Christian Fraternity colonizes University of Central Florida

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I think it's the phrasing. I've never heard that type of phrasing ever. I can understand being "kept" under Christ (although I would never phrase it that way) but saying "keeping under Christ" to me implies that you are the active party and not Christ. It's not Christ keeping you.. it's you maintaining it yourself.

That's exactly what I was thinking, both as to who is the "active party" and the phrasing itself. It's sort of like talking about "getting saved" or being asked "when were you saved?". I know exactly what people mean when they say those things, but they're phrases I have never heard used in my own tradition and that I associate with more evangelical traditions. It's just not the way we talk.

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Christians are the active party in making sure we keep under Christ. Christ is the active party in keeping and sheltering us.

Being a devout person of any faith takes a sense of agency and activity on the part of the believers. It is a constant test and testament of faith.

Maybe, but I can tell you that traditional Presbyterianism, rooted in Calvinism, would always look at God or Christ as the ultimate active party, and would say, without denying free will or human responsibility, that our ability to make sure we "keep under Christ" is completely dependent on God's grace that keeps us. That's one reason why, like Drolefille, it would sound a little more understandable to me to say "kept under Christ" than "keeping under Christ." That, and when I hear "Keeping Under Christ," my initial reaction is to ask "keeping what under Christ?"

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

That's exactly what I was thinking, both as to who is the "active party" and the phrasing itself. It's sort of like talking about "getting saved" or being asked "when were you saved?". I know exactly what people mean when they say those things, but they're phrases I have never heard used in my own tradition and that I associate with more evangelical traditions. It's just not the way we talk.

Maybe, but I can tell you that traditional Presbyterianism, rooted in Calvinism, would always look at God or Christ as the ultimate active party, and would say, without denying free will or human responsibility, that our ability to make sure we "keep under Christ" is completely dependent on God's grace that keeps us. That's one reason why, like Drolefille, it would sound a little more understandable to me to say "kept under Christ" than "keeping under Christ." That, and when I hear "Keeping Under Christ," my initial reaction is to ask "keeping what under Christ?"

When I hear keep under Christ I do think of standing under a Crucifix. But then I'm Catholic so just like "Being Saved" (which in our view is a moot point) "Keeping Under Christ" might be better expressed as following God's will/ living in a Christlike manner, etc.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

"Keeping Under Christ" might be better expressed as following God's will/ living in a Christlike manner, etc.

So you do understand. It's simply a faith-based catch phrase.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

So you do understand. It's simply a faith-based catch phrase.

Yeah, like I said, I get it. It's just odd phrasing to me and MysticCat.

[ufkappachiguy]

Being that our main focus is Christian Accountability and keeping eachother accountable and focused on our Christian walks in college; Keeping Under Christ is much like "Keeping eachother focused on our Christian mission" and therefore Keeping eachother under Christ's guidance. No question as to who the savior is for that but thats the idea of the phrase.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by ufkappachiguy

Being that our main focus is Christian Accountability and keeping eachother accountable and focused on our Christian walks in college; Keeping Under Christ is much like "Keeping eachother focused on our Christian mission" and therefore Keeping eachother under Christ's guidance. No question as to who the savior is for that but thats the idea of the phrase.

That's cool. So as a brotherhood you aren't just keeping yourself but you are keeping each other focused. Cool.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by ufkappachiguy

Being that our main focus is Christian Accountability and keeping eachother accountable and focused on our Christian walks in college; Keeping Under Christ is much like "Keeping eachother focused on our Christian mission" and therefore Keeping eachother under Christ's guidance. No question as to who the savior is for that but thats the idea of the phrase.

Thanks very much for that explanation.

And best of luck!

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

that our ability to make sure we "keep under Christ" is completely dependent on God's grace that keeps us.

I never said that it was not contingent upon God's grace but we have to seek that grace and are testified by faith. Being saved means that we have been given God's grace and are therefore expected to live our lives accordingly. "Live our lives" meaning being active participants in living a saved life in which we are devout in faith.

Originally Posted by MysticCat

That's one reason why, like Drolefille, it would sound a little more understandable to me to say "kept under Christ" than "keeping under Christ." That, and when I hear "Keeping Under Christ," my initial reaction is to ask "keeping what under Christ?"

Our hearts, our minds, our being.

If you overthink anything it won't make sense.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

I never said that it was not contingent upon God's grace but we have to seek that grace and are testified by faith.

Okay, getting off topic here, but as long as we are: The Christian tradition in which I was brought up and of which I am still part says that we cannot even seek God's grace without first receiving God's grace. In other words, God's grace seeks us, and we respond. We cannot seek it out on our own.

Being saved means that we have been given God's grace and are therefore expected to change our lives accordingly.

I understand that, but as I said, it's a way of expressing it that is foreign to me. I understand exactly what it means, just like I might understand French or German. But very, very few Presbyterians I have come in contact with speak in terms of "being saved," and if you ask one when he or she was saved, the answer is likely to be (as my grandmother did in fact answer) "when the foundations of the world were laid," or at the least "on Calvary 2000 years ago."

If you overthink anything it won't make sense.

I'm not overthinking anything at all (although it is arguable that as one of God's Frozen People and a lawyer, I'm prone to overthink anything). I said at the outset that I thought I understood the meaning of the phrase, but that the phrase itself doesn't make much sense to me because the phraseology -- the manner in which the thought is expressed -- is foreign to me. In other words, I pretty much know what the words mean, but I would never express it that way, partially because I just don't talk that way and partially because I would be more used to a different emphasis -- "kept" rather than "keeping." That's why it sounds odd to me, that's why the phrase made me stop to try and figure out exactly what was meant, and that's why I'm not sure I would agree with the sentiment it conveys.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I understand exactly what it means

Good.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Okay, getting off topic here, but as long as we are: The Christian tradition in which I was brought up and of which I am still part says that we cannot even seek God's grace without first receiving God's grace. In other words, God's grace seeks us, and we respond. We cannot seek it out on our own.

I understand that, but as I said, it's a way of expressing it that is foreign to me. I understand exactly what it means, just like I might understand French or German. But very, very few Presbyterians I have come in contact with speak in terms of "being saved," and if you ask one when he or she was saved, the answer is likely to be (as my grandmother did in fact answer) "when the foundations of the world were laid," or at the least "on Calvary 2000 years ago."

I'm not overthinking anything at all (although it is arguable that as one of God's Frozen People and a lawyer, I'm prone to overthink anything). I said at the outset that I thought I understood the meaning of the phrase, but that the phrase itself doesn't make much sense to me because the phraseology -- the manner in which the thought is expressed -- is foreign to me. In other words, I pretty much know what the words mean, but I would never express it that way, partially because I just don't talk that way and partially because I would be more used to a different emphasis -- "kept" rather than "keeping." That's why it sounds odd to me, that's why the phrase made me stop to try and figure out exactly what was meant, and that's why I'm not sure I would agree with the sentiment it conveys.

Have I mentioned I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter? Cause I do.