NORM

Paul, I was a pacifist until some thugs attacked my daughter while trick-or-treating (Halloween) in our neighborhood. I was escorting her, but she was a couple of houses ahead of me, and these three young men pushed her down and tried to take her bag of candy. Something came over me and I fought them all off. At the time, I didn't know they were only interested in the candy. They pushed her to the ground and were struggling with her. I thought they were attempting to rape her, which is why I reacted so violently. I tell you, I did not know I was capable of such a thing. I took on three young men (they were in their mid-twenties, I would guess) and walked away with only a bruised eye. After that incident, I began to re-evaluate my position on violence. I now think there are times when immediate action - even violent action - is justified. I think that war should be the absolute last choice, and ONLY in a defensive manner. The aggressive use of preemptive force initiated by the Bush Administration in Iraq, in my opinion, is NOT an example of a justified violent action. NORM

Thanks, Paul. I appreciate your vote of confidence. Truthfully, I view myself more a Humanist than a Christian. I derive equal measure of inspiration from the likes of Kurt Vonnegut, Alexander Dumas and George Santayana as I do from Jesus, Mohammed and Hillel. I am happy to participate in this community as long as I am welcome. And, I do feel welcome! I appreciate the diversity of ideas and perspective. NORM

I don't see TCPC as symbiotic with Unitarian Universalism even though they may share a similar goal, namely; Spirituality without theism. Mysticism without magic. Just as there are many variations on the theme of theistic Christianity, why shouldn't there be a corresponding number of iterations on progressive Christianity? I've been to Unitarian Universalist churches on numerous occasions, and it is of a decidedly different timbre than TCPC. In many ways, Unitarianism - for me - focuses too much on mysticism and developing modern interpretations of ancient ritual and tradition. Actually, my question was rhetorical, as I've already made a decision to NOT self-identify as Christian. My faith philosophy is more in line with Judaism than Christianity. My study of the Jesus of the Bible leads me to the conclusion that he was actually a follower of Hillel, who was somewhat of a progressive himself within the Jewish community of his day (Hilllel, I mean). I am quite happy to join an occasional minyan in the local Jewish community. I appreciate your concerncs, but I just don't share your assessment of this particular group. Sure, you can find one or two that match your characterizations, but they are the exception and not the rule. And here I am speaking of regular posters, not the drive-bys. I think that you expect too much of an on-line forum. For the limitations inherent within the medium, this forum is just fine. Too bad we can't share libations through the Ethernet. NORM

How was my post off topic? It got to the heart of the matter, no? I mean, what you are "criticizing" is what REAL Christianity is. So, my query is on point. BTW, no one has directly answered my question. David, since you have no qualms about deciding who is and isn't a Christian; what say you? Bill? Inquiring minds would like to know... Just to recap: I embrace the teaching of Jesus because of its intrinsic philosophical value; particularly as expressed in the Sermon on the Mount / Plain. I often seek to emulate that philosophy in my own life. I do not, however, believe in propitiation for sin, resurrection, virgin birth, miracles, etc. Is I am or is I ain't - a Christian? NORM

While we are on this subject, would you consider a person like me a Christian? I am non-theist, but have a profound respect for the teachings of Jesus. In fact, I often reflect on the words recorded in the Sermon on the Mount / Plain. I have the whole thing memorized, and try to live up to the philosophy of love and understanding I believe is contained within those words. I do not believe that Jesus died for our sins. I do not believe that he rose from the dead. And, I don't believe that he was conceived of the Holy Spirit, born of a Virgin and is the Son of G-d. I'm not even sure I believe there really is a G-d, but I'm open to the possibility. I really think that were I to have an in depth conversation with Bishop Spong, that he would tell me that I am a Christian. However, I am a realist. I no longer refer to myself as a Christian because of the previously mentioned litmus test, of which I fail miserably. As a rule, if someone tells me they are a Christian or a Charmed Elf; I take them at face value. NORM

Bill, you would absolutely HATE Judaism! Human empowerment is the dynamic that drives most Jewish congregations I know. Also, some of the most respected people I know are Unitarian Universalists. I agree with you, Bill. The ultimate direction progressiveness leads is toward love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control - the very definition of humanism. If that upsets you, I kind of feel sorry for you. I would not kick you out of my pub, but I probably wouldn't pick you to help with my social studies project. NORM

What????? Bishop Spong has spent the better half of the present decade forging a new way for Christians to experience G-d. I couldn't disagree more with your opinion. Have you read any of the following: Liberating the Gospels; Reading the Bible with Jewish Eyes, Jesus for the non-religious, Born of a Woman, Reclaiming the Bible for a Non-religious World, The Hebrew Lord, Eternal Life: A New Vision: Beyond Religion, Beyond Theism, Beyond Heaven and Hell, Here I Stand: My Struggle for a Christianity of Integrity, Love, and Equality. I don't think any one of those books is destructive or "deconstructive." Quite the contrary, for me; they hold the last possible hope of redeeming the Gospel message. NORM

