In Reply to: Re: About your question posted by Zither on March 11, 2006 at 13:26:05:
Hi Zither. I meant no offense so please don't feel that my remark was made to characterize you in any way. You said, "I don't really see myself as having a narrow view but you have explained why you think that about me." Since you are a new poster I know almost nothing about you at all so can't state what your views are. I certainly did not mean to say that YOU are narrow-minded, nor did I say (or at least mean to say) that you had a "narrow view."
When I said, "to characterize many Christians in this narrow light is probably a stereotype" I meant that in THIS instance I felt that you were saying that a huge number of Christians were that narrowminded, which runs counter to my experience. Granted, I've met a fair number who are, but like you I've experienced many churches and have come to the conclusion that many Christians are not narrow-minded.
I guess I felt that in this case you were making somewhat of a generality and wanted to point out that I disagreed with it, based upon my experience and noting recent trends among Christian churches.
Maybe I'm just a tad sensitive on this point also because Berg used to make such sweeping generalities about ALL Christian churches not in the Family, saying they were ALL materialistic, backslidden, lukewarm, puritanical, etc. etc. discounting all the good they do, inner-city work, soup kitchens, disaster relief work, sincere missionaries, etc. etc. In Berg's view one rubber stamp of condemnation fit them all.
I know that's not what you intended, but from what I've seen, Christians worldwide have made enormous strides since Berg took a "freeze frame" picture of them back in the 50's. They have also done, and continue to do, enormous amounts of good in the world today. Think of the Salvation Army, Samaritan's Purse, Christian children's aid groups, work amongst lepers, Mother Teresa in Calcutta, etc.
Wishing you the best!