murmsk

A part of me wonders what would happen if you were to convince such a person that it is okay to find your own way on some issues. A part of me wonders if this wouldn't be a disaster, because they are simply not capable of doing it.

I think there is some validity to this. I had an employee years ago whose husbands past was full of drug, alcohol and woman abuse . He found "religion" in a fundamental church and became a good husband and father. Without the church continually telling him how to live and the fear of hell, I am certain he would revert.

I guess I don't view the bible as right or wrong but rather it is the product of the people who wrote it and as such it reflects all the views and hangups of the day. Plus, especially the letters, we are hearing only one side of a conversation. How many times have I said to my children if you do this there will be hell to pay. Perhaps they were hanging with the wrong crowd or not studying. Imagine hearing "If you hang out with boys you will ruin your life" with our knowing that "those boys" were involved with drugs .

So my question is this... do we know something that they don't know? And if so, what is that thing that we know?

Even the most fundamental of bible readers filter what they pat attention to. In addition to the verses that condemn homosexuality the bible is equally clear in condemning wearing of different types of cloths and condoning slavery but these are always glossed over these days. In a sense what we choose to ignore is a product of our culture. Growing up I noticed this fluidity of views through the years. During confirmation I asked our Pastor why sins change and he didn't have an answer (at least that I can remember). Truth shouldn't change through the years. If it does then it is not truth.

steve

With in these 4 areas there are 2 distinct goals.

Gun control and arming school officials has the goal of reducing the carnage of a murderous situation. Even if you has a society with no guns some person with a sharp stick can still kill. The difference is that it would be difficult to walk into a school and kill 20 kids. On a more realistic level outlawing 100 bullet clips forces the killer to reload producing times of venerability . Putting armed guards in schools just means the murder will be confronted sooner. These things reduce the carnage potential. These things do nothing to correct the underlying problems.

Addressing the culture / mental health addresses the problem by speaking to the underlying problem of why someone would want to kill.

My personal opinion is that there needs to be movement on ALL fronts. It is naive to think either without the other will not have have a satisfactory effect. If you handle the cultural/mental health issues you will get a decrease in the number of shootings but what shooting you do have will include a large # of people. If you deal only with gun control/ armed guards the total # of shooting will be large but it will involve smaller numbers of wounded/dead.

My opinions on gun control are that we have gun control now. I hear no one suggesting legalizing full machine guns or RPG's so it not that you have some who want no gun control and some thatt want no guns.. rather it is where do you draw the line. Where does the potential for carnage out weigh a persons right to own? machine gun-no, shot gun-yes, RPG-no, semi-automatic w/ 5 bullets 22-yes, semi-automatic w/ 100 bullets - ???????

steve

Here is the question that I have been 'dealing' with for quite some time: If we are to accept homosexuality because they are also Gods children and sexuality is not a choice we are born homosexual or straight, then couldn't pedophiles use this same argument?

NO not at all! The issue has has to do with is the relationship one where both are fulfilled and enriched by the union. There is never a situation where the child is not harmed. And I might add that this has nothing to do with gay or straight.

A better question might be that of polygamy. I can see potential situations where 3 people could have loving, mutually fulfilling relationships.

steve

Reading the bible for the first time again Marcus Borg

Is God Christian Kirby Godsey

Quotes are appropiate when the quoted does a better job of reflecting my thoughts than I can or I want to give credit for a novel idea.

steve

Following Jesus Is Costly

I am not sure I agree with this anymore.

Getting out of bed is costly.

Growing up is costly

Making decisions is costly

I can say over all I have gotten more out my spiritual travels than I have put in.

I know some have been and are persecuted but to state cost as universal ????

steve

1. How does language “an approach to God” fit your spiritual needs?

It fits my needs because it is vague and open ended. As I have aged my view of "an approach to God " has evolved. The one constant have been the teaching and life of Jesus. I assume and look forward to continued evolution in the years to come. There is room in the above statement for the evolution of understanding.

2. What language would you have used for you own spiritual journey?

I am not sure I fully understand the question. The journey to enriched my life.

3. Do you feel as the life and teachings of Jesus have brought you closer to an experience of God? How so?

I have come to understand that God wants me to be happy and wants my life to be worthwhile. The teachings and life of Jesus provides a framework around which this is accomplished.

