Can you separate yourself from your doctrines? - Who are you really?

[St. SteVen]

A key indicator: You are offended when anyone disagrees with your doctrine.

What defines you? Who are you really?

]

 

[face2face]

And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. John 8:32

The Master was full of grace and truth, the embodiment, he is “the Truth” of John 14:6. The Way of Life in 2 John 1-4

The Freedom this knowledge and standing in Christ is Freedom from the Law (Gal 5:1), sin and death (Rom 8:1-2) and bondage to self (Rom 8:12-15) which you live in fear (Hebrews 2:14-17)

This truth should define us as it did him.

Offense does nothing to change the truth.

F2F

 

[Wick Stick]

What defines you? Who are you really?

Loyalty is the most important value in my system of values. That's who I am.

I find Christianity, like most things, is about membership in a group. We can disagree on what, how, where, when or even why. But WHO is non-negotiable.

 

[St. SteVen]

I find Christianity, like most things, is about membership in a group.

What I might call tribalism. You should weigh in on this topic. What are the potential dangers of loyalty?

Life in the Tribal Bubble - The unReal world?

Religious institutions, particularly the churches of Christianity, provide a sanitized sterile environment. A bit like a petri dish in a lab, in which church culture can safely grow. But, tribe members don't live in the bubble. So they have to travel outside eventually. They may surround...

www.christianityboard.com

]

 

[St. SteVen]

A key indicator: You are offended when anyone disagrees with your doctrine.

What defines you? Who are you really?

]

 

[St. SteVen]

From the OP:

A key indicator:
You are personally offended when anyone disagrees with your doctrine.

What defines you? Who are you really?

Can you separate yourself from your doctrines?​

]

 

[Lambano]

Oprah couldn't be wrong, could she?

 

[Lambano]

Wow, now I feel really motivated!

 

[Lambano]

 

[Lambano]

What defines you? Who are you really?

Can you separate yourself from your doctrines?​

The shrinks may be right on this one. Everybody is talking about "identity" (and what they "identify" as) these days. What you believe DOES to some extent define your self-identity.

 

[St. SteVen]

The shrinks may be right on this one. Everybody is talking about "identity" (and what they "identify" as) these days. What you believe DOES to some extent define your self-identity.

The questions are:
- How do you react when someone disagrees with your beliefs?
- How do you feel about others with differing beliefs?

[

 

[Lambano]

The questions are:
- How do you react when someone disagrees with your beliefs?
- How do you feel about others with differing beliefs?

[

If what we believe DOES define who we are, then the logical corollary is, when someone rejects our beliefs, they are rejecting us.

Draw your horses! Mount your swords!

 

[Lambano]

If what we believe DOES define who we are, then the logical corollary is, when someone rejects our beliefs, they are rejecting us.

Draw your horses! Mount your swords!

I was gonna say, "Welcome to the Human Condition", but this one made me crack up. Especially the location. And the entry fee.

 

[St. SteVen]

If what we believe DOES define who we are, then the logical corollary is, when someone rejects our beliefs, they are rejecting us.

Therein lies the problem. From my perspective, it's a divisive stance.

--- PARODY ---

Believer #1: Here's what I believe...
Believer #2: I completely reject you.
Believer #1: Say what?
Believer #2: Your beliefs violate who I am.
Believer #1: Maybe you shouldn't take your beliefs so personally.
Believer #2: They are my personal beliefs.
Believer #1: That's fine. But why be offended by others?
Believer #2: Your beliefs are a personal attack on me.
Believer #1: We both have a right to our own beliefs.
Believer #2: No, I reject your beliefs.
Believer #1: Isn't that rather divisive?
Believer #2: It's supposed to be.
Believer #1: Doesn't the Bible teach us to love one another?
Believer #2: Yes, but you aren't one of us.
Believer #1: "Judge not, lest ye too be judged."
Believer #2: Who are you to judge me?
Believer #1: Seriously?

[

 

[Lambano]

Therein lies the problem. From my perspective, it's a divisive stance.

And it's built into the human race.

 

[Wrangler]

Can you separate yourself from your doctrines? - Who are you really?

A key indicator: You are offended when anyone disagrees with your doctrine.

What defines you? Who are you really?

This seems to me to be a proto-thought, not quite fully developed as far as thoughts go. It's akin to asking what is the color of orange. Your facts are uncoordinated. Perhaps it is your semantics, poorly defining "who we are" as a function of "what we believe." Clearly these are 2 different nouns, a person and an idea. So, I'm not sure how to proceed. What is it you want to know?

I've recently got back into watching boxing, particularly the 4 kings of the 80's. Hagler and Leonard were both my sport idols growing up and it was a dream of many years realized when they finally fought. 2 all-time greats at their peak. IMO, it is the best fight of all time. (I have a top 12 list I could share, if you are interested). One reason it surpasses the Thrilla in Manilla (#2 on my list) with Ali and Frazier is the fact that it ended in a split decision. This invites debate.

A vid I watched last night by Remey's Corner was entitled "Who really won?" The host called the fight 115-113 for Hagler (as one judge did) and admitted he could more easily see 2 rounds going to Leonard than the other way around AND he admitted Hagler was his favorite fighter, which he is honest enough to admit his bias. Also, he came out and said point blank that Hagler did not get robbed. Yes, some put this fight as among the most controversial decisions ever. (I disagree; It was a simply a very close fight.)

I called the fight 115-113 for Leonard, as another judge did. The 3rd judge was on drugs or something, calling the fight 118-110 (meaning he gave Leonard all but 2 rounds). And I knew then there were 2 rounds, the 4th and 10th, that could have gone either way. A friend who saw the fight live with me gave those 2 rounds to Hagler. Again 115-13 for Hagler.

I mention all this to take us out of religion and examine our argumentative selves from a less intense angle. Because certain things are important to me, I am inclined to discuss and debate my opinions, be it boxing, in general, this fight, in particular, or doctrine. I know plenty of Christians who are simply not into arguing, period.

Who we are?

Domain: Eukaryota​

Kingdom: Animalia​

Phylum: Chordata​

Class: Mammalia​

Order: Primates​

Suborder: Haplorhini​

Infraorder: Simiiformes​

Family: Hominidae​

Subfamily: Homininae​

Tribe: Hominini​

Subtribe: Hominina​

Genus: Homo​

Species: Sapiens​

 

[Hey You!]

A key indicator: You are offended when anyone disagrees with your doctrine.

What defines you? Who are you really?

]

Much like Identity Politics...

Sure; we care about right and wrong, but it still can be about us...