|
Post by Josh on Feb 25, 2008 14:10:53 GMT -8
Just one last remember about tonight if anyone wants to join us! Michelle, Rose, and I will be there and maybe some others.
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Aug 21, 2009 8:45:19 GMT -8
my old HS classmate and noted Christian author posted this link on his facebook page: lumelonline.com/2009/08/12/when-evangelicals-dine-with-the-wicked/What do you all think? I am a U2 fan (although not as rabid as some) and I think this guy makes a valid point, at least from a strict evangelical viewpoint. I realize some of this might have been discussed above. In other words, when do you feel ideas like this become radical and paranoid? Can someone who is a relativist create art that is "praiseworthy, true, etc."?
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Aug 21, 2009 8:53:12 GMT -8
OK. I read a couple of paragraphs and then laughed out loud at his assessment of U2. Talk about complete misinterpretation!
Celebrating Charles Manson? Apparently the gal hasn't actually taken the time to listen to Rattle and Hum, which states emphatically before the song:
"Charles Manson stole this song from the Beatles/ We're stealing it back"
Sorry, I really can't finish the article. It's too ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Aug 21, 2009 9:03:27 GMT -8
I agree, Josh, but my question was deeper. Remember "Hell's Bells" The video series designed in the 80's to teach young Christians the evils of rock and roll? This is similar... kind of ridiculous.
My point is how do Christians that consider themselves fundamentalists justify being a fan of someone who openly supports relativism? I am not trying to point out the splinter in anyone's eye, but rather curious as to why more people to not think this blogger is spot on, in spite of U2 making cool music.
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Aug 21, 2009 9:05:26 GMT -8
Also the comments are interesting, they blast her.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Aug 21, 2009 9:13:41 GMT -8
First off, I don't find U2 relativistic, though the term should be defined. Secondly, I don't consider myself "funamentalist", though that term should be defined as well.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Aug 21, 2009 9:15:42 GMT -8
Do you consider U2 to have a relativist outlook? In which ways?
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Aug 21, 2009 9:58:47 GMT -8
The blogger claimed they were relativist, I guess I would agree, but make no judgement in that. In short, relativism can be expressed as saying there are no absolutes, and that there are multiple ways to salvation, as opposed to John 14:6, which many fundamentalists believe. I was not accusing you or U2 of being relativist or fundamentalist, but I think the blogger was accusing U2 of relativism, and claiming to be a fundamentalist.
Look, I was just looking for response to what you and I both think is paranoid and ridiculous. How would you argue her claims?
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Aug 21, 2009 10:15:26 GMT -8
I would argue that U2 is not relativistic in any of the senses you defined (which I agree she is insinuating) and that the problem with her arguments is that she is simply misinformed.
I would probably, however, disagree with her notion of who can be saved by Jesus Christ, holding personally that although no one can be saved apart from Christ, that there may be many who are saved without being able to verbally articulate that Jesus Christ is their savior.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Aug 21, 2009 10:37:29 GMT -8
BTW, sorry if it sounded like I was getting my boxers in a bundle. I really wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Oct 11, 2010 4:42:38 GMT -8
Just saw this on Michelle's facebook page: I know this thread is old, but I thought it was an appropriate summation of this discussion
|
|
|
Post by rbbailey on Oct 11, 2010 19:06:36 GMT -8
It's basically a cooler way of saying WWJD.
|
|