Jump to content

Progressive Christianity Vs. Literalistic Christianity


Jutan

Recommended Posts

Hi Mckenna:

 

About a year or so ago , in a rare moment of humility, James explained that he used to be an atheist. During this period he says he would sarcastically and verbally ridicule Christians. After some personal crises ,which I won't go into, he turned to religion.

 

As we say In the black community he has "flipped the script". Instead of being a sarcastic atheist attacking Christians , he's now a sarcastic conservative Catholic attacking "liberals". I don't know much about Jung psychology but I am sure there are"shadow" issues lurking here . He may indeed be projecting his own doubts about the Catholic faith onto us. He then attacks us to rid himself of his doubts. He may indeed "need' us for that reason .

 

All of us who are believers have to deal with our doubts, which will always be there ,no matter how much we say we "believe" . How we deal with our "shadow" nature of doubt is what is important.

MOW

 

 

His experience isn't that unusual. I've seen it many times. A librarian I worked with was raised a Southern Baptist (along with her brothers). One of those brothers became an atheist (he and his wife) then they had twin daughters and became fundamentalists (not the Southern Baptist he was raised). I can't even tell you how many people I've met both in "real" life and on the web who have the same story. I remember telling my husband that fundamentalists and (some) atheists are two sides of the same coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Hi Mckenna:

 

About a year or so ago , in a rare moment of humility, James explained that he used to be an atheist. During this period he says he would sarcastically and verbally ridicule Christians. After some personal crises ,which I won't go into, he turned to religion.

 

As we say In the black community he has "flipped the script". Instead of being a sarcastic atheist attacking Christians , he's now a sarcastic conservative Catholic attacking "liberals". I don't know much about Jung psychology but I am sure there are"shadow" issues lurking here . He may indeed be projecting his own doubts about the Catholic faith onto us. He then attacks us to rid himself of his doubts. He may indeed "need' us for that reason .

 

All of us who are believers have to deal with our doubts, which will always be there ,no matter how much we say we "believe" . How we deal with our "shadow" nature of doubt is what is important.

MOW

 

 

His experience isn't that unusual. I've seen it many times. A librarian I worked with was raised a Southern Baptist (along with her brothers). One of those brothers became an atheist (he and his wife) then they had twin daughters and became fundamentalists (not the Southern Baptist he was raised). I can't even tell you how many people I've met both in "real" life and on the web who have the same story. I remember telling my husband that fundamentalists and (some) atheists are two sides of the same coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I can definitely see where you're coming from. How do you perceive the YHWH of the Old Testament (and New Testament, I suppose) to differ from Zeus? Certainly there are images of YHWH that don't exactly go with that of Zeus...like that of a mother...

 

 

Sorry it took me so long to respond. I've been tied up mentally with end of school year stuff. And of course now I have a nasty cold. I wanted to really try and answer the question as thoroughly as I could.

 

Zeus is a sexual god with children. He is very male and stereotype (archetype?) of the ultimate male. It is the only way to really see him. There is no question Zeus has a ######.

 

YHWH on the other hand has multiple facets including a mountain, eagle, mother hen, mother bear, rock, woman nursing her infant, woman in labor, fortress to name a few. YHWH is not a biological father, does not have a sexual appetite, and forbids images to be made (I think that may be why so many images are recorded in scripture, to prevent one from defining who YHWH is).

 

Unfortunately many churches (including progressive) have attached themselves to the trinity model of God and God as male complete with ######. (Hence, Zeus worship!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry it took me so long to respond. I've been tied up mentally with end of school year stuff. And of course now I have a nasty cold. I wanted to really try and answer the question as thoroughly as I could.

 

Zeus is a sexual god with children. He is very male and stereotype (archetype?) of the ultimate male. It is the only way to really see him. There is no question Zeus has a ######.

 

YHWH on the other hand has multiple facets including a mountain, eagle, mother hen, mother bear, rock, woman nursing her infant, woman in labor, fortress to name a few. YHWH is not a biological father, does not have a sexual appetite, and forbids images to be made (I think that may be why so many images are recorded in scripture, to prevent one from defining who YHWH is).

 

Unfortunately many churches (including progressive) have attached themselves to the trinity model of God and God as male complete with ######. (Hence, Zeus worship!)

 

That's a really interesting perspective! Thanks!

 

How do you think the Trinity model of God adds to the Zeus image? Because of its overall maleness (Father, Son, and ?)?

 

Good point about Zeus' sexuality vs. YHWH's, er, lack of a sex life. :lol:

 

I think it's a bit difficult to get away from male images of YHWH simply because he ( :P ) has so often been depicted as masculine. Male pronouns are generally used; the word "Lord" is used; and the words "Heavenly Father" are pretty important in Christian tradition.

 

So how do we lose the image of Zeus without gender-neutralizing the entire Bible (which, IMO, would not be honest to the text)? Hmm...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a really interesting perspective! Thanks!

