BeachOfEden

"As for me, I have been frustrated with the sense that there is no denomination that really suits what I am looking for. I am uninterested in existing Christian denominations, even the liberal ones like UCC, because of their use of language, rites, and creeds that to me signal an old paradigm (and yet, unlike Marcus Borg, I cannot recite creeds that I don't believe to be true.) On the other hand, Unitarian Universalism is too amorphous and unfocused to satisfy what I am seeking." I agree. What i often would wish for is indeed a brand new progressive/moderate church..that would takes the best bits and pieces from different progressive denominations, pluss some emergent and contemporary ideas. Current Pros & Cons It seems many of of like and agree with certian bits of like United Methodists & Presbyterian USA,ect...but in agreement with David and others here...while I DO LIKE UMC and Pres USA's social justice views..the old traditional rites mean nothing to me..and and Pres USA's over focus on the trinity is a turn off to me..and thus where I would tend to relate more to Christian UU's instead. I am appealed to Christian UU's non-trinity views..but on the other hand...some of the really liberal churches like UU reduce all the beliefs down to mere positive 'myths' and then at that point it looses it's meaning to me. I guess at this very moment I relate to UMC the best....though I rareley go there...

This would make an very interesting topic for this forum, don;t you think? The basic fact that many liberals are turned off of christianity because of what they precieve as a Violent Atonement Thoery. Infact, I think I will start a thread on this on the PC forum;)

Progressive & Moderate christians Hippies At MySpace: http://groups.myspace.com/ProgOrModChristianHippies

I remember reading last year about this time how in the last couple of years some Progressive Churches have began doing services at Easter time that up untill lately have always been thought of as purely Catholic..such as Ash Wensday. This is great to hear, that is, that Progressive Christian churches are started to offer services to those Progressive minded Christians who come from Catholic backgrounds. I supose Catholic is one of thee largest Judeo-Christian themed religions/faith groups. Then second largest to them I guess would be like the big Evangelical protestant groups like Southern Baptists. I guess I can not really expect Progressive Christian churches to be equally aware of other smaller faith groups religious observances...but..it would be nice...my question is.....does Mormon have their own special celebration or tradition for or during Easter time? If so, what is it? Likewsie the same question about Christian Science. I can tell you that as one who was raised JW....they, JW's positively have their own obervance/ tradtion for Easter time. It is a very big deal to them. Infact, you could say it is their biggest one. The JW's call it The Lord's Evening Meal...or also The Memorial and it's whole theme is focused on remembering the how Jesus gave his life for the whole world. Upon observation, I guess one might say it remembles Catholic or Protestant Communion..but the main focus is on remembering or re-telling the account of The Last Supper. It would be really cool if Progressive Christians would be ware of other smaller faith group traditions such as this and then, like with the Catholics Ash Wensday and Good Friday and Palm Sunday...if they could offer their own Progressive version or alternative to the Momorial of Christ and re-telling of this story.

What would you recommend as the best progressive Jesus movie that could be rented?

Yes, that IS a good point about Ash Wendsday..I remembering reading last year how it is becoming more and more popular for Protestant churches to adopt Ash Wensday services which, if you think about it, could serve as great alternatives for those who used to be a in fundamental Catholic churches and feel they have no where to go on that evening.

I believe that there likely a number of follow Progressive Christians here, like me, that whatever their previous fundamental family faith background that they escaped from...they may indeed, like me....start dreading and trying to plan an escape from their fundamental families over the month of April..when all the biggest observances for for all the Judeo-Christian religions occure. If your fundametal faith family happens to be Assembly of God, Southern Baptist or some fundamental far right branch of Evangelical Protestantism....then you'd likely be trying to think of a way to escape your overly religious zealous aunt from trying to bring you to her bring easter service...Or if you family is fundamental catholic then you want to scape your family trying to drag you off to Easter Mass. Likewise, in my case..where I and my best friend since childhood and whom is also a progressive Christian and gay man who's father happens to be a JW elder. Thus, like the above examples I have given, my friend and I hope to ESCAPE our JW fundamental perents's big answer to Easter/Passover services..which in this case happens to be the JW's Memorial of the Lord's Meal. This event occures on April 12, which happens to be on Wensday. Anyways, we are planning our escape for this NOW...and I think it would be really GREAT if..there was..or if...I could FIND a Progressive church somewhere near Van Nuys or Hollywood..where they'd be having some sort of program that evening. If not..then we will likely just do some non-religious activities like visit the botanic gardens in LA and maybe walk the boardwalk at Santa Monica beach..but..it would be great...if..they DID happen to be a Progressive church event on that evening that we could also attend as an alternative to our fundamental JW familes' Memorial event. While it will be very easy to find a Progressive Easter service alternative..in contrast...I don;t think many non-JW churches even reconize April 12th as anything religious themed day or evening...so this may be more challenging..though, if I guess is right..I think the JW's Memorial on April 12th falls on the same day as the Jewish Passover...so I don;t know..maybe they is a liberal Jewish Passover service we could check out on that evening? any helpful sugestions on this?

