BeachOfEden

Thanks for posting this! I read it and it is a GREAT article. Infact. I will post a new thread on it called, "The Emerging Church." BTW, I agree with both of you...that even if we were to embrace the belief that the Bible was and is the word of God..and was/is more than just a positive collection of man-made fairy tales...still..this would not and in my opinion, does NOT erase the FACt that since we are ALL imperfect..then ALL of our understandings about what we read in the Bible and our interpretations of God and Christ would still be IMperfect and therefore flawed.

Can anyone here find online articles in which it is proven that certain Progressive Presbyterians or United Methodists support the conditionalist view? Thanks:)

So if a person from the far religious right were to say they thought we, as Progressive Christians believed in post=modernism would they be right or wrong? Cause not too long along I was on a Liberal Christian forum on MYSpace and fundamental person explained that he thought our Christian progressivism was the embracing of Post-Modernism..and that he explained this as one beliving that there are no absolutes in this world. How would you, as a Progressive Christian respond to this?

I would say that Yes, most atheists I have chatted with became so because of their feelings towards a previous belief system.And as I said in Darby's thread, I think that had I known there were options, I might not have temporarily given up on God and Christianity. I agree..because of all this they are likely left paranoid that each and EVERY Christian themed group is out to try and recruite them..and their fear is SO over-the-top that they even fear Christians who embrace the terms PROGRESSIVE and LIBERAL. Inlight of this maybe IS why it would be a good idea for non-fundie Christian groups such as TCPC to set up tables at liberals events..so they can see for themselves that NOT "ALL' theist themed and Christian themed groups are out to get them and try and trick them with hidden bigotries wrapped in Christian wrapping paper.

"I" am NOT making excuses for their far LEFT hatred and bigotries..because to be honest with you..they completely piss me off too..I am merely trying to explain where they get their wrong hostile mentalities towards us. Ok..say a person like on of these 5 UU Humanists I discribed to you...was raised Catholic BEFORE the creation of Vatican II. So they stand up in the UU Church and tell how they hold bitter feelings of being threatened with hellfire threats.....Well, in 'THIER' hostility and ignorence..they FAIL to realize that there ARE LIBERAL and PROGRESSIVE Catholics...that do NOT support such interpretations of hell. Secondanly, such a person would also fail to reason that even the regular catholic Church does NOT teach such views on hell ANYMORE. Or what about the 3 UU's who told about the Southern Baptist church burning them with hellfire threats as children? Well, do they not realize that there ARE Protestant churches that do NOT teach hellfire threat..such as United Presbyterian or United Methodists? Or let's take another example. Let's say that like Des, you were raised in the very fundamental far right version of New Thought Christian Science..and you grow up and say you were burned in it? Well, what about the Unity Church? They are New thought and yet are a PROGRESSIVE version of it. So, what I am getting at here...is whatEVER far right Judeo-Christian themed faith group you were raised in...there IS a Progressive answer to it...so a an unpleasent extremists right upbringing is no excuse for turning against all theists themed beliefs or against a belief in God... And let's say you were raised in a faith group that is smaller in numbers than these others I mentioned such as Mormon or JW? Well, even if these groups don;t have enough Progressive ex members to offer a liberal alternative church..still, most likely someone, somewhere on the web or MySpace HAS created an online group you can join. So, what I think is..we need to communicate to the UU and liberal community at large..that while we share their frustrastions with dealing with their previous far right extreme backgrounds...still..this is NO reason to preach hatred nor biotry towards ALL theist believers nor faith groups..especially towards their moderate and progressive brethern/sistern that are more often than not fighting for the same social justice issues that they are.

Can anyone give a religious explaintion of what the belief of post-modernism is? I have an idea..but not sure I have the full understanding of it? Would you say that you are religiously speaking a post?modernist? Partly? Why or why not?