 

How do you think the Trinity model of God adds to the Zeus image? Because of its overall maleness (Father, Son, and ?)?

 

Good point about Zeus' sexuality vs. YHWH's, er, lack of a sex life. :lol:

 

I think it's a bit difficult to get away from male images of YHWH simply because he ( :P ) has so often been depicted as masculine. Male pronouns are generally used; the word "Lord" is used; and the words "Heavenly Father" are pretty important in Christian tradition.

 

So how do we lose the image of Zeus without gender-neutralizing the entire Bible (which, IMO, would not be honest to the text)? Hmm...

 

 

It is about focus. Trinity is only one of many ways to understand or think about God. Their are many, many images of God in the bible (and who says we are even limited to them? Many of us have our own experiences which are also valid). THe problem is that in our society for years we have focused on the male images to the exclusion of all the rest. Trying thinking and talking about God using the feminine pronouns. It can be a pretty amazing experience.

 

YHWH is pretty clear about the whole idol worship, graven image, thing. Modern Christianity has really violated the 1st commandment by creating images of God (even if only verbal images) and worshipping those images (trinity is not even in the bible) and losing much of who God actually is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is about focus. Trinity is only one of many ways to understand or think about God. Their are many, many images of God in the bible (and who says we are even limited to them? Many of us have our own experiences which are also valid). THe problem is that in our society for years we have focused on the male images to the exclusion of all the rest. Trying thinking and talking about God using the feminine pronouns. It can be a pretty amazing experience.

 

Absolutely. I agree.

 

I love when people use feminine pronouns...it makes me happy. I have a tendency to use male pronouns, but in general I try to avoid them altogether. I certainly don't think of God - or even Christ - as male.

 

YHWH is pretty clear about the whole idol worship, graven image, thing. Modern Christianity has really violated the 1st commandment by creating images of God (even if only verbal images) and worshipping those images (trinity is not even in the bible) and losing much of who God actually is.

 

Again, I agree. I find it sad. It's what turned me off from Christianity for a long time, and I think it's the same for a lot of people leaving the church today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. I agree.

 

I love when people use feminine pronouns...it makes me happy. I have a tendency to use male pronouns, but in general I try to avoid them altogether. I certainly don't think of God - or even Christ - as male.

Again, I agree. I find it sad. It's what turned me off from Christianity for a long time, and I think it's the same for a lot of people leaving the church today.

 

 

I tend to use the male pronouns and I tend to think of God as male. It is part of that unlearning process I was talking about in the other thread. But I love it when people use the female or no pronoun.

 

I stopped going to church for years out of sheer frustration. It has only been for the last two years that I found a place where I could be me. I like it because I can have my beliefs without matching or trying to reach a certain place. I am unitarian but at the local Unitarian Universalist church I didn't feel free to explore my beliefs. At the UCC I do. From what I understand no matter what denomination you attend, if you go to a congregationalist church everyone is different! So, if I ever move I might prefer the UU!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to use the male pronouns and I tend to think of God as male. It is part of that unlearning process I was talking about in the other thread. But I love it when people use the female or no pronoun.

 

I know what you mean. And I barely even attended a Christian church when I was younger - I picked up God's supposed "maleness" merely from our culture!

 

I stopped going to church for years out of sheer frustration. It has only been for the last two years that I found a place where I could be me. I like it because I can have my beliefs without matching or trying to reach a certain place. I am unitarian but at the local Unitarian Universalist church I didn't feel free to explore my beliefs. At the UCC I do. From what I understand no matter what denomination you attend, if you go to a congregationalist church everyone is different! So, if I ever move I might prefer the UU!

 

I'm so glad you've found someplace you feel at home :) I really need to check out the local UCC. And I know what you mean with your last comment - UU churches certainly vary vastly, too! So I might not always be comfortable in a UU church, even though i love the one I attend :)

 

Ah, the woes of not having black and white creeds ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual, the apology, sorry for my absence. I'll do my best to answer questions in the order they were raised.

 

Bobd

 

Sorry you've decided that you don't want to talk to me anymore. I don't think I was demoninzing (unless you think that being described as a non-Christian is demonisation.... and then I'm unsure how I was supposed to understand you saying I worshipped the Beast of Revelation or your sacreligious remarks about YHWH) I'll admit I was a bit snarky/sarcastic but I'm pretty sure we're a pot and kettle in this one.

 

McKenna

 

As I've explained in other places, and MOW inadequately explains, I'm on this board because a.) progresive Christianity is fascinating to me b.)I enjoy the opportunity to discuss philosophy, theology etc. with people of differing viewpoints in a way where I can temper my gut reaction, do the proper research and reply - like writing a living paper. c.) I'm bound by the Great Commission and I would be pleased to one day learn that my, poor, attempts at bearing witness as a Christian bore some fruit in someone's soul. I've written long, more detailed explanations before and I'm sure if you want to dig through my logs you could find them.