Hummm..well, I know that when ever my mom gets in one of her super "theocratic" moods and proceeds to share with me how great she thinks a new JW article is on the way they think family life should be or marriage....I am like, "And here is a great book a progressive Christian pastor from Settle WA wrote on how St,Paul's words were altered to make it sound as if he supported sexism in the church."

"those of us that continually hope and pray for a better future." I relate to group#2;)

Once back in the 90's a friend of mine and I went to a writters workshop put on by Paramount Pictures where they taught how to write for Star Trek.

Well, with me...I have loved both Star Wars and Star Trek ever since I was in Jr.High...It's just I was always in the closet about it because of the negative stero-typing of "sci-Fi nerds"..that they were all physically replusive-looking people as dipicted in that famous SNL sketch with William Shatner. So I hide all my StarLog magazines from public viewing, like a person would do with PentHouse mags or something. infact I still have those mags stored away. I am not sure why the popularity of STNG. From what i can gather...after the orginal ST was cancled in 69...It was AFTER this cencelation that the orginal ST began to become known and gain in popularity and these baby boomers made the orginal ST become popular in the 70's, and infact, THEY cause the whole Trekker thing and the conventions and all...These Trekker baby boomer fans then had kids...like me, born in 69..and they all passed on their love on Trek to the next generation. Then came Star Trek I and then II and the popularity grow all the more...so much so..that this idea of STTNG came about...It was a risk...and everyone said it was a gamble..but the timing was right..because you had this HUGE fan base of boomers..AND now their children..and it just so happened the the combination of casting of actors AND two great writters in the 3rd season..worked. There was good chemistry with actors who played Picard, Data and Troy...that was much like the onscreen chemistry of the orginal Star Wars cast of Luke, Leia and Han.

I like the Orginal ST and Next Generation, although you are all right when you said it was not good till the third season....Voyager was ok and Enterpraise...I don't remember too well..and in my opinion DS9 was THEE WORST ST ever! It was SO terrible! i was SO glad when it was kicked off

Welcome! Your understanding of Mormonism would ad some great new insights to our community. So far we have Progressive people here who previously came from Catholic, Christian Science and JW, so now having LDS added to our collective will help all the more expand our understanding of different faith groups. It would also be helpful if would could also add Progressives who also came from the following faith group backgrounds: 1. Calvery Chapel or Vineyard Christian Fellowship, or FourSquare Gospel 2. Evangelical Luthern 3. Southern Baptists 4. Church of Christ (non-instrumental) 5. Seventh-Day Adventists 6. Christadelphian or The Church of God of Abraham Faith/Open Bible Church If we could also add one progressive person from each of these 6 faith backgrounds onto here it would really complete our data base of faith groups..and thus expand our understanding.

"Actually, it doesn't have to have anything to do with the Trinity." The far right fundamental Protestants would have a fit is they heard this and they would debate this. But the question is, does it? Does viewing the Holy Spirit as an impersonal force verses a person have to do with this? I sure there's a varity of views on this to be sure.. "Do you think God's holy spirit (as per JW's) is part of God?" In the sense that the electricity that is generate from a power plant is part of the power plant, in that is was created by and from the power plant. "If it's God's active force and it dwells within you, you can rightly say that, in essence, God dwells within you." i am not sure how to discribe this into words..that Holy Spirit is God's conscious in spirit form but not bodily? "The concept of God dwelling within man is not a "new age" concept. It's found in Christian Orthodoxy. Yes, some groups, like Unity, take it to an "acosmic" extreme, but that doesn't mean that the idea isn't found in scripture." And if we look at it from the Evangelical and/or Pentecostal Protestant view..the idea of God dwelling in man is also there...excpet in THIS version, the trinity DOES make the difference. If one believes that God is the Father, God is the Son and God Is the Holy Spirit...then this all DOES relate. QUOTE(Beach) It IS, VERY, VERY similar. Thus IS WHY Religious Science Church and Unity Church often have inner-faith with Hindu and Buddhists speakers..and they often cross-over one another. "New Thought has a lot in common with Hinduism and Buddhism because, for the most part, they have a view of God (of course Buddhists don't say "God")...-" Right, only instead they call it "The Buddha Nature." "and the universe that is "acosmic." This means that they believe that the only real thing is the Mind of God, and that the universe, mankind, everything, is basically a dream or illusion" Now, this is the part where they lose me. When they say stuff like evil is merely an illusion of Incorrect thinking..that's like playing peek-a-boo with reality. Unity/New Thought/Religious Science for the most part is "acosmic." Advaita Vedanta Hinduism is "acosmic." Buddhism is "acosmic." Shaivism Hinduism is "panENtheistic." Eastern Orthodox Christianity is "theistic," although I would argue that EO is "panENtheistic" and just doesn't want to admit it. I would agree with you on all of this.