True..that a person could be a self-asuming Humanist simply because their perents were..like how on the flipside someone could be a self-righteous loyal member of this or that fundamental church simply perents their perents were..but to each and every Progressive Christian here...I would ask, in your personal experinces and your observations..have this been YOUR experince? That the majority of bitter Humanists/atheists YOU have met, known or talked to..were really bitter towards ANy and ALL theist themed belief systems simply because that is what their perents taught them? Or..has YOUR experinced been that most of the bitter Humanists.atheists YOU have met, known.talked to spoke of being burned by a previous far right fundamental background? Please share your views... What "I" can tell you..is that of all the hostile Humanists "I" have talked to in the UU churches of Ventura and Santa Barbara..THEY said...that THEY were burned by either Southern Baptists (3 of them to be precise in the Ventura UU church) and 2 people said they were burned in the Catholic church prior to the creation of Vatican II...Now these 5 people who actually shared their experinced in front of the whole Ventura UU church...where between the ages of 55 and 80's. Now in 'my' opinion, do "I" think that these burned experinces that these 5 UU Humanists had justifies their intense hostile additude towards ALL theists themed believers..even the Progressive and Liberal ones? NO! Do "I" think that their previous bad experiences in their former fundamental church backgrounds justifies them covering their cars with anti-Christian bumper stickers? Hell no. "I" am NOT making excuses for their far LEFT hatred and bigotries..because to be honest with you..they completely piss me off too..I am merely trying to explain where they get their wrong hostile mentalities towards us. Ok..say a person like on of these 5 UU Humanists I discribed to you...was raised Catholic BEFORE the creation of Vatican II. So they stand up in the UU Church and tell how they hold bitter feelings of being threatened with hellfire threats.....Well, in 'THIER' hostility and ignorence..they FAIL to realize that there ARE LIBERAL and PROGRESSIVE Catholics...that do NOT support such interpretations of hell. Secondanly, such a person would also fail to reason that even the regular catholic Church does NOT teach such views on hell ANYMORE. Or what about the 3 UU's who told about the Southern Baptist church burning them with hellfire threats as children? Well, do they not realize that there ARE Protestant churches that do NOT teach hellfire threat..such as United Presbyterian or United Methodists? Or let's take another example. Let's say that like Des, you were raised in the very fundamental far right version of New Thought Christian Science..and you grow up and say you were burned in it? Well, what about the Unity Church? They are New thought and yet are a PROGRESSIVE version of it. So, what I am getting at here...is whatEVER far right Judeo-Christian themed faith group you were raised in...there IS a Progressive answer to it...so a an unpleasent extremists right upbringing is no excuse for turning against all theists themed beliefs or against a belief in God..and let's say you were raised in a faith group that is smaller in numbers than these others I mentioned such as Mormon or JW? Well, even if these groups don;t have enough Progressive ex members to offer a liberal alternative church..still, most likely someone, somewhere on the web or MySpace HAS created an online group you can join. So, what I think is..we need to communicate to the UU and liberal community at large..that while we share their frustrastions with dealing with their previous far right extreme backgrounds...still..this is NO reason to preach hatred nor biotry towards ALL theist believers nor faith groups..especially towrds their moderate and progressive brthern/sistern that are more often than not fighting for the same social justice issues that they are.

True and yet the Native Americans also refer to the Great Spirit as Grand Father.

Darby is making sound as if the person who claims they were burned by people in the previous conservative church background...made the whole thing up..as if these people he or she claimed burned them never really existed in the first place. As if the person who made the claim that they were burnt by the church are liers. How do you explainthis claim, Darby? How do you expplian your cliam that it is ALWAYS the person's own fault that they claim they were burnt in a conservative church background? And why do you believe it is always the victim's fault rather than the conservative churches' fault or it's leaders or congergation members? What of these conservative churches where people leave because they claim they were sexually abused? Do you think all these victims are liers too?