 

October's Autumn

 

That is not entirely true while being partially true. God comes across many different ways in the bible. There in not one characterization of God in the Hebrew bible. The people's view of him changes and evolves.
While I would agree that both man's perception of God, and God's self-revelation have developed and expanded over time. Bobd, and other Gnostics, claim that God in the OT is a defective, disabled half-god known as the DemiUrge. The DemiUrge created all of the physical universe and imprisoned the freeness of spirit created by the true god.

 

Unfortunatley this is not Hebrew so you haven't looked anything.

 

So, the only valid edition of Holy Writ as far as you are concerned are the original Hebrew autographs? Sorry, the experience of the Jews and early Christians doesn't bear this out as a concept within the Judaic-Christian understanding of the Scriptures. Unless you are rpeapred to offer me some proof for this statement, I can't accept it.

You can't read Hebrew poetry literally, even in Hebrew. It wasn't intended to be taken apart or out of context. You must look at it as a whole. What is the gist of the poem?
This is the fourth penetential psalms. David confesses his sin to God and asks forgiveness. He prays and responds to the work of God's grace in his heart.

 

If I have misunderstood it (providing it can be understood in english), please explain to me the meaning that neither Jews or Christians have found in this.

 

 

There is no such thing as demons in the Hebrew Bible. Work on your history, please.

 

Demons are the angels that fell with Lucifer when Saint Michael the Arcangel threw them out. Demons have therefore exited since before the Garden of Eden because Satan was no longer Lucifer when he tempted Eve, and by proxy, Adam.

 

If I'm always being pilloried for my own sarcasm, could you please eliminate it from your posts as well?

 

From what I've seen of your postings here you worship Zeus, not YHWH. This is common among conservatives and fundamentalists.
I don't understand, in the same thread where people trash me for being sarcastic (and even then not that much) I get replies like this. Under what possible authority do you claim I worship the head god of the pagan, Greek pantheon? The King of gods who lives on Olympus, who was the youngest of his parents children and married Hera, had mistresses (and at least one semi-pedophilica homosexual relathionship)? Which part of the Holy Trinity, makes you think I worship a man-###### of a God, driven by human passions (lust, revenge, etc.)?

 

Interesting but Xiantity [sic] was for a long time a sect of Judaism

 

I've never said it wasn't. In fact, earlier in this thread I noted that Christianity comes from Judaism like a flower on a stem.

 

Double think? I'm not quite sure where you get that from.
I get it from the threads where, many people who self-identify as progressives, make ad hominem attacks against people they don;t agree with. Or, conversely, rant and rave about who terrible or dangerous someone is. All this while complaining that so-called conservatives, are judgemental and intolerant. For another example, look at how responses go when I write something. Or look at the threads I mentioned, Pope Benedict XVI thread started by BeachofEden (my one foray outside this forum - excluding the tech questions forum) or the thread about Ann Coulter.

 

If you understand Progressive Christianity to be a "psuedo-religious expression of a failed ideology that finds itself, justifiably, on the ash-heap of history" you are sorely out of touch with both what is happening in the United States, the world, and people here ... Progressive Christianity is growing. It grows slowly because slow growth is healthy growth ... True faith takes time to grow. It is not set in stone at the age of 8 or 13 or whatever age one becomes confirmed in many churches.

 

What's happening throughout the US and the world? Firstly, I don't live in the US and so, necessarily, try not to get too involved in domestic US politics. But I think that the progressive Christians system, comes from the attempt by socialists and marxists to adapt a religion to their own political worldview ... If progressive Christianity is growing, they need to get better advertising for this board, because it has lost most of its major posters in the last few years... how much time does it take to grow faith? I wasn't confirmed at 8 or 13. I was confirmed when I was 21. How odl shoudl I have been and how much suffering would be appropriate for me to speak about a person who was not born into the Faith?

 

MOW

 

About a year or so ago , in a rare moment of humility, James explained that he used to be an atheist. During this period he says he would sarcastically and verbally ridicule Christians. After some personal crises ,which I won't go into, he turned to religion.
Thanks, I think. But its another example fo the way some posters complain about my attitude etc. but feel perfectly comfortably making off-hand insults about me in conversations with others.

 

I don't know much about Jung psychology but I am sure there are"shadow" issues lurking here . He may indeed be projecting his own doubts about the Catholic faith onto us. He then attacks us to rid himself of his doubts. He may indeed "need' us for that reason .

 

If you don;t know much about Jungian psychology, you might want to avoid making a diagnosis of someone you've never actually met outside of a few posts in an internet forum. Not to be insulting, it just seems more reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual, the apology, sorry for my absence. I'll do my best to answer questions in the order they were raised.

