Labels

[preistsplace]

I have been thinking about lables lately...Universalism...Christian ...Red ...Blue

On one hand they are detrimental and condmening...Heretic..Unorthodox
On the other hand they are informative...cold...hot...
In this category you could also put all lables that suggest a difference of belief, as the titles usually suggest what they believe.
Thoughts comments???????

[preistsplace]

 many of us do not like labels...we feel that saying universalism refers to a doctrine..in a way it does as universalism is a belief that is teachable...others say that it is simply the truth...What I see here is that it is (or can be) both.
Labels are used to imply  the esence (ness) of something
Christian= follower of Christ
Unorthodox= not the commonly accepted veiw
They can also be used in explanations, and warnings.
We as christians are called to love all equally we are called to Follow Christ and not to put Him in boxes of doctrine or religion.
However in a study of beliefs and and words it becomes increasingly difficult to abstain from using labels.
I think my veiw on this is that the labels are not good or evil but that their use determines the charachter of the label.
If we use to describe , or if we use to condemn....

[WhiteWings]

Can we even speak without labels.....?
"That is a car" is using a label to explain it isn't a bike.
Personally I think labels are very useful.
If someone says: I'm a Christian, budhist, muslim, calvinst, ... we instantly know what the set of beliefs of that person.

The reason people may be/are against labels is that labels can also be negative/discriminating
I doubt that anyone would object if Jesus appeared in a very vivid vison and label him/her as teacher.

Labels are useful, good, and can be done without.
But shall be abused.
Don't shoot the label, but the abuser...

[jabcat]

Yeah, I'm OK with labels as long as they're accurate and not used in a negative, derogatory manner, as a means to incorrectly diminish the subject.  I do think it can be a real temptation to use them that way though.

Example.  A while back there was quite a bit of discussion about whether the Bible is inspired, trustworthy scripture.  An incorrupt label kept getting used "against" those who were saying yes it's inspired, and though there are translational issues, it is trustworthy.  The label used was "those that claim inerrancy", when no one in the discussion claimed any translations we have are inerrant/perfect.  I saw it as a slur and a distraction from the real topic at hand;  a means to avoid the real issue, i.e., can we believe accurately translated, Spirit-revealed, rightly divided scripture or not?  Thus an incorrect, demeaning label was being used, IMO. 

Otherwise, if used factually and accurately, I'd say they're good.  As long as we handle with care.

[sven]

I think "cult" is the worst label you can get in religious matters

[WhiteWings]

We are cultUR   :winkgrin:

But yes; you are right. At least we aren't called a sect  :winkgrin:

[Tim B]

At least we don't label ourselves as The Elect and then say all others are The Damned. xD

But yeah, labels can be obnoxious. I don't really like the label "Christian" because people tend to think that I then: am a boring person, hate "gays," point out everybody else's wrongs etc.

I like people to know me for who I am and how I act, not "know" me based on a label.

[WhiteWings]

Your parents labelled you Tim.
That places you in the Timothy group.
Sorry but that are the facts  :laughing7:

[jabcat]

Tim's an American believer.

Tim's a flag-waving, gun-toting Christian do-gooder.

All labels.  One set used accurately and with respect, the other as inaccurate demeaning slurs.

(You decide which is which  :laughing7:).  We love you Tim  :reachout:.

[Tim B]

Your parents labelled you Tim.
That places you in the Timothy group.
Sorry but that are the facts  :laughing7:

Drat. I'm stuck in a group! Nooooooo!  :laughing7:

Tim's an American believer.

Tim's a flag-waving, gun-toting Christian do-gooder.

All labels.  One set used accurately and with respect, the other as inaccurate demeaning slurs.

(You decide which is which  :laughing7:).  We love you Tim  :reachout:.

