AletheiaRivers

Flow- This statement surprises me a little. I could have sworn that a few months ago in one topic or another many on the board said the exact opposite. I thought (could be wrong) that most said they preferred Matthew or Mark, but specifically not John. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually Flows statement (Hi Flow!) threw me a bit too. I wouldn't be surprised that it's flow's favorite (mystical as you are). I can think of a couple of others who might feel the same way, but by and large it's been my experience that PCers don't like John. I think it depends on how those verses are interpreted. Generally they are used to "prove" exclusivism. However, there are those that feel that such an interpretation, in light of other verses that point to God's love and the desire to save all men, is incorrect.

Cynthia's mentioning beliefnet made me think of religioustolerance.org (Click). Great site.

Huston Smith's "The Worlds Religions" is very good. It covers the major traditions. He is very readable and an expert. I recently picked up "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Exploring God." It goes more into the various religion's ideas of God, rather than into the religions themselves. It covers different views of God, like monotheism, pantheism, panentheism, monism, etc ... It gives a good insight into the beliefs, rather than the history. I also picked up "The Complete Idiot's Guide to World Religions." It is a very shallow and brief exploration of the major religions from a comparative viewpoint. Hands down, the best books on comparative religion are by Keith Ward. However his major comparative work is a four volume set, so it's not brief. And although I haven't seen it, The Teaching Company has a course on "Great World Religions." It's on sale right now and is available in DVD, VHS, CD or audiotape format. Here is the link: The Teaching Company - Great World Religions

Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday desdemona. Happy birthday to you. :-)

Good to know. Guess I'll pick it up at amazon as well.

I really liked Joshua as well. I hadn't thought of it in a while. Thanks for bringing it up. I'm going to see if blockbuster has it to rent.

Actually, the Gospel of John is my favorite. It didn't used to be. For a while I thought that it shouldn't be in the Scriptures at all because it seemed so obviously "myth," and what does myth have to do with the "quest for the historical Jesus"? (Just a little sarcasm there.) Now I feel just the opposite. Now I feel that John is the most "true" precisely for the metaphysics that it espouses: the Incarnation. The idea of the Incarnation is amazing. Many many religions have similar stories. I think they point to a higher truth: That God is part of the Universe, part of us. That God is interested in us. That this life is not all there is. That "God became man, that man might become God." I believe that the Gospels do point to Jesus being God. That's not to say that the Gospels are literally (historically) true or that Jesus was literally God, but I do think that is what the New Testament says, as literature. I don't see anything problematic with believing that "Jesus loves you." Doing so doesn't mean fundamentalism. That's the "issue" I have with much of liberal religion. In an effort to leave behind the literal, legalistic attitudes, the baby gets tossed out with the bathwater.

There comes a time when you just have to let it go I think. Being a progressive Christian isn't about being anti-conservative. It's about (imo) being "pro" something. It's about taking the best that the Christian Tradition has to offer and moving forward. I agree and I have to wonder why? The Gospels (as literature) have an awful lot to say about Jesus and God and their relationship to each other. What the Gospels have to say, while maybe not being literally true in all aspects, is still profoundly true. I think that many PCers have lost sight of that. While I'm not a former Evangelical, I do relate to your difficulty with fitting in with progressives (although not on this board, overall). Welcome to the board! Looking forward to the dialogue.

Unless you believe that Jesus was a man who was ALSO raised to heaven. I guess in that sense he could love you now, and not be God.

