@rfusca It's funny how the church is evolving. I wonder what the videos, pictures, website, stage design, etc. are adding onto or replacing.
I remember the time when I visited a Southern Baptist Church. It was just one time, and I could remember it vividly. There were videos, pictures, website, stage design, etc. like yours. No altar table. Big loudspeakers.
@Anonymous well, I don't think there's a blanket statement that covers that. For example, we do video announcements. Why? Because they catch people's attention more than the person whose been standing up there for awhile and people pay more attention. The website - people need a way to find the church, listen to sermon's other parts of the week, etc
@Anonymous you have to realize too, the primary purpose of an alter, in the Bible was sacrifices for sin atonement. Used daily. We don't have to make sacrifices - thats what Jesus did. The alter isn't really needed like that anymore. It can surely be symbolic, but the beauty of Christ is that we don't need it.
@Anonymous ok...but I'm not sure how/why/... that makes a question about the side he was pierced on non-trivial
I took a look at the Creed again, and I saw this: "We believe in traditional marriage, defined as the union between a man and a woman that were born as such." Apparently, that knocks out gays, lesbians, and transsexuals.
It also says: "This ministry will not perform marriage between a man and a woman who are not evenly yoked, one being saved and the other being of the world. The man and woman must proclaim that Jesus Christ is their Lord and Savior." Would a Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Christian count as being saved?
They say: "If heaven is not a place, then why did Jesus ascend into heaven as he left his apostles?" In this book, it is explained that the Ascension of Christ does not mean he actually floats up in the sky, but he -- oh, I forgot the exact words!
@Anonymous Well, the psychology of it doesn't require a very rigorous philosophical treatment of the concept. In psychology, as well as in most other settings, "free will" simply indicates the ability of some complex, hidden process with a "personality" to persuade behavior and thought.
And theologians actually differ on the idea more than you might think. There is seemingly gradients of free will concepts amongst theologians.
At each Christian extreme, orthodoxy and "unorthodoxy", it seems folks believe in God's providence operating through free will. Somewhere between the extremes, though it's possible I misunderstand the language, the language seems to indicate less openness to free will -- much heavier leaning on predestination, the pre-elect, the pre-damned.
@Anonymous Sure. By "hidden", I don't mean "completely hidden." But, with hidden and/or complex components. Processes in which you can see trends and make predictions, but not without error. And often without precision.
@Anonymous Not entirely sure. My nickname was Sven in school (middle and high). During class one day, someone combined that name with ... smidgen? ... spontaneously: svidgen. ... And I've just used it for a lot of things since then, figuring the name would usually be free. e.g. ... svidgen.com ... my old online bookmarking experiment.
Leviticus 18 talks about sexual morality, whereas Leviticus 19 talks about food and what to eat and what not to eat. It is quite difficult to read these two passages together. Modern Christians seem to obey the sexuality commands in chapter 18, but not 19. But if we really believe in Bible is the...
@JackDouglas yeah I figured adding a tradition would be a lot simpler edit than trying to make it on topic at BH.SE (which may be impossible since the main question is about current practice based on the text)
This is really a truth question... An interesting/better question might be "how do Christians justify interpreting Leviticus 18 and 19 differently?" Especially if you can find someone who explicitly does so... — lonesomeday15 mins ago
@Daи well it isn't 'either/or'. We can close it on BH.SE and not migrate.