This also proves that while indeed we always talk about there being an extreme fundamental RIGHT....there IS also a far fundamental LEFT..and to me this fundamental LEFT is the hostile bittered ANTI-Theist Humanists/Atheists such as these ones we have observed in UU's.

Darb: I KNEW it had to be the Christian fundamentalists' fault in the end!! And what would be your answer? That somewhere along the line is gotta be a New Age Wicca who brained washed some fundamentalist's mind with their pagen feminism and dreaded liberal theology? Or maybe that the Devil twisted the person's mind into thinking that everyone should actually be treated equal?

Here it is... "UNITARIAN GROUP SPLITS, WANTS GOD IN ITS RELIGION" <P> Julia Lieblich, Tribune religion reporter. Chicago Tribune. Chicago, Ill.: Apr 21, 2001. pg. 1 <P> David Burton, attorney, Deist, and a co-founder of a group for Unitarian Universalists who regard themselves as theists is quoted as saying: "The Unitarian tradition...draws inspiration and sustenance from the divine. But Unitarian Universalism as it's practiced today is almost devoid of religious content." He added that most attendees at the Virginia meeting were Unitarian Christians. He said: "Jesus is central to their religion. In most UU congregations, if you got up and started talking about Jesus, you'd be run out on a rail...The UUA is extremely intolerant." <P> I have found the Religious Tolerance Network completely agreeable on almost every subject. However, I feel that the following comment made by a member of the RTN is not in harmony with my own findings and experinces: <P> "A small group of two dozen Unitarian Universalists met in Virginia on 2001-APR-22. Their goal was to create a renewal organization for those Unitarian Universalists who regard themselves as theists. They appear to have much less concern with social justice issues than does the general UUA membership." <P> After I left my own fundamental religious background and became dedicated to researching the subject or Progressive religion I spent a great deal of time in conversing with liberal Christians and Deiests within the UU network. I joined a conversation forum especially for UU Christians ran by the UU minister Scott Wells. Later, Scott Wells would also helped create a UU Christian network called The Magi, especially designed to help UU Christian church get created and suppported. I spent at least 6 years in conversation with these liberal UU Christians and would they expressed to me is that they felt the UUs, as a whole, had developed a strong and ovbious dislike of any deist themed belief system, this including their own minority of UU deists and UU Christians and that the majority favored Humanisists within the vast majority of UUs churches was snuffing out any traits of of their Deist and Judeo-Christian heritage. Moreover, that these Humanist UUs were progressivingly taking steps to omit any mention of even the term "God". It would be very easy for me to many state all this with no backing to prove all these claims made on behalf of UU Deists and UU Christians....if I had not personally observed it with my own eyes. However, I visited 2 UU churches in Southern Califoria for 3 years and I will share with you what I saw. <P> The Positive <P> Over the 3 year period that I visted these 2 UU churches I DID see alot of POSITIVE things and hear alot of positive teachings. This one UU church I attended had a Natural deist for a Minister and he was a very kind and non-biast man. He was great at mentioning all the faiths within the UU belief system, including Deists and Judeo-Christianity, as well as Humanist view points. After this minister retired a liberal Jew UU women replaced him and she too was good at this. However, within the congeration there was a number of very anti-Deist Humanists who I saw often made faces of disaprovel whenever the UU minister would invite a Deist or Liberal Jew to speak. But also they made very displeased facial expressions when even the UU minister once invited a Native American elder, who when he simply shared his view in a Great Spirit. Whenever the Native American elder simply mentioned the word, "Creator", or "Great Spirit," the Humanists made ovbious facial expressions of disaproval. More so, once the liberal Jew UU minister invited a liberal Rabbi to share his story of how he moved towards liberal Judism. This Rabbi was very down to earth and friendly and said nothing offensive to any group. However, when he merely started to explain the liberal Jewish style of prayerful mediation and song, at least 7 Humanists stood up from their seats and left the church. And once when I visited the historic UU church in Santa Barbara 3 of the UUs there told me that the hostile feelings between Humanists towards Natural deusts and liberal Christians was so strong that more than once the UU minister had to call a special UU meditor to keep the peace. But what about this stated view made that Liberal Christians seem less dedicated to the causes of social justice than Humanist liberals? I am a subscriber to both the Progressive christian Network news as well a subscriber of "Earth Ministry", a progressive Eco-Christian network and newsletter. I have been recieving both of these Progressive Christian resources for 5 years now. The following is taken directly from, "Earth Ministry." <P> "In summary, our mission statement calls us as people of faith - seeing something of the Divine in creation - to live reverently and respectfully. It asks us to examine our individual and societal impacts on both