If having a megachurch that proclaims it, a television show and network that supports it, and a representative of the group interviewed which says it isn't mainstream, what is?
One pastor at one mega-church who makes one asinine statement on TV does not automatically make something doctrine for all of the Christian faith.
I'm still waiting for confirmation that he even said such a thing, as I could not find anything after a google or youtube search.
Again, if you think that "Obama is the anti-christ and he's in kahoots with Pope Benedict to bring about armageddon" is a doctrine that runs throughout Christendom, you are mistaken. I don't care what the Gospel according to Pat says. LOL.
Christians follow the teachings of Christ. Not the rantings of every preacher with a microphone. They're humans, they make mistakes just like the rest of us.
This proves my point that "mainstream" is a word without meaning as you're using it, because you can exclude any group that might reflect poorly upon you simply by claiming they're not "mainstream".[/QUOTE]
Actually, you're right. If you look hard enough you'll find a group of Christians who believe that dinosaur bones were put into the Earth by the devil just to befuddle mankind. You can probably find another group of Christians who believe that all crazy people are truly possessed by demons. You can find them, they're out there, but I'm saying they don't count because these beliefs are not tenents of most Christian beliefs. That's what I mean by 'mainstream'. I'm talking about values that MOST Christians hold to (Catholics, Protestants, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Baptists, etc).
The literal interpretation of the bible would be one that still supports slavery and beating of servants, based on Luke 12 or 1 Timothy 6. ".
Luke 12 regarding the slave is Jesus relating a pariable to his Disciples to illustrate the point that "much will be expected of those who are given much responsibility". It was not a command or permission to beat up a servant. Christians are the servants of Christ, and as such much more will be expected of them than from a non-believer. THAT was the point he was making. He wasn't supporting the beating of anyone. He was telling a story to make a point. That's what a pariable is.
Then there are things like condemning homosexuality because it was "the sin of Sodom" or some such nonsense.
I don't consider condemning the act of homosexuality to be a 'disgusting practice'. Sorry, I don't care what the politically correct world thinks. And it isn't wicked because it was the 'sin of Sodom'. It was already a sin BEFORE Sodom, as it is considered an abomination. Men simply were not meant to lay with other men. Pretty cut and dry. I'm sure you'll disagree.
In fact, Ezekiel 16:49 makes it very clear that the "sin of Sodom" was not taking care of their poor! There are many other examples where you can find where two different sects of the same religion can find entirely different meaning. This is the base of why claiming "mainstream" as a meaningful distinction is bogus..
Check Genesis, chapter 18 I believe. It states that the people in Sodom were performing sexual immoralities of all kinds. (This likely goes way beyond just homosexuality. It likely includes beastiality and pedophilia, but that's just my interpretation.) Later two angels are nearly raped as they go to visit Lot. They had to strike the population blind in order to keep this from happening.
Perhaps Sodom didn't take care of it's poor, but the sexual sins of the city are in fact an integral part of their judgement.
"