 

Bobd

 

Sorry you've decided that you don't want to talk to me anymore. I don't think I was demoninzing (unless you think that being described as a non-Christian is demonisation.... and then I'm unsure how I was supposed to understand you saying I worshipped the Beast of Revelation or your sacreligious remarks about YHWH) I'll admit I was a bit snarky/sarcastic but I'm pretty sure we're a pot and kettle in this one.

 

McKenna

 

As I've explained in other places, and MOW inadequately explains, I'm on this board because a.) progresive Christianity is fascinating to me b.)I enjoy the opportunity to discuss philosophy, theology etc. with people of differing viewpoints in a way where I can temper my gut reaction, do the proper research and reply - like writing a living paper. c.) I'm bound by the Great Commission and I would be pleased to one day learn that my, poor, attempts at bearing witness as a Christian bore some fruit in someone's soul. I've written long, more detailed explanations before and I'm sure if you want to dig through my logs you could find them.

 

October's Autumn

 

That is not entirely true while being partially true. God comes across many different ways in the bible. There in not one characterization of God in the Hebrew bible. The people's view of him changes and evolves.
While I would agree that both man's perception of God, and God's self-revelation have developed and expanded over time. Bobd, and other Gnostics, claim that God in the OT is a defective, disabled half-god known as the DemiUrge. The DemiUrge created all of the physical universe and imprisoned the freeness of spirit created by the true god.

 

Unfortunatley this is not Hebrew so you haven't looked anything.

 

So, the only valid edition of Holy Writ as far as you are concerned are the original Hebrew autographs? Sorry, the experience of the Jews and early Christians doesn't bear this out as a concept within the Judaic-Christian understanding of the Scriptures. Unless you are rpeapred to offer me some proof for this statement, I can't accept it.

You can't read Hebrew poetry literally, even in Hebrew. It wasn't intended to be taken apart or out of context. You must look at it as a whole. What is the gist of the poem?
This is the fourth penetential psalms. David confesses his sin to God and asks forgiveness. He prays and responds to the work of God's grace in his heart.

 

If I have misunderstood it (providing it can be understood in english), please explain to me the meaning that neither Jews or Christians have found in this.

 

 

There is no such thing as demons in the Hebrew Bible. Work on your history, please.

 

Demons are the angels that fell with Lucifer when Saint Michael the Arcangel threw them out. Demons have therefore exited since before the Garden of Eden because Satan was no longer Lucifer when he tempted Eve, and by proxy, Adam.

 

If I'm always being pilloried for my own sarcasm, could you please eliminate it from your posts as well?

 

From what I've seen of your postings here you worship Zeus, not YHWH. This is common among conservatives and fundamentalists.
I don't understand, in the same thread where people trash me for being sarcastic (and even then not that much) I get replies like this. Under what possible authority do you claim I worship the head god of the pagan, Greek pantheon? The King of gods who lives on Olympus, who was the youngest of his parents children and married Hera, had mistresses (and at least one semi-pedophilica homosexual relathionship)? Which part of the Holy Trinity, makes you think I worship a man-###### of a God, driven by human passions (lust, revenge, etc.)?

 

Interesting but Xiantity [sic] was for a long time a sect of Judaism

 

I've never said it wasn't. In fact, earlier in this thread I noted that Christianity comes from Judaism like a flower on a stem.

 

Double think? I'm not quite sure where you get that from.
I get it from the threads where, many people who self-identify as progressives, make ad hominem attacks against people they don;t agree with. Or, conversely, rant and rave about who terrible or dangerous someone is. All this while complaining that so-called conservatives, are judgemental and intolerant. For another example, look at how responses go when I write something. Or look at the threads I mentioned, Pope Benedict XVI thread started by BeachofEden (my one foray outside this forum - excluding the tech questions forum) or the thread about Ann Coulter.

 

If you understand Progressive Christianity to be a "psuedo-religious expression of a failed ideology that finds itself, justifiably, on the ash-heap of history" you are sorely out of touch with both what is happening in the United States, the world, and people here ... Progressive Christianity is growing. It grows slowly because slow growth is healthy growth ... True faith takes time to grow. It is not set in stone at the age of 8 or 13 or whatever age one becomes confirmed in many churches.

 

What's happening throughout the US and the world? Firstly, I don't live in the US and so, necessarily, try not to get too involved in domestic US politics. But I think that the progressive Christians system, comes from the attempt by socialists and marxists to adapt a religion to their own political worldview ... If progressive Christianity is growing, they need to get better advertising for this board, because it has lost most of its major posters in the last few years... how much time does it take to grow faith? I wasn't confirmed at 8 or 13. I was confirmed when I was 21. How odl shoudl I have been and how much suffering would be appropriate for me to speak about a person who was not born into the Faith?

 

MOW

 

About a year or so ago , in a rare moment of humility, James explained that he used to be an atheist. During this period he says he would sarcastically and verbally ridicule Christians. After some personal crises ,which I won't go into, he turned to religion.
Thanks, I think. But its another example fo the way some posters complain about my attitude etc. but feel perfectly comfortably making off-hand insults about me in conversations with others.