Beach QUOTE there's a difference between saying one's HAS holy spirit verses someone saying they ARE Holy Spirit Ath: "Just wanted to clarify, because in your opening post you said "or have God In US." If you have Holy Spirit in you, you have God in you." Most likely to most...having Holy Spirit In you and having God In you is the same..especially if one is trinitarian...since I am not trinitarian..I do not relate personally to this..and on top of this, like Star wras, the Force, I view the Holy spirit..as an inpersonal force or power from God. "There is a concept in Eastern Christianity that says that at death, rather than going to heaven (as in pearly gates, or sitting on clouds) or living on earth, that we would join in a mystical union with God. It's called Theosis. It's much different than what New Thought teaches, although it might sound similar". It IS, VERY, VERY similar. Thus IS WHY Religious Science Church and Unity Church often have inner-faith with Hindu and Buddhists speakers..and they often cross-over one another. "It's important to understand the different view points and to differentiate between them. There are various ontological views that seem similar on the surface, but are quite different in the details. " Anyone care to explain the deeper differences between Unity and religious science and New thought verses eastern? FredP: "That is a good question to bring up. No, it isn't that I, as an individual ego, as Fred, am God. That would be rightly diagonsed as a God-complex." If a spiritual person on the left were to believe this..then their ego would match the far right who belives they have the right Jesus. "It's two different, but related, things. First, philosophically speaking, God is the ground of being itself, so everything that exists -- everything that has being -- participates in the being of God." Might this theory also be discribed as Waldo Emerson's concept "The OverSoul"? And thus again, why Emerson and Eastern religious persons often agreed in spiritual fellowship. "Second, spiritually speaking, there is cross-cultural evidence suggesting that our experience of ourselves can expand beyond identification with the ego, or individual self, to an experience of self as the One Self -- the Self of all things." Evidence? How so? "Sometimes it occurs just for brief moments or for prolonged periods of time, during meditation or in response to a deeply moving experience; sometimes it occurs as a more or less permanent state. But when it does occur, people consistently report a direct experience of profound oneness with everyone and everything -- an obliteration of the ordinary boundary between "self" and "other.".." While people DO discribe such experinces..is it hard to lable these or discribe them. "This is far from being an egotistical God-complex. On the contrary, it is the only possible ground of true selflessness -- there is literally no more "mine" and "yours."..." The problem that I see with this theory.. is dualism dark and light mix...so if everyone was to join with God at death then this means Hilter as well as Jesus are all part of God. And while the dualism of the Force works well on Star Wars...I am not sure how this works out in the actual real universe... "This experience of absolute union, not the bells and whistles that sometimes accompany it, but the pure oneness itself, is the heart and goal of mystical practice in every religion." Perhaps one could sum this is saying if we are all one with each other and God in purpose or one in physical being..or both?

..So they are basically '2' different ways churches can handle when they are proven wrong in their views: (1) Simply do NOT acknowledge that you were ever wrong in the first place..and claim heathens are spreading lies to undermind the Gospel.... ...or.. (2) Go with the New Light theory..and if one questions the Old light that was wrong then...claim heathens are spreading lies to undermind the Gospel....

"Where does the holy spirit fit in?" Seems to me anyone with a good heart can have holy spirit...but again, there's a difference between saying one's HAS holy spirit verses someone saying they ARE Holy Spirit.