Hi Forrest and welcome to the board. First off I'd like to say that without authors of a liberal to moderate bent, I wouldn't be here. In that sense PC evangelization works. All of Marcus Borg's books certainly fit into that category. He might not have gone door to door, but his books are evangelizing nonetheless. His books brought me back to Christianity in that they made me take a second look at my presuppositions and prejudices towards the Christian tradition. After Borg's books, I moved on to other authors who, while some consider them liberal, are of a more traditional and moderate bent. While I still qualify as a progressive Christian, my views would be considered a bit to the right of Borg. Which leads me to my second point. The difficulty, as I see it, lies in the message that would be preached as representing "Progressive Christianity." Would it be a traditional Christianity with a liberal political bent (ala Jim Wallis)? Would it be a message that Jesus was a wise sage and mystic who was divinized by his followers after his death (ala Marcus Borg)? Would it be a gnostic, contemplative, mystical Christianity (ala Elaine Pagels)? Is PC universalist? Pluralistic? Inclusivistic? Perennial? Still, I'd like to see PC become more public, more seen, more available. I don't think PC is (or should be) elite. It does need to break out of academia. The question is how and what is the message?

Thanks guys. It's nice to be missed.

I am a bit burned out and am finding I don't feel I have much to contribute right now. I still read the board everyday though.

I live in Utah and know A LOT of Mormons. Almost all my family, most of my workmates (including my bosses) and 90% of my neighbors are LDS. Most Mormons are normal people, with unusual ideas about God. But then again, I have unusual ideas about God according to some. Oh well. I love Utah, and I do get frustrated with how Mormonism is portrayed in the media. Polygamy and gun-toting survivalists are very much an exception and not the rule, unlike how TV would have you believe. If it wasn't for Mormonism, my great-grandfather would never have emigrated from Norway and I wouldn't be here. How's that for Mormonism contributing to human wisdom? Heh! Kidding!

Do you think there will be a way to purchase the tapes of this. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I didn't find anything on the website. Maybe send them an email?

Awesome.

Would you believe that one of the Evangelical Christians is Rick Warren of "The Purpose Driven Life"? Good for him.

For anyone living near Portland, Oregon (or anyone who wants to travel): To Purchase Tickets Click Here

Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday Sterrettc & Maitri! Happy birthday to you!

I believe in free will. However, I don't think it's possible for me to KNOW I have free will. I could be an automaton, programmed to believe I have free will, while all along my choices have been mapped out for me with sufficient randomness to fool me. We certainly could be living in the matrix.

PS - Put another way - Saying that we are contingent (dependent) on "something not yet certain" isn't saying that GOD isn't certain, but that the circumstances (say - creation on God's part) isn't a necessity.

Right. God is NOT contingent. God is necessary. However we ARE contingent. We are not necessary. Saying that God is contingent on himself, while a brain twister, is technically true. Otherwise you get the "who created God?" scenario that rationally has no answer.

con·tin·gent 1. Liable to occur but not with certainty; possible. 2. Dependent on conditions or occurrences not yet established; conditional. See synonyms at dependent. 3. Happening by chance or accident; fortuitous. See synonyms at accidental. 4. Logic. True only under certain conditions; not necessarily or universally true: a contingent proposition. de·pen·dent 1. Contingent on another. 2. Subordinate. 3. Relying on or requiring the aid of another for support: dependent children.

"God - A Guide for the Perplexed" by Keith Ward The book is a tour of the development of theistic thought. It would be hard to nutshell it here, but overall, it discusses how ideas of God have morphed throughout the ages, from ancient Roman and Greek polytheism, to Jewish Monotheism, to Christianity. (It doesn't discuss other world religions, but Ward does have a book about that as well. It's called "The Case for Religion." I just started it.) It pulls in the views of some of the greatest religious and philosophical thinkers over the ages: Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, Kant, Descartes, Kierkegaard, James, Spinoza, etc ... It is more of a philosophy book than a theological book, but if you like philosophy, or want an introduction that is easier to follow than the average religious philosophy book, I highly recommend it.

<---- Des is blushing!

Progressive Christianity certainly honors the Protestant tradition, however, there are also Progressive Catholics, Progressive Episcopalians and (dare I say) Progressive Orthodox. United Methodist, United Church of Christ, Lutheran churches (not Missouri Sinod), and Presbyterian churches might interest you. Some are going to be more conservative, some are going to be more liberal.