What will follow in a moment is a blog post from the “Progressive Christian’ Faith Channel at Patheos.com, I wanted to speak to some of the characteristics of the ‘dying breed of Christian’ (is that a bad thing?) however since I have been summarily blocked from commenting on ‘progressive Christian’ John’’ Shore’s blogs by the man himself , I am posting here at The Battle Cry. A couple characteristics on the list should clearly make you want to be part of the ‘dying breed’, a couple seem just silly, while others would require more ‘definition’ (not a lot) in order to cast a vote. Here’s Mr. Shore’s post:
May You might be a dying breed of Christian if …
May 22, 2014 By John Shore
(With apologies to Jeff Foxworthy.)
You might be a dying breed of Christian if …
1. You think the Bible is a rulebook spelling out exactly what you need to believe and think about everything.
2. You think that being a Christian automatically makes you the moral superior of anyone not a Christian.
3. You think being gay or transgender is an offense to God.
4. You let your pastor tell you how to vote.
5. You think men alone are suited to be the head of home and church.
6. You think that God wants wives to submit to their husbands.
7. You think God is a man.
8. You don’t think Purity Balls are appallingly inappropriate.
7. You think it’s a woman’s job to make sure that men don’t lust after her.
8. You think divorce is a sin.
9. You think the earth was created six to ten thousand years ago.
10. You think hell is an actual location that exists in real space and time, where everyone who dies a non-Christian is sentenced by God to spend eternity burning alive.
Boy. If only this were funny.
If, instead of the dying breed sort of Christian, you are the coming majority sort of Christian, come join us Unfundamentalist Christians via our Facebook page and/or our group blog.
It’s probably an astute observation that there is indeed a ‘dying breed’ of Christian and a ‘coming majority ‘ of Christians, however it’s a better indicator of rampant apostasy than anything else. Then again, maybe it’s not such an astute observation……….
The Battle Cry 
Yeah, it’s pretty bad when you can consider yourself more religiously conservative than your parents! Ahahahaha
LikeLike
Forgot to subscribe!
LikeLike
I guess I’m part of the “dying breed” as well
LikeLike
I think the tragedy is that though those who believe many of the propositions stated here are dying out, those “Christians” who are rising up to take our place are not Christians at all. Jesus said, “If you continue in my Word, then you are really my disciples.” His sheep hear his voice and follow him,
LikeLike
Brother Randy,
You bring up some really good things to consider. I hope those who need to read and heed will pay a visit with God opened hearts!
LikeLike
We saw what happened with Galileo.
And that happens when progress crosses dogma. At the time geocentricity was part of the established theological and biblical thinking. Even Calvin and Luther condemned Galileo and Copernicus because of it.
Now only the lunatic fringe ascribe to geocentricity.
Christianity evolves.
That’s a fact.
LikeLike
Are you saying that an example of ‘evolving’ science that brought the real truth to the table makes the case for ‘evolving’ Christianity?
I’m just trying to understand your point. I don’t think you can make that case when ‘evolving’ Christianity denies the fundamentals of the Bible and/or twists and mangles scripture to conform to the whims and political correctness of sinful men.
LikeLike
Christianity that evolves is not Bible based Christianity
LikeLike
Good point.
LikeLike
R.C.Spoul:
“Both Calvin and Luther rejected Copernicus as a heretic in the 16th century. I don’t know anybody in orthodox Christianity today who’s pleading for geocentricity. Do you? Do you know anybody? In that case the church has said, “Look, we misinterpreted the teaching of the Bible with respect to the solar system, and thank you scientists for correcting our misunderstanding.”
And so I think that we can learn from nonbelieving scientists who are studying natural revelation. They may get a better sense of the truth from their study of natural revelation than I get from ignoring natural revelation. So I have a high view of natural revelation is what I’m saying.”
Maybe RC Spoul is an apostate.
Or maybe you could be wrong.
LikeLike
I could always be wrong, and we can learn things from scientists. That’s not my point. You know my point – the Bible is sufficiently clear that the average reader can understand it. When popular thought (even ‘Christian’ thought) is not in agreement with what is clearly written, the popular and politically correct lose.
LikeLike