4. How does the absence of salvation language help or detract from your spiritual path?

In my opinion the concept of salvation, as it is understood and practiced in most church circles, has more to do with the church trying to control the masses than it does anything else. If you disobey the church you will not be saved. There is some wisdom in salvation if you move away from a literal interpretation. If you live a Jesus inspired life there is a good chance you might save yourself from a few problems as well as live non self-centered life of substance.

5. How does the Jesus of history or his teachings affect your understanding of God?

It brings into focus that "belief" really has very little to do with it. My understandings are not tied to Jesus's divinity.

6. How might our understanding of who and what we are, as human beings, change if we remove the need for the sacrifice of Jesus as the Pascal Lamb, our redeemer?

I think there is a way of including sacrifice language without compromising our progressiveness. Jesus did not have to die and did not die because of some agreement with God to spare me from some earned punishment. Rather was willing to die for what he knew was right much like MLK and Gandhi did.

7. What is the difference between savior, hero, master, teacher, or prophet for you?

Savior is personal with some sense of being saved from something.

Hero is a general societal thing with no necessity of a personal attachment.

Master has authority over someone. Expects his/her subjects to obey without question if necessary. Master also takes responsibility of and for his/her subjects.

Teacher teaches (nuff said)

Prophet has wisdom that transcends the obvious. One who tells tomorrows truths.

And that's the way I see it (right now).

steve

• 0
  

I don't think you can look to biology for answers

The word "life" has several meanings. The truth is parts of the human body will "live" for quite awhile after what we term death occurs.

Brain activity is often used as a marker for live when reality is it more a marker for viability. When an organism loses brain activity the chance viability of the greater organism is essentially zero at this point in our current understanding of medicine. There was a time when heart activity was a marker.

My point is .....trying to find a biological marker of life or viability that can be agreed on so the discussion can move on just isn't going to happen.

The question is simply this, Does society have the right to decide things like this? If the answer is NO then we as individuals have the obligation to search our heart for an answer on how we will live our life. If the answer is YES the we as society members have to search our heart for our vote and accept the will of others as well as the fact that these are seldom decisions for all time which means the discussion will continue.

steve

I have several problems with this discussion.

Pulling bible individual verses to support or not support an issue assumes an inerrant bible.

I also seriously doubt that the concept of abortion was even on the map and even if it was I would suspect the resistance would come from medical risk to the mother rather than any moralistic statement especially considering how the Jews of that era felt about women that bleed.

I have been present in the OR during late term abortions and early term births and I see very little difference between the two other than how the fetus is treated after removal from the woman's body. If you see a life as sacred it is hard not to be moved by this. When I was younger and was not ready to be a father I was very pro-choice.......now I am not sure. Early term the situation gets much grayer. If I put myself in the place of a fetus.... would I want to be born to someone who didn't want me .... Or would I rather not be born? I think I would choose the latter and save or recycle my sole for another time.

I tend to look at the overarching bible stories to try and gain a sense of where God might stand and I suspect he would side on the side of grace.

That said ... I still can't don't have a firm enough grasp to enforce my opinions on others.

steve

Sometimes it is very difficult to discuss issues that involve discrimination without it getting personal since discrimination is itself is very very personal.

Further Re-read MLK's "Letter from the Birmingham Jail " and substitute Gay(or any other discriminated group) for Negro and tell it doesn't ring true.

On a happier note it was hard to look at the results of the last election and not feel that the ball for legalization of same-sex marriage isn't rolling down hill!

steve

If my memory serves, I read somewhere that the Sabbath changed from the 7th day (Saturday) to the first day (Sunday) when the Christian Worshipers merged the Sun Worshipers several hundred years after Jesus died.

steve

It seems to me that there are 2 separate issues. Marriage and unions. One is religious .... Marriage, and one is legal ..... unions. Yes you can have one without the other.

Most societies have decided that unions between two people that forms a family unit deserves some rules with respect to finances and behavior. Some are in reference to children and some are not. I struggle to see a situation where where limiting this to only heterosexual couples wouldn't be discrimination. Marriage is religious and thus is a decision of the church. Our church for instance has decided that marriage is a covenant between two people who choose to merge their lives infront of God. Their genders are irrelevant. We marry people regardless of the legality of the union.