 

I don't know much about Jung psychology but I am sure there are"shadow" issues lurking here . He may indeed be projecting his own doubts about the Catholic faith onto us. He then attacks us to rid himself of his doubts. He may indeed "need' us for that reason .

 

If you don;t know much about Jungian psychology, you might want to avoid making a diagnosis of someone you've never actually met outside of a few posts in an internet forum. Not to be insulting, it just seems more reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, the woes of not having black and white creeds ;)

 

It is a small price to pay for truth.

 

My experience in those places with b&w creeds is that they all disagree anyhow. I saw a statistic somewhere that 90% of women who are Catholic use birth control. It might have come from Spong's book. Anyhow, I say good for them for seeing truth beyond the dogma of their religion!

 

"We" have the truth and "they" do not. It is worse in the conservative/fundamentalists groups because they aren't willing to live and let live. There is always someone more conservative and someone more liberal ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jamesAMDG

 

Bobd

 

Sorry you've decided that you don't want to talk to me anymore. I don't think I was demoninzing (unless you think that being described as a non-Christian is demonisation.... and then I'm unsure how I was supposed to understand you saying I worshipped the Beast of Revelation or your sacreligious remarks about YHWH) I'll admit I was a bit snarky/sarcastic but I'm pretty sure we're a pot and kettle in this one.

 

You are right. We are a pot and a kettle.

 

I tend to be huffy and when I recognize that I am moving into the aeon of arrogance, I back off until I can cool down. That is why I said I did not want to talk to you any more. I define an aeon as a place in thought. Like when a man doesn't want to talk about his divorce. he says "don't go there". It means he doesn't want to think about it. He does not wan't to go to that particular aeon of thought or place in thought.

 

In regard to the Old Testament Yahveh, my thinking, right or wrong, is a little different from the traditional Gnostic thinking about him. I see Yahveh as a man who once walked the earth and who was in possession of very high tech science, taught great wisdom and taught us about god. I can quote many passages from the Old Testament to support my theory, but I am not trying to win an argument here. Ancient men knew who he really was, but in later times when Hebrew tribesmen fell into a period of dark ignorance, they began to proclaim him as a god as they gradually wrote down and evolved the Pentateuch. As a result, I see him as an inferior god created by the Hebrew tribesmen, falsly proclaimed as the creator of the Universe. In his Old Testament image as a god, I see him as the beast of Saint John's Revelation with his ten horns of the law. The horns of a bull moose or other horned animal are very intimidating and when you confront the animal it has the power to gore you or kill you. The horns of the law are very intimidating and when you confront it the police and the supporting judicial system have the power to punish you or even kill you by a process called execution. The seven heads of the beast are the seven reputations of the god created by the descendants of Abraham. They are, in random order:

1. The head with the reputation of being the Creator

2. The head with the reputation of being a Curse Maker

3. The head with the reputation of being a Protector

4. The head with the reputation of being a Powerful Lord

5. The head with the reputation of being a Destroyer

6. The head with the reputation of being Jealous

7. The head with the reputation of being an Avenger

I see the symbolism of John's beast matching the characteristics of Yahveh that are described in the Old Testament. I explain this in much more detail in my book which is unpublished, but I am looking for a publisher. However I will not present the details here because I am not trying to win an argument.

 

I do not believe that the universe is an inferior creation. It is the most majestic creation that I can possibly imagine.

 

When I read about Yahveh saying "you shall have no other gods besides me", I see him talking not about himself, but about the God I. Understandably the ancient Hebrews mistakenly believed that he was god and developed their thought patterns to write about him as such. The result was a very strange beast indeed.

 

BobD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McKenna

 

As I've explained in other places, and MOW inadequately explains, I'm on this board because a.) progresive Christianity is fascinating to me b.)I enjoy the opportunity to discuss philosophy, theology etc. with people of differing viewpoints in a way where I can temper my gut reaction, do the proper research and reply - like writing a living paper. c.) I'm bound by the Great Commission and I would be pleased to one day learn that my, poor, attempts at bearing witness as a Christian bore some fruit in someone's soul. I've written long, more detailed explanations before and I'm sure if you want to dig through my logs you could find them.

 

Sorry, I'm new to the forum, so I'd never heard you explain it before.

 

Those seem like good reasons to me :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get it from the threads where, many people who self-identify as progressives, make ad hominem attacks against people they don;t agree with. Or, conversely, rant and rave about who terrible or dangerous someone is. All this while complaining that so-called conservatives, are judgemental and intolerant. For another example, look at how responses go when I write something. Or look at the threads I mentioned, Pope Benedict XVI thread started by BeachofEden (my one foray outside this forum - excluding the tech questions forum) or the thread about Ann Coulter.