QUOTE(AletheiaRivers "We ex-JW's like to call it the "blinking light" theory." Or maybe it could also be called The Red Light/Green Light Thoery. "I have to say thought, at least they will admit to being wrong. I haven't seen that in the fundamentalist/conservative circles I've been in! " Hummm..true. For example, we all know that many Protestant groups no longer explain hell as a literal place of eternal torment...like United Methodists and others, but then again, did ANy of them ever admit that they wrong WRONG in their previous interpretayions on this? Sometimes a faith group will admit a past wrong view..but then they make matters worse by simply replacing it with another. For example, some years back the Southern Baptists publically apologied for suporting the slave trade and for treating Native Americans inferior....yet they merely replaced this with treating women sexist or slamminng all non-Evangelical protestants as CULTS.

Most of the time on these forums here we discuss beliefs and views from the extreme far Evangelical Right that we do not agree with and why..and so for a little bit of change I thought I'd talk about some views/beliefs from the far religious left...that I happen not to concure with and why...One of these beliefs from the far mystical religious left that I do NOT concure with is this idea expressed in New Thought philosophy where explain believing that we all are God or have God In US. This, to me, sounds like a God complexe..like we imperfect humans are placing ourselves on the same level as God...and this reminds me of when the Devil told Adam and Eve that if they ate that apple they would, "Become like God," and know everything. This does not seem very humble. This idea of wanting to be GOD, was this NOT Satan issue?

I agree.

"The first time I visited a parish, the priest quoted St Cyprian to me - "You cannot have God as your Father without the Church as your Mother." I should have responded with Augustine's, "The Church, she is my mother, and she is a whore." but I bit my tongue." You know, that saying reminds me up by past JW upbringing. Though JW does not refer to their human board of leaders as "Mother"...They do consider their "Organization" THEE channel to God.

Ummm..ok..well, let me review David D's points again and see which of them I most agree with.... DavidD (A) All religions are false, because God is unknowable. ( All religions are false, because it takes a very precise path to know God well, and all human beings have fallen short so far (or they haven’t, but then that goes back to (A). © All religions are false, because it is impossible for a human being to know God well until culture, material knowledge and/or other circumstances have evolved enough for any human being to understand what is God and what is not, if anything. Hummm..all of these work for me..but I think © comes the cloest...But as for myself I'd rephrase it just a little... For the most part, All religions have both true pieces in them as well as false, because it is impossible for a human being to know God well until...we eneter into the perfect Kingdom of God...thus in a Imperfect world or age or relm it is NOt possible to have a prefect understanding of God nor a prefect grasp of theology/doctrine.