Most people would probably think that a "gut-toter" and "do-gooder" can't go hand in hand. They must have not met me yet. xD lol

*runs around with guns and giving hugs*

[WhiteWings]

*runs around with guns and giving hugs*

(http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:kMJGaAmOFxLJNM:http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_qp8_aNp24Yg/SYyiI-e9v4I/AAAAAAAAC34/a5kGP7heAQ8/s400/gun-revolver-heart-flag.jpg)

[preistsplace]

guns don't kill people, people kill people (by malicious use of guns)
Labels don't hurt people,people hurt people (by improper use of labels)
I guess is more or less what I was saying, We use labels but the minute we are using them to distract from truth or launch personal attacks we are using them in a way that is far from showing the no holds barred love of our Savior..Blessings In Christ

[jabcat]

guns don't kill people, people kill people (by malicious use of guns)
Labels don't hurt people,people hurt people (by improper use of labels)
I guess is more or less what I was saying, We use labels but the minute we are using them to distract from truth or launch personal attacks we are using them in a way that is far from showing the no holds barred love of our Savior..Blessings In Christ

Either just saw this, or it just hit me.   :goodpost:

[preistsplace]

It is our use of what is given us that reveals who we are. Are we acting with fruit of the Spirit or with fruit of the flesh? This alone reveals who we are serving.
Blessings in Christ

[martincisneros]

guns don't kill people, people kill people (by malicious use of guns) Labels don't hurt people,people hurt people (by improper use of labels) I guess is more or less what I was saying, We use labels but the minute we are using them to distract from truth or launch personal attacks we are using them in a way that is far from showing the no holds barred love of our Savior..

Or...to distinguish truth from error in the most loving acts of devotion to God and to Creation, and as validation that we're not trash, as the other systems would claim. I use absolutely every label I've ever used [and still humbly do] with the sense of "Yes, I'm a Christian, but please don't hold that against me 'cause I really really do love God, love you, and genuinely expect Him to RADICALLY romance your soul in a Song of Solomon APOCALYPSE of the ages that are relevant to YOUR LIFE  in WHATEVER form that would be relevant FOR YOU!!"

[preistsplace]

 :goodpost:

[aspiring son]

Lables are good, and useful. However I recently told someone I didn't call myself a christian because my beliefs are pretty much all different save the fact that Christ died on the cross. But I understand why it's a hard label to get away from. I really don't know what to label myself as to be honest. I try to stay away from the what are you conversations. I believe in UR, and, I'm a follower of Christ. Thats about it.

Blessings,

Brandon

I hate the term religious. "Are you religious"?     Grrrrrrrrr. :msealed:

:happy3:     

[chuckt]

I have been thinking about lables lately...Universalism...Christian ...Red ...Blue

On one hand they are detrimental and condmening...Heretic..Unorthodox
On the other hand they are informative...cold...hot...
In this category you could also put all lables that suggest a difference of belief, as the titles usually suggest what they believe.
Thoughts comments???????

My thought is once a person labels another prejudice ensues.

peace
chuckt

[martincisneros]

However I recently told someone I didn't call myself a christian because my beliefs are pretty much all different save the fact that Christ died on the cross. But I understand why it's a hard label to get away from.

16However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name. (1Peter 4:16)

The Apostles evidently felt like if you embraced their beliefs, then it was a badge of honor to be called a Christ with an ian.

[martincisneros]

My thought is once a person labels another prejudice ensues.

Labels are human nature though.  Not sure if I'd go as far as calling them a product of Babel, but basically you embrace one or a few, or you're at the mercy of absolutely everybody else's labels!  And usually when you shun the labels, then the ones others stick on you aren't remotely fair and aren't even within the same ballpark of where you're coming from!  In one sense, there is absolutely no growth without a label per Mark 4 'cause whatever God or man in His image calls the thing THAT'S WHAT IT IS, per the law of Genesis and Mark 11:22-24 that you'll have whatever you say.  It's the law of Creation, of manifestation, of being, and of becoming.

[chuckt]

My thought is once a person labels another prejudice ensues.

Labels are human nature though.  Not sure if I'd go as far as calling them a product of Babel, but basically you embrace one or a few, or you're at the mercy of absolutely everybody else's labels!  And usually when you shun the labels, then the ones others stick on you aren't remotely fair and aren't even within the same ballpark of where you're coming from!  In one sense, there is absolutely no growth without a label per Mark 4 'cause whatever God or man in His image calls the thing THAT'S WHAT IT IS, per the law of Genesis and Mark 11:22-24 that you'll have whatever you say.  It's the law of Creation, of manifestation, of being, and of becoming.