 

James, you keep on bringing up the thread about Ann Coulter (http://tcpc.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1281&hl=coulter). While I see your point of us "ranting and raving" about her or something, I don't see us disagreeing with what she says "judgmental and intolerant." I didn't reread the entire thread but I felt that our words were an honest reaction to hers (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter). I cannot express the anger and disbelief I felt when I read much of what she said; and I replied with the following post:

 

:o Wow, I'm astounded. I've heard of Coulter before, and heard about some of her comments - like the 9/11 widows comment and the thing about John Edwards being a [derogatory term] - but wow, I can't even believe that page. Are all of those quotes real? Is she kidding? It just seems so entirely outrageous and IMMORAL. I'm in shock :blink::angry:

 

Is this judgmental and intolerant? Are we not allowed to express our anger? I'm just trying to understand what you mean when you say that. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I am late coming to this thread so I may have missed something. When I saw the title about literal v. non-literal, I thought it might be about things like a 7 24 hour day creation, or a literal virgin birth . But no, it's gays. Sometimes I wish we were a little less popular as a theological debate topic. If more people knew us personally, then they might know how boring our "lifestyle" really is. Then maybe we could move on to some more juicy literal v. non-literal debate. Like did Joshua really stop the sun, or was it an eclipse? Did the children of Isreal really go through the red sea, or was it misnamed and it was some other sea and they walked on a sandbar?

See, more interesting stuff. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am late coming to this thread so I may have missed something. When I saw the title about literal v. non-literal, I thought it might be about things like a 7 24 hour day creation, or a literal virgin birth . But no, it's gays. Sometimes I wish we were a little less popular as a theological debate topic. If more people knew us personally, then they might know how boring our "lifestyle" really is. Then maybe we could move on to some more juicy literal v. non-literal debate. Like did Joshua really stop the sun, or was it an eclipse? Did the children of Isreal really go through the red sea, or was it misnamed and it was some other sea and they walked on a sandbar?

See, more interesting stuff. :unsure:

 

I have to agree. I think it is time that gay Marriage and all rights be a footnote in history much like interracial/inter-religious marriage is now. Granted, a sad footnote, as it is taking way too much energy to come to the conclusion that we should actually honor the constitution and allow all consenting adults to marry! Someday we will be able to look back and say we saw history in the making when Civil rights were FINALLY granted to all people regardless of their sexual idenity or orientation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Joseph, I'm not sure whether you view yourself as an Existentialist; or whether you've read and absorbed the so-called channelled teachings of Neale Donald Walsch ("Conversations With God") and others who heavily promote the idea that God's love is so unconditional that no "Wrong Choices" exist; or whether you've come to this understanding on your own; but, man, I've gotta tell you, there most certainly are right and wrong choices, and there absolutely does exist a standard which one MUST follow. This standard is the moral code of God and of all God's angels. Since you are one of God's angels, you're hardwired at the quantum angelic level and at the human DNA level to seek out that moral code and live by it. When you make choices your own soul thinks are right, your brain and your body receive the benefit of neurotransmitters like oxytocin and vasopressin (two biochemicals essential to mental and spiritual health). When you make choices your own soul does NOT like (for instance, if you stupidly decide that pedophilia is a good thing) then your brain and your body do NOT get the good biochemicals, and eventually you will get sick.

 

It is not for you to determine what is wise. It is for you to remember what is wise. It is for you to listen to your own soul, since your own soul understands and remembers what your conscious mind has forgotten. This is the Kingdom Within.

 

There is not a single circumstance in which pedophilia would considered "right" by God. Pedophilia is always -- always -- a psychological by-product of narcissism and sociopathy (barring a spike, tumour, or virus punching through one very tiny part of your diencephalon). It has no place in the life of anyone who wants to be his or her best self.

 

Love Jen

 

I think I have to side with Joseph here. He says that "we know no such thing" concerning the wrongness of pedophilia. It is obvious to me that he is correct in his assumption, otherwise we would not see it on the news daily. People DO molest children so obviously the "collective we" do NOT know that it is wrong, otherwise certain of us would not participate in such a vile activity. I don't think brother Joseph said that pedophilia was right, only that WE do not know that it is unacceptable.

 

I agree that there are right and wrong choices and MOST of us recognize this. However, there always has been and most likely always will be an element of our society that has no appreciation for right and wrong conduct. I think right and wrong is ingrained in MOST people (nature's law or conscience if you will) - I am not so sure about my moral code being from God or God's angels (simply because I have never personally heard from God or an angel) but I can go with that for now since I have no better explanation.

 

When you make choices your own soul thinks are right, your brain and your body receive the benefit of neurotransmitters like oxytocin and vasopressin (two biochemicals essential to mental and spiritual health).

 

I am not familiar with all this but I feel that when we knowingly do wrong we experience guilt, stress and anxiety - perhaps as a result of all of these chemical reactions, perhaps not but the fact remains that MOST of us know when we have done wrong.