Fundamental Christians With Persecution Complexes COLUMN Christians Are Not a Persecuted Minority Jim Evans 01-18-06 "Nothing has become more tiresome in recent years than the incessant claim by many conservative Christians that they are being persecuted. Every time a church/state issue comes to the fore, a gaggle of Christian activists show up preening in front of television cameras and whining about the war on Christianity. It's a plot, they tell us, perpetrated by the ACLU and God-haters everywhere, to remove any sign of Christianity from culture." BeachOfEden: The organization of Jehovah's Witnesses is also famous for this Persecution Complex "But is that really true? Is [Fundamental]Christianity some persecuted minority that is under attack? With Christian leaders in high office everywhere, including the White House, is there any real danger that Christianity will somehow be erased from the American landscape?" "The U. S. Constitution expressly prohibits government from endorsing a particular religion. It was the founders' intent to keep religion out of government. They had seen the effect of a close relationship between church and state in Europe and wanted no part of any religiously inspired conflict. But that's not persecution. In fact, Christianity has thrived in the freedom created by our legal system. That's why in most neighborhoods in America there is a church on nearly every corner. And if those churches are not a sufficient visible symbol of the viability of Christianity, then that's what Christian leaders need to worry about. That's not persecution, that's neglect." "Of course, it's not really about being persecuted. It's about not being in control." BeachOfEden: I could NOt have phrase it better myself. That IS PRECISELY what the REAL issue is about. This is also the REAL issue with the JW org...CONTROLL over others. "For instance, NBC recently launched a new series called the "Book of Daniel." The show is about an Episcopal priest and his highly dysfunctional family. There is drug use by the priest, his wife and their children. There is profanity and considerable sexual references of both a hetero- and homosexual nature." "According to Christian watchdog groups like the American Family Association and Focus on the Family, the NBC series as just another example of a liberal media elite picking on a helpless and defenseless Christian faith. They argue that Christians are regularly portrayed in movies and television programs as either incompetent or insidious. The unwillingness of Hollywood to portray Christians in a favorable light is proof of a sinister desire to undermine the faith." BeachOfEden: Well, I think such negative models of what Christians are like are created by seculars rather than liberal Christians. With liberal and progressive churches memberships slipping in favor or more colorful and louder fundamental far right mega churches..why would liberal Christians paint 'themselves' as just a bunch of hyprocrites? Thus, I think it is non-theist and non-desist minded secularists creating such unflattering images of what 'they' think Christianity is like. "Now, don't get me wrong, the "Book of Daniel" is not a very good television program, but not because of the way it presents Christianity. It's bad because the writing is bad. The acting is stiff, and even the negative portrayal of Daniel's family that the Christian right is so worried about hardly comes across as believable." BeachOfEden: I disagree with this writter's point of view. I do NOT think the writting or acting of this show is stiff or bad and I DO think it IS the way Christianity is presneted in the show and the negative portrayal of Daniel's family. While people keeps pointing out how the Christian Right does not like the way The book of Daniel TV shows displays Christianity and Christians...the point is..this tv show is NOT about the Religious Right's version of Christianity aka Fundamental Evangelical Protestantism...Rather it IS about the Liberal or more Progressive version of Christianity in America, the Liberal Episcopalian Church. Thus, since this tv is about the liberal version of christianity in America, rather than the fundamental right version..it would therefore, makes more snese that the Liberal branches of Christianity, SHOULD be the ones concerns with how their version of Christianity is being protrayed...as hyprocrities. "But even more disturbing than the bad television the "Book of Daniel" represents, is the audacious assumption that network programming has some responsibility to represent Christians in a favorable way. Why should Hollywood producers do public relations for the church? And why would we want them to? Why do we think that make-believe Christians living happily in make-believe worlds can possibly make a difference in this very real world? Jesus said we would be known by our love, not by our Nielsen ratings." BeachOfEden: Indeed, secular Hollywood is not responsible for how Christianity should be protrayed. But if a writter claims to be Christian, then, when a person makes such a claim, then he or she DOES becomes responsible and SHOULD be responsible for HOW he or she protrays Christianity in their shows. As far as I know..the creator of this Daniel show never proclaimed himself as a Christian. If he did..then he WOULd be responsible for how he protrayed Christians in this show. That's my 2 cents anyways. "And while we are on the subject, did Jesus ever say anything about the powers that be in this world rolling out the red carpet for us? They didn't do it for him, so why should his followers expect to be treated any better? In the world, Jesus said, but not of it.Not that we don't need to be concerned about the negative way Christians appear on television, but I don't know how to make Pat Robertson stop." BeachOfEden: I like that;) That's pretty funny:D James L. Evans is pastor of Auburn First Baptist Church in Auburn, Ala.

NEWS 'Book of Daniel' Creator Rallies to Save TV Show from Cancellation Kevin Eckstrom 01-18-06 (RNS) The creator of NBC's "The Book of Daniel" is warning viewers that "bullies" at the American Family Association may succeed in their fight to kill the show unless viewers speak up. Jack Kenny, the creative force behind the prime-time drama about an Episcopal priest and his dysfunctional family, posted his appeal on a blog, www.blogofdaniel.com, that is hosted by the Episcopal Diocese of Washington. Kenny asked fans to contact stations in support of the show, and thank a dwindling number of sponsors for advertising during the Friday show, which airs at 10 p.m. Eastern time. "Ordinarily, I would never ask anyone to do this, but the AFA and bullies like them are hard at work to try and prevent you from seeing these beautiful shows, and that is censorship -- pure and simple," Kenny wrote. "And that is both un-Christian and un-American." The Tupelo, Miss.-based AFA has rallied opposition to the show's lurid content -- especially the Jesus character, which they say is disrespectful. The show features a pill-popping priest, his alcoholic wife, a daughter who sells drugs and a gay son. So far, AFA officials say 11 NBC affiliates in Tennessee, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Arkansas and Indiana have refused to air the show. In addition, AFA officials said four companies have pulled their ads during the show, and only one company -- Burlington Coat Factory -- continues to advertise during "The Book of Daniel." "NBC is losing between two and three million dollars each time they air `The Book of Daniel,"' AFA chairman Donald Wildmon said. "With those kinds of losses, NBC may decide to cancel the show." NBC has only committed to eight episodes. Kenny, a self-described "unaffiliated Christian," said the next three episodes (scheduled to air Jan. 20, Jan. 27 and Feb. 3) are important to the characters' development. "Please believe me when I tell you that the stories that we are about to tell you ... are the most heartbreakingly beautiful stories I've ever had the pleasure of being associated with," Kenny said.

David D: "I remember feeling frustrated on debate boards when atheists used "Christian" interchangeably with "Fundamentalist", as in "take all the Christians out and shoot them". That sums up prefectly my frustrations with the Liberal Left.