]Labels are human nature though

yeah carnal nature  :winkgrin:

chuckt

[Paul Hazelwood]

Certain labels are just something we have to deal with, other labels cause no problems at all.

If I say I am a Christian,  the average person will draw on what they think a Christian is.

I believe in Jesus Christ as Saviour, so I am a Christian.   But then if I say I believe that all men are saved, it ceases to invoke the thought that I am a Christian from the majority of people whether or not they are believers.

[aspiring son]

I'd go so far as to say that only things and beings NOT in His image are those things and beings that don't obey the spiritual law of labeling 'cause they have no righteousness to label, but are merely labeled.  All a label on a package at the grocery store means is what you can count on being in there.  In the natural, you wouldn't buy and take into your body anything without great clarity about it's labeling.  So, why do your spirit that way, and think you've really accomplished anything?  Just genuinely keep on the package what's inside of the package.  Words do mean something at all times, otherwise there is no being and manifesting His image since nothing in Scripture taken beyond the veil is without a label.  If it's Him, then it proceeds from His label.  If it's conformity to Him, then that's clearly labeled by your understanding (i.e. labeling) of the promises.  Labels are never mentioned by either St. Paul or St. John as being abolished by Him, in their tedious lists of things that He's abolishing.  In fact, He wants great plainness of speech about what He's abolishing, per it's labeling.  No labels doctrine is philosophical liberalism and relativism to it's core, even if not meant that way, but only meant over the frustration of what's on the label not having been in the packages you've previously bought.  In the natural, that's something you take up with your country's version of the Food and Drug Administration, as it would be called in the U.S.  In the spirit, that's where some good ol' fashioned Joel chapter 2 intercessions with weeping and crying out to God for Him to spare His people and not give His heritage over to reproach comes in for the outpoured glory to be experienced!  You cannot get away from labels and have it right with Him, but the truth is the focus rather than the label, and once you've established what giving the true testimony is, as Jesus gave before Pilate, then whatever label that happens to be, then that's what's on your superhero costume.  It's on your superhero constume, RATHER THAN a barrier or binding that prevents you from hugging, holding, and loving as Christ loves the Church, the world, the flesh, the devil, etc.

I get what your saying, Martin,but I've found myself genuinely stuck on the question when asked if I'm a christian, because in my mind I think of christendom, and what I was in the church. Maybe that's my personal issue that God is still dealing with, even though I've been out of the church for some time now.

Brandon

[aspiring son]

You're right Martin. And I do have affection for those who are still in the churches no matter what they believe. It's a rebuke well taken, and probably needed. There's no point in striving to be without a label. If Christ is within, he shines through regardless.

Brandon

[aspiring son]

I don't really have a problem with labelled. Every word we use is the label of an expression we wish to make. I don't have a problem though if someone shuns the use of "Christian" as being a self-applied label. In the early days, unbelievers labeled the church as being "christians" by way of mocking, or at least, referring to being a follower of Christ. In other words, they labeled those who followed sound doctrine as being Christians, but they did it from a place of mockery because they did not believe in Christ.

So, the early church embraced the term because it referred to those who followed the truth, even when the world mocked the truth.

TODAY, however, the term Christian is applied to just about anyone who believes that a man named Jesus exists, even if they teach that the same Jesus will lose most everyone to fire-torture forever. NOT sound doctrine.

If someone wishes to label me a Christian, I can't do anything about it. And if someone KNOWS what I believe, then I would also call myself a Christian. HOWEVER, I refrain from labelling myself such, if it gives the appearance that I agree with all the expected and reasonable inferrences that the label suggests. Because, if I adopt the word "Christian" in that context, it gives the appearance that I agree with all the modern doctrinal trappings that go along with that, when I do not.

Same goes for "universalist." I have no problem telling someone like Sparrow or WillieH that I am a universalist, because they understand what I mean by that, through conversations about salvation and Jesus etc. But to someone who doesn't know my beliefs like they do, I would not cause someone to believe that I endorse Unitarian Universalism by adopting a label which gives the appearance that I do, when I do not.

Agreed. Depending on who you're talking to you can use certain terms. But for those i do not know, I do not go out of my way to use any type of labels concerning my beliefs, because the impression I put upon them I want to be spirit inspired. That's all I want.

Brandon