 

I likewise can NOT accept the bible as a literal word of God - it is to contradictory against itself. I can accept it as "words ABOUT God" but not "word OF God". For it to be the literal word OF God for me - then God would need to speak directly to me and tell it to me and since this has never happened I can only consider it a book about God written by men. This is what revelation entails. Revelation only applies to the first person to whom it is revealled, anyone that that person tells it to is receiving "hearsay" and is not obliged to believe it at all.

 

Just my opinions - I could be wrong...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I have to side with Joseph here. He says that "we know no such thing" concerning the wrongness of pedophilia. It is obvious to me that he is correct in his assumption, otherwise we would not see it on the news daily. People DO molest children so obviously the "collective we" do NOT know that it is wrong, otherwise certain of us would not participate in such a vile activity. I don't think brother Joseph said that pedophilia was right, only that WE do not know that it is unacceptable.

 

Hi there, Hatcher. One thing you might consider is the fact that a pedophile's greatest weapon against the children he/she victimizes is secrecy. A pedophile doesn't walk around on the street with a big sign that says, "I like to abuse children. Please be a generous Christian and lend me your children for a day. Thanks be to God." A pedophile never tells anyone but other pedophiles about his/her dysfunctional addictions. Pedophiles are among the world's best keepers of secrets precisely because they know what they're doing is wrong, and they know there will be serious societal consequences (as there should be) if they're caught. Yet they do it anyway. So I think it's inaccurate to say, "obviously the "collective we" do NOT know that it is wrong, otherwise certain of us would not participate in such a vile activity." So why do they do it anyway, even though they know it's wrong?

 

I think it's important that pedophiles be brought to justice. Their addictive choices cause great harm to others, and their addictive choices also cause great anguish to their own souls. Pedophiles are not honouring their own angelic code of values (love your God, love your neighbour as yourself). They're not trying at all the be the best people they're capable of being. When the rest of us make excuses for their unaccaptable choices ("poor thing, he didn't know what he was doing") we make our communities less loving, less safe, and less connected to God.

 

Love Jen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't argue at all about the fact that they NEED to be brought to justice - I agree 100% + some. However; from what I have seen and read - pedophiles ONLY hide what they do because they fear death at the hands of the multitudes. They are openly proud of what they do among their own element AND see nothing at all wrong with it...

 

I can't speak from experience of course but that seems to be the chain of thought among this vile group of derelicts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However; from what I have seen and read - pedophiles ONLY hide what they do because they fear death at the hands of the multitudes. They are openly proud of what they do among their own element AND see nothing at all wrong with it...

 

Umm . . . a couple of things you've said puzzle me. First, in the community where I live, vigilante justice just doesn't exist (death at the hands of the multitudes) so mob justice isn't a deterrent -- not in Ontario, anyway. Second, pedophiles can't get child victims without actively choosing a life of secrecy, lies, threats, and manipulation. They can spend many months trying to ensnare a vulnerable child. This takes planning and cunning. Pedophiles are openly proud of their planning and their cunning. It makes them feel superior to other people. But they still know what they're doing is wrong. They just don't care, because they get a biochemical high from their addiction of choice.

 

Jen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Umm . . . a couple of things you've said puzzle me. First, in the community where I live, vigilante justice just doesn't exist (death at the hands of the multitudes) so mob justice isn't a deterrent -- not in Ontario, anyway. Second, pedophiles can't get child victims without actively choosing a life of secrecy, lies, threats, and manipulation. They can spend many months trying to ensnare a vulnerable child. This takes planning and cunning. Pedophiles are openly proud of their planning and their cunning. It makes them feel superior to other people. But they still know what they're doing is wrong. They just don't care, because they get a biochemical high from their addiction of choice.

 

Jen

 

Perhaps we just will not agree. The undercover investigations that I have seen make it quite clear to me that these idiots (pedophiles) only think that what they do is wrong AFTER they get caught. Also - perhaps Ontario is just far ahead of the rest of the world (I have never been there) BUT vigilante justice DOES exist everywhere else. Pedophiles fear prison for that very reason - they don't last long in the penal system because people kill them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that pedophildes are just like you and me. They are just conditioned differently and have an attachment to that which is not condoned by society as allowable or considered healthy for a society. We as a country consider killing as deplorable and wrong but only when it is not in 'our deemed' best interests. When we are at war, we make heros of those who have killed many.

 

We live in a subjective world where 'right' and 'wrong', 'good' and 'evil' and the like are just linguistics that fit according to the conditions, time period and makeup of society whims. Self righteousness will not get us any closer to the truth. It seems to me, God didn't make any errors in creation and we are where we are at this moment and that position is in balanced harmony. Creation takes care of itself and only Love and Peace will survive.