With respect to logic . There really is very little logic associated with religion. To have a discussion about about the logic of a thought , there has to be come common facts that everyone agrees on. I see nothing that is universally agreed on.

steve

I would think a mixed faith tradition marrage would be very difficult if one views faith traditions in exclusive terms. If I felt the only way to heaven was through Jesus or the Koran then it seems to me that problems are bound to happen. After all who wants their spouse or children going to hell. If on the other hand both spouses admit that God can be approached through Jesus, Buda . Koran ....... with equal ease then mutual respect begins.

steve

I had a Latin professor years ago who said the sole purpose of language and words is to communicate thoughts and concepts. It is the responsibility of the speaker(writer) to use words that will most perfectly communicate these thoughts. This conversation was used during a discussion of cuss words and that there may be times and audiences where cuss words are necessary. With respect to this conversation ... if the word "evangelical" does not communicate to the audience what the communicator is trying to communicate then we need to find another word. For me I never call myself a "Christian " anymore due to the fact I don't want to be thought of as being a conservative Christian. I now am a Follower of Jesus.

Has anybody come up with an effective evangelism strategy for progressive churches?

Lead by example. Our church "evangelizes" by being active and visible in caring for the least of us . Being active and visible in speaking out against religious bigotry to name a few. When people ask "why do you do the things you do? We tell them.

We recently watched a youtube debate between Jim Wallis and a Southern Baptist discussing whether faith and justice is at the core of the Christian commandment. It was an interesting debate not for what was said as that was predictable but rather if you read between the lines their ideas of the core purpose of the church was radically different. Jim Wallis's view was the church is what it does and centers around Jesus's directive to love your neighbor and whatever is done to the least is done to me. Where as the SB guy was felt the core tenet is to make converts.

steve

It is interesting how we get caught up with words.

When our congregation re-planted itself 2 years ago we call our self a Progressive, Missional Faith Community. We spent considerable time studying what it meant and used the 8 points as the starting point for the progressive discussion. Toward the end of the discussion on of our older ladies rose to say that she agreed with the 8 points but had some issue with the word progressive stating "we have always followed those". Sometimes I think we like labels not because they say who we are but rather who we are not. In my case it is the latter.

To me the word "evangelical " means one who consciously spreads the word because it is a core tenet of ones faith. with the emphasis on CORE TENET. To me there is a difference between spreading the word because I have been commanded to (and it will get me to heaven), and spreading the word because I find it to have enriched my life and maybe it would enrich yours.

steve

Letting my self accept what I already knew in my heart that it is not what you believe that is important but how you live.

steve

I think it is a good idea.

I don't know how to put this without being offensive but I will try.

This can be a very intimidating place for the average run of the mill person who is questioning. Most who of us who post here are well above average in intelligence and the writings reflect that. In addition most are mature in their faith. This would be very difficult for a person new to PC to understand.

A place where "high english" is not spoken would be a good thing and a place where folks won;t feel out of place would be good as well.

steve

The real question is....

Does one live their life differently depending on ones belief in an afterlife?

I think not......

steve

Steve, I don't know that it does fall within this discussion. What do you have in mind?

Well I can see situations where there could be a loving, non-dominating relationship between three adults especially if bisexuality is involved. The reason I ask is it is a bit outside my current comfort zone as homosexuality once was. With respect to my current discomfort, my brain tells me it is another prejudice.

I was wondering how others view it?

steve

we all will find out one one of these days hopefull later rather than sooner.

steve

Many of these rituals may have been a response to a problem/issue that a people had.

example might be:

a village was having trouble with people getting sick from food (poorly preserved or something like mushrooms where some are good and some are poison) so the church leaders decide all food has to be checked by , you guessed it, the church ....dah dah .... Kosher foods

Bead colors might be harder to explain.

steve

trying to be a good person

So where does polygamy fall in this discussion?

steve

I currently am of the opinion that there is very little if any room for the word BELIEF in a thinking persons vocabulary.

steve

I Cringe When I Remember.......

The church NOT supporting civil rights,

the church fostering the concept that a womans place is in the kitchen, (Oh that still goes on in certain circles)

the church championing the idea that being gay is a sin (oh that is still going on too),

the church NOT welcoming someone who is different (oh, that still goes on too),

the church teaching that God is to be feared. (again still an active part of church teachings)

the list goes on....

At least there hasn't been a Christian Crusade in my lifetime

steve