LOL! My grandparents were my Jewish "source." Don't worry, we are used to having Christians explain our religion to us! No hard feelings. NORM

I think that those folks who are mystics, and see meaning in these words, will not want to substitute Sacred for God / G-d or YHWH. But for those whose faith is in action, I don't think it would be a problem. NORM

You just quoted a Jewish source for me: Rabbi Cohen. Please consult a dictionary for the definition of ineffable. Only the mystics believed there was a "magical" name that only the priests knew. Kabbalism is regarded as somewhat kooky. I think that you are confusing the English understanding of name with the Jewish understanding. G-d to the Jew is not a physical being. It is a spirit. Spirits do not have bodies and they do not have SPECIFIC names because that would deny the Spirit from manifesting in different ways, i.e.; L-rd of L-rds, King of Kings, Shepherd of Shepherds, Mother of Mothers, etc... In ENGLISH you have to use the word "name" because there is no equivalent to describe the tetragrammon. So, you can quote me sentences in English that use "name" till your blue in the face. I'm still going to tell you that the Jews do not refer to G-d by name. Look, I don't even think that G-d exists. I'm just telling you what I was taught by a Rabbi when I converted to Judaism. He didn't consult a textbook. Actually, he did reference the Talmud, but I've long since forgotten the text. Besides, it was in Hebrew, so that wouldn't do you any good unless you can read Hebrew. There are some Tanakhs that actually leave a space where G-d should be as an illustration of the concept. I'm sure if you go into a local Synagogue and ask to visit the library, you will find some of them. BTW, this is not a very big deal in the Jewish tradition today. The emphasis now is on doing acts of mitzvah and "advancing the Kingdom" on Earth. The only Jews who obsess about YHWH are the Kabbalists and Numerologists. I think we've sidetracked this thread enough with this discussion. The point I was trying to make was that the "name" one ascribes to the Ground of Being isn't at all important. So, to take the word GOD out of the 8 Points is not abandoning the human created "idea" of what the name God, G-d or YHWH is trying to express. NORM

Please don't misunderstand. By explaining what I've learned of the Jewish perspective (as a Jew), I am not suggesting that that is how I refer to G-d. I have no mental construct for such a being. I use the affectation only out of respect for those who taught me during my year of conversion. For them, YHWH has a profound meaning that goes WAY beyond a simple name. That was my only point. I don't think that TCPC needs to worry about offending Jews. The ones who would be offended more than likely will not log onto a website with "Christianity" in the title. NORM

Those are all Christian / Western sources. It does not represent a Jewish / Eastern perspective. And, it is not the view of a "select group of Jews," but something taught to every child in Shul. YHWH is NOT G-d's name!!! From a modern Christian perspective, you are correct. YHWH is what they think the Jews named G-d. Christians began to adopt (there is much debate as to when this happened) a more Western perspective as it morphed from Judaism into what we now know as Christianity. However, that is not the Jewish perspective. We don't think that YHWH is G-d's "name." NORM

From my understanding, having gone through conversion to Judaism, those aren't names - they are attributes. The tetragrammatron is four Hebrew consonants that cannot be pronounced. On purpose. There is no one name for G-d. Saying that G-d has a name is a Christian thing. Actually, it's more of a Western thing. It's hard to explain, because the English translation of the Hebrew scriptures leaves one with the impression that G-d is a "person." When you read the Hebrew, it becomes clear that G-d transcends anthropomorphism. Take Ha-Shem, for example. It is translated as "The Name" in English. But it is more accurately translated as the one who defines what is understood as a name. Kind of "the Name of Names." G-d, according to the Jews, has no body. It is spirit. No body. No name. NORM

There was a very strange - and long - moment of silence after that sermon. I was in shock. Previously, I was of the opinion that homosexuality was a sin. I'm glad you find it inspirational. That sermon changed my life. NORM

Hello and welcome, Stas. As a Christian, I felt it necessary to put faith into action. So, I would volunteer for the soup kitchen or some sort of outreach program. Invariably, I would be questioned about my beliefs (or, rather; in my case - lack thereof). The reactions were never very pretty. Eventually, I found that I had to lie in order to continue working side by side with other Christians. Eventually, I converted to Judaism because it is not necessary to accept a theistic understanding of G-d in order to be accepted. NORM

- emphasis mine. I couldn't agree with you more. NORM

This is not a strange idea at all, Paul. In my Minyan, there are several of us who do not believe in a supernatural G-d. We are not criticized for this, because the purpose of the Minyan is to live our lives in such a way as to be a blessing for all mankind -mitzvah. It is possible to do this whether or not you believe in a supernatural "cause" for such ideas. NORM

Er, just to be clear; personally, I HAVE abandoned a theistic G-d. I just felt it necessary to come to the defense of TCPC. These folks have been very supportive and tolerant of little old me. NORM

So...........you are exactly like everyone else in this Forum. Sorry, but I just don't understand your complaint. NORM

Bill, I think that you are grossly misreading TCPC and most