 

Just a view to consider... No more... No less

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps we just will not agree. The undercover investigations that I have seen make it quite clear to me that these idiots (pedophiles) only think that what they do is wrong AFTER they get caught. Also - perhaps Ontario is just far ahead of the rest of the world (I have never been there) BUT vigilante justice DOES exist everywhere else. Pedophiles fear prison for that very reason - they don't last long in the penal system because people kill them.

 

 

I know I'm WAAAAYY late in coming into this one, but I'll throw my $0.02 in. If I remember correctly, the original post had to do with the measure of truth, particularly absolute truth when it comes to sexuality. I'll go ahead and disclose myself as a gnostic-ish Christian similar to Bobd, but not quite as far from orthodoxy as he ;).

 

Here's the problem with the orthodox approach to sexuality. It gives blanket license to monogamous (i.e. married) heterosexual sex and throws out everything else. Pedophiles and homosexuals are considered as those who give in to illicit desires, while married couples are considered God-honoring in their intercourse because they are able to have children. A literalistic interpretation of the Bible aside, the problem with this view is that it does not consider the heart. There are married couples who are unfaithful and adulterous in their thought life, who resent spouses for not indulging their sexual whims at a moments notice and whenever they want, who commit adultery of the heart at work, in the grocery store, when watching TV, etc. The only thing that prevents them from engaging in all sorts of nasty behavior is the fact that they fear the repercussions and they consider the occasional act within the confines of marraige to be enough of a pacification to keep them from hitting the door with their stuff. But, according to the orthodox position, so long as the act of sex is kept within the confines of a marraige between a man and a woman, despite the other issues it is still better than those hell-bound pedophiles and homosexuals. Does anyone see the fundamental flaw in this position?

 

What makes marraige and sex God-honoring has nothing to do with the orthodox sanctification of lust in marraige. Marraige is a subversive activity that requires a person to put on the selfless nature of God and crucify one's flesh - just the same as someone who finds homosexual or pedophilic desires in their body, recognizes that they are not God honoring, and works to overcome them. The value of marraige is in it's visible representation of the character of God. It is a parable, a sacrament, and a means by which two people become like God. It is NOT an outlet for the desires of the flesh.

 

The other thing to consider is whether or not our biology is really "God given." I, a man, think some women are beautiful. It makes me desire them. Orthodoxy considers this to be God given. Someone else finds someone of the same gender to be beautiful, and desires them. Because this does not "fit" in orthodoxy's theology, it is thought to be not God given, and assumes their desire to be insincere. But the reality is that there is no such thing as "God given" sexuality. It is all a matter of biology and the natural world, which hardly reflects the character of God. Only 5% of mammalian species mate for life with the same partner, and even out of that 5%, many species "cheat" and their "spouses" end up raising offspring that are not biologically theirs. (Such is the case with wolves, who are occasionally touted as a model of lifetime monogamy.) Incidentally, homo sapiens doesn't even fall in that 5%. Studies have shown that men actually have an increased production of seed if they are "cheating", reinforcing the biological principle of trying to get one's offspring to be as numerous and varied as possible. Where is God in this natural order of sexuality that we see both in the animal kingdom and in humanity? He is fundamentally alien to it.

 

Am I saying pedophilia is ok? Absolutely not. It is based on a parasite-host relationship. Pedophiles are sexual parasites who prey on children because they are physically weaker and often mentally inexperienced enough to be duped. Do I think there should be a sacramental recognition of same-sex marraiges? Probably not, simply because I have to affirm that there is not a biblical standard for such a practice. For some reason, God created marraige between a man and a woman as a parable of the principle of szygies (male-female redemptive partnerships). But does this mean that man-woman marraiges and sexual activity is absolutely ok? No way. The orthodox position in many cases is nothing more than a sanctification of human lust. They might as well extend this sanctification to same-sex and pedophile relationships.

 

Just $0.02 from another "world-hating gnostic". ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem at all with "adult" consenting homosexuals engaging in their specific lifestyle. It is not for me but I judge them not.

 

My only comments have been concerning pedophiles (with whom I do have a problem), I just don't think that they see anything wrong with their behavior. My position is that they (pedophiles) only regret their activities after being nailed. They do not think that they do anything wrong up until that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem at all with "adult" consenting homosexuals engaging in their specific lifestyle. It is not for me but I judge them not.

 

My only comments have been concerning pedophiles (with whom I do have a problem), I just don't think that they see anything wrong with their behavior. My position is that they (pedophiles) only regret their activities after being nailed. They do not think that they do anything wrong up until that point.

 

It seems to me, At their present level of consciousness/evolution, of course they don't see anything wrong with their behavior. They live mostly at the level of desire and fear which is basic and mostly destructive and in complete disregard for the whims of society and its rules of 'right' and 'wrong'. These levels are present to some degree in most all people I have met. Perhaps most here have evolved beyond that point where desire and fear are the controlling factors in their life.

 

P.S. Curious, why do you have a 'problem' or what exactly is your 'problem with them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service