the human and non-human world, and to alter our life patterns to reflect God’s loving concern. It calls us to speak out against injustice, to stand with the powerless and voiceless, and to work actively in the causes of justice and peace." <P> And this from the Official Network Of Progressive Christianity <P> "By calling ourselves progressive, we mean that we are Christians who… <P> 1. Have found an approach to God through the life and teachings of Jesus; <P> 2. Recognize the faithfulness of other people who have other names for the way to God's realm, and acknowledge that their ways are true for them, as our ways are true for us; <P> 3. Understand the sharing of bread and wine in Jesus's name to be a representation of an ancient vision of God's feast for all peoples; <P> 4. Invite all people to participate in our community and worship life without insisting that they become like us in order to be acceptable (including but not limited to): <P> believers and agnostics, <P> conventional Christians and questioning skeptics, <P> women and men, <P> those of all sexual orientations and gender identities, <P> those of all races and cultures, <P> those of all classes and abilities, <P> those who hope for a better world and those who have lost hope; <P> 5. Know that the way we behave toward one another and toward other people is the fullest expression of what we believe; <P> 6. Find more grace in the search for understanding than we do in dogmatic certainty - more value in questioning than in absolutes; <P> 7. Form ourselves into communities dedicated to equipping one another for the work we feel called to do: striving for peace and justice among all people, protecting and restoring the integrity of all God's creation, and bringing hope to those Jesus called the least of his sisters and brothers; and <P> 8. Recognize that being followers of Jesus is costly, and entails selfless love, conscientious resistance to evil, and renunciation of privilege." <P> We known well why the fundamental far religious right oppose the liberal left and Progressive Christians, because they oppose the social justice freedoms that liberal and progressive Christians stand for.... But...what could cause Humanists and the like to dislike Progressive and Liberal Christians, and even all liberal God-based faith groups? Especially when these Liberal and Progressive Deisists and Christians ARE fighting for most of the very same social justice freedoms that all liberals and progressive fight for? All of us individuals who have walked away from extremist fundamental faith group backgrounds and thus become progressive in our views of God and of other faiths knows all too well how coming out of such extreme far right backgrounds and upbringings can cause a person to become bitter and distrustful. Because of this, former fundamentalists who have since become progressive, such as ourselves, realize the dangers and biogtry that is cause by extremist black and white thinking. We came to realize how those on the fundamental extreme right see NO tolerant balanced middel way of life. To THEM your are either in agreement with THEM and THEIR interpretations of the Bible..or you must be anti-God/ Jesus hater. Unforuantly there is also a extreme liberal left version of this black and white thinking and with THEM ANYONE who embraces a belief in a Higher Power other than oneself..even 'if' they state they ARE liberal or progressive and even if they do support social justice issues.. to such extreme leftists..such claims are all lies and cannot be true. It is as if to them to state that one believes in some type of Higher Power or God AND is also a liberal or progressive is a contridiction. Ironically, as if a mirror flip-side to the extreme right, the extreme left views things in black and white too. To THEM if you do not embrace and agree with their interpreations of what it means to be a liberal..then your statements and claims to be a liberal or progressive are invalid. To such extreme leftists you are either Humanists and thus on their side..or..you are on the extreme right and a sexist,racist, homophobic, anti-earth and anti-animal welfare right-winger. These types of extreme leftist fundamentalists usually were burned by an extremist Christian fundamental background, and when they leave such a far right background they become deeply angry and bittered and these negative feelings cause them to become dedicated to attacking all form and expresions of theist themed faith. As former members of fundamentalists faith backgrounds, we have seen the extremist thinking in the far right and how sometimes the passion to defend what THEY believe to be the moral way of life has lead to etxreme acts of terror. For example, an extreme right fundamental Christian feels that it is morally wrong to kill unborn babies, so to teach people that it is wrong to kill babies..he blows up an abortion clinic and ends up killing not only his intended targets..but also by standers including a girl scout on her way to grade school, a 75-year old man sitting on a near by park bench feeding the birds, and a young children mother of a 5-year old and 2-year-old. So does this make sense? That this extrem right person kills people to try and prove a point that murder of babies is wrong? Likewise, does it make sense to bomb and kill people of workplaces that they believe is harmful to other living things to prove that harming and killing other living this is wrong? The point is don't become the flipside of the extreme right by becoming a left intolerant answer to fundamentalism.

Fred is very right about this on UU's. For 5 years I have visted UU churches in both Ventura and Santa Barbara and there IS most positively a VERY strong anti Christian and basically both anti-deist and even anti-theist mentality there. This really sucks for all the Liberal Christians, Liberal Jews and deists in their churches and thus is why they don;t stay long. Most UU Christians I have talked to keep switching back and forth from visiting UU's to Episcopalians. Infact, I have a newspaper article about this that I saved about the hostility from a vast majority Humanist UU's towards their theist and deists UU's brethern. I'll find it and post it on here so you can all read. It's pretty eye-opening.

I hear more about exclusivism than the trinity. Just fyi. Well that would make more reasoning sense, don;t you think?

So the question is..why is trinity 'THEE' ONE determining factor one whether a religious is accepted as legit or not?

Also see my other thread on here intitled, "Much Hostility Towards Unitarians."

It is interesting that the far right Christians..be they Protestant ones or Catholics ones always love to put both the UU's and JW's and Bahia and their "BLEEP" list. Ironic..when you stop and think that both UU's and Bahia are all for social justices..must like we Prog Christians are and yet JW's are completely NOT for Social Justice..and yet why do the fundie branches of Protestants and Fundie branch of catholics place the fundamental far right JW's on the same level as the very liberal/progressive UU's and bahias???? This all goes back to what I was talking about how the fundi Prots and fundi Caths are obessesed with the debate of the trinity..thus is WHY they stict the very fundi JW's on the same BLEEP list with the very liberla UUs... Does this fail to make sense to anyone else here???

From: December 7, 2005 Beliefnet.com "Conservative Christians who are disappointed in retail stores that wish customers "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" are equally frustrated with this year's White House Christmas card. Though the White House holiday greeting is always religiously generic because it is sent to people of all faiths, Washington Post reporter Alan Cooperman writes that some conservative Christians feel slighted" BeachOfEden: "Don' they always say they feel slighted no matter what time of the year or what season it is? "Cooperman reports that Joseph Farah, editor of the conservative web site WorldNetDaily.com says that Bush "claims to be a born-again, evangelical Christian. But he sure doesn't act like one." BeachOfEden: Oh my GAWD! You mean this this Copperman guy is SO far right that even Bush seems too liberal for him? "I threw out my White House card as soon as I got it." BeachOfEden: Maybe you should hold up a cross and hiss at it. "Other Christian groups are not bothered by the cards. "I think it's more important to put Christ back into our war planning than into our Christmas cards," said the National Council of Churches' general secretary, the Rev. Bob Edgar, a former Democratic congressman." BeachOFEden: What? He is saying he wants to put the theme of Christ back into santa Clause or this war over in the middle East? Yes, let us rememeber the true meaning of this war! From the History Channel: History Channel Article On The Real History of Christmas Saturnalia In Rome, where winters were not as harsh as those in the far north, Saturnalia—a holiday in honor of Saturn, the god of agriculture—was celebrated. Beginning in the week leading up to the winter solstice and continuing for a full month, Saturnalia was a hedonistic time, when food and drink were plentiful and the normal Roman social order was turned upside down. For a month, slaves would become masters. Peasants were in command of the city. Business and schools were closed so that everyone could join in the fun. Also around the time of the winter solstice, Romans observed Juvenalia, a feast honoring the children of Rome. In addition, members of the upper classes often celebrated the birthday of Mithra, the god of the unconquerable sun, on December 25. It was believed that Mithra, an infant god, was born of a rock. For some Romans, Mithra's birthday was the most sacred day of the year. In the early years of Christianity, Easter was the main holiday; the birth of Jesus was not celebrated. In the fourth century, church officials decided to institute the birth of Jesus as a holiday. Unfortunately, the Bible does not mention date for his birth (a fact Puritans later pointed out in order to deny the legitimacy of the celebration). Although some evidence suggests that his birth may have occurred in the spring (why would shepherds be herding in the middle of winter?), Pope Julius I chose December 25. It is commonly believed that the church chose this date in an effort to adopt and absorb the traditions of the pagan Saturnalia festival. First called the Feast of the Nativity, the custom spread to Egypt by 432 and to England by the end of the sixth century. By the end of the eighth century, the celebration of Christmas had spread all the way to Scandinavia. Today, in the Greek and Russian orthodox churches, Christmas is celebrated 13 days after the 25th, which is also referred to as the Epiphany or Three Kings Day. This is the day it is believed that the three wise men finally found Jesus in the manger. By holding Christmas at the same time as traditional winter solstice festivals, church leaders increased the chances that Christmas would be popularly embraced, but gave up the ability to dictate how it was celebrated. By the Middle Ages, Christianity had, for the most part, replaced pagan religion. On Christmas, believers attended church, then celebrated raucously in a drunken, carnival-like atmosphere similar to today's Mardi Gras. Each year, a beggar or student would be crowned the "lord of misrule" and eager celebrants played the part of his subjects. The poor would go to the houses of the rich and demand their best food and drink. If owners failed to comply, their visitors would most likely terrorize them with mischief. Christmas became the time of year when the upper classes could repay their real or imagined "debt" to society by entertaining less fortunate citizens. An Outlaw Christmas In the early 17th century, a wave of religious reform changed the way Christmas was celebrated in Europe. When Oliver Cromwell and his Puritan forces took over England in 1645, they vowed to rid England of decadence and, as part of their effort, cancelled Christmas. By popular demand, Charles II was restored to the throne and, with him, came the return of the popular holiday. Oliver Cromwell Corbis-Bettman The pilgrims, English separatists that came to America in 1620, were even more orthodox in their Puritan beliefs than Cromwell. As a result, Christmas was not a holiday in early America. From 1659 to 1681, the celebration of Christmas was actually outlawed in Boston. Anyone exhibiting the Christmas spirit was fined five shillings. By contrast, in the Jamestown settlement, Captain John Smith reported that Christmas was enjoyed by all and passed without incident. After the American Revolution, English customs fell out of favor, including Christmas. In fact, Congress was in session on December 25, 1789, the first Christmas under America's new constitution. Christmas wasn't declared a federal holiday until June 26, 1870. Ok..so this basically leaves of with '2' 'different' far right religious reactions to all this. One, you can be the like the extreme far right Evangelical Protestants who choose to re-write history the way they like it, and try and force their verison of what 'they think' Christmas 'should' be about and try and force their perfered version on all of society..and tagged all who dare not concure with them UNAmerican and UnChristian...or you can take the flip side far opposite extreme right view on Christmas that the Jehovah's Witnesses do. The J-Dubs acknowledged all these facts that the history channel gives..and in response they basically hold up a Bible and hiss at the mere mention of the word Christmas, that 'they' deem NEVER was about Christ in the first place..but instead always was really about the birth of the Roman pagen god Mirtha on December 25 and about the mythical Santa Clause. ..Or..here another thought...in Holand they celebrate simply Winter Fest..from the end of Novemeber till Feb to give a cheerful distraction from the long and gloominess or winter. In this winter fest they is neither a deperate attempt to try and make this Winter festival appear to be about Christ or religious in theme. There is no mythical Santa Clause and there is no religious war that neither makes this winter Festival try and seem neither Saintly nor Satanic in nature, and as for myself this is the version I choose to adopt, the Winter Festival. Make sure to watch The History of Christmas on Saturday, December 24 @ 7:30/6:30c

QUOTE(AletheiaRivers @ Dec 5 2005, 03:44 PM) JW's believe humans are by nature mortal and are either granted everlasting life on earth (the sheep), OR immortality in heaven (the 144,000), (everlasting life and immortality are two different things in their view) OR are annihilated by God (the goats). So technically, they are both. Fred P: "I think the everlasting continuance of mortal life on earth would get really, really boring after, oh, I don't know, about 3,385,238,213,328,453,432 years." It depends how you paint it. If everlasting life on a perfected earth is natural like Native American then I think it WOULD be great...with cystle clear lakes and white sand beaches and humanity being one with nature...but if it's some fundiem old elder JW's vision of New York Skyscaper world with suites and ties..then whether then was on solid organic matter ground or a spiritual relm it sounds boring. But you have to figure that it seems a vast majority of Protestants and Catholics and the like explain their vision of heaven being like earth perfected..and in such as case...a natural paradise earth and this vision of a perfectly earthly heaven come out to be the same discription..only different locations. The Victorian painting of heaven sounds pretty weird and boring..with people laying around all day on clouds and strange over-weight chubby winged babies flying around like cupid..pretty abstact and un-natural

I have been in religious conversations and researching world faiths since I was 13 and this seems to be 'THEE' one single doctrine that Evangelicals and Fundamental Protestants spend all their time fighting over. Oddly, it is also thee one prime reason that they make other faith groups prime targets for tagging as "Cults'. In reality, what does a reasoning person consider to be a unhealthy cult? A group that serves poision coolaid for dinner? In dangers it's memebers and society's lives? Yet, the far right seems to causually and rather loosely tag ANy and EVERY faith group that simply happens to not embrace the trinatarian view of God. There are two oddities to the far right Evangelical Protestant's cult tagging on all unitarians. First, the far right Protestants tag all their non-trinitarian peers who are equally fundamental in nature as themselves, these being such rigid faith groups as Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses. Now, the social justice issues of these 2 fundamental faith groups in question..such as both groups forbidding women from serving as pastors or church elders...or that the fact that these two faith groups deem a memebers-ONLY salvation does not seem to overly disturbed their far fundamental right Protestant foes..likely, because if they were to rang on JW's or Mormons for being sexist and exclusive in their own salvation views..then they would have to also add theirselves to their own cult list for being guilty as charged on the same things. So...rather..the far right Protestants focus all their tagging Mormons and JW's a 'cult' based mostly on ONE issue...simply NOT embracing the trinity. Now, we have their other type of cult tagging victims....which are the liberal faith groups that happen to simply not embrace the trinity view of God and these would include UU Christians as well as Bahia. Now the fact that faith groups #1 and faith groups#2 are 'different' in that one group is ultra fundamentalist in nature, while the other group is completely progressive or liberal in nature does not seem to matter at all to the far right Protestants..rather..who you are or whether you promote social jsutice or not or whether you are rigid or ulta liberal...does not matter..the only thing that matters to THEM if if you dare not accept the trinity view of God..then basically you are on the "BLEEP" list.

"I didn't know that conditionalists and annihilationists drew that fine distinction between themselves. I guess JW's fall more into the annihilationist camp. Of course, in their view, annihilation is conditional upon response or non-response (ie: believing the "right" things) to God." Can some exppain the basics of HOW annilationsists ARE 'different' from Conditionalists? Thanks! This will prove vaualbel to my research!

I would like to know, Progressive Christians on here, how do YOU feel about Evangelical and fundamental Christians blasting and verbally attacking unitarians and biblical unitarians? How do YOU feel about such people going on witch hunts against Bahias and other unitarians?

If anyone here could list direct links to pro-conditionalist books I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

This is a conversation I had on MySpace on one of my Progressive Christianities forums...I shows how MUCH hosility most far right Protestants hold against bibical unitarians, as well as all unitarians and non-trinitarian theists in general... Doctrinally, Jehovah’s Witnesses bear no resemblance whatever to mainstream historic Christianity." BeachOfEden: Hummm. but the far right fundamental Protestants often state the same thing about their liberal Protestant and mainstream peers. Being a Progressive Christian myself...I am not really impressed with the far right Protestants opnions of what they decree to be "historic Christianity." "Russell acquired from the Adventists the idea that there is no .." BeachOfEden: There 'different' TYPEs of Adventists. The most commom type that everyone thinks of and knows is Seventh-Day Adventists, whom DO believe in a literal and firely hell..it's just they think it will end at Christ's second coming. However, it is NOT this type of 'Aventists' that Russell studied with. The type of Adventist that Russell DID study with was The Second Advenist or as they are called to day The Advent Christian church or Abarham Faith Church of God. Indeed the Second Adventists do NOT believe that hell is a literal place of eternal hell fire..but then again, neither do such mainstream Protestants such as Progressive and moderate UNITED METHODISTS and or many of the PRESYTERIAN CHURCH USA. "and no life after death until the Second Coming, when the righteous will be "re-created.".." BeachOfEden: What does the word RESURRECTION mean? To be RAISED UP or awakened..However, if you believe that at death you never go unconscious or asleep then why would one NEED to be awakened or raised? "In breaking away from the Adventists, Russell only widened his divergence from the Truth, ..." Ahhh..THEE 'TRUTH'...? That is JW's favorite way of discribing their own interpretations of the Bible. "Holy Trinity. According to the Witnesses, "the doctrine of the Trinity originated not with God but with Satan."6 They regard the First Ecumenical Council (Nicea, 325 AD), which defined the doctrine of the Trinity, as a great victory for apostate Christianity." BeachOfEden: As a Progressive Christian who believes in social justice I woul ask both JW's and their completeing foes, the far right fundamental Protestants what their doctrinal fight over the nature of God being trinatarian or unitarian in nature has to do with "treating others as one would like to be treated?" What does it have to do with the blanet sexism being practiced in the name of God in the bible in BOTH of these fundamental faith groups? BTW, "APOSTATE" is also another favorite word used by JW's for EVERYONE who dares not agree with 'their' interpretations of the Bible. "Jesus Christ. The same Council condemned the Arian heresy, " BeachOfEden: I don't care about this doctrinal fight. Many of my friends are Unitarians and Bahias who don't believe in the trinity either. "which taught that Jesus Christ was created by God in time, and that He was unequal to God. Jehovah’s Witnesses is basically a revival of this heresy, " Like I said, I don't have a b#tch against unitarians or arians.

I don;t recall ever reading anything about any conditionalist saying Jews, Buddhists,ect are not nor can not be a part of the resurrection. First, we must realize that the vast majority of conditionists are of mainstream or Progressive/moderate Protestants: United Methodists and Presbyterians..as such I can not see where they would support the fundamental far right view when a "members-ONLY" salvation is held. If a "memebers-ONLY" salvation IS held..then how could one truely be considered mainstream Christian, Progressive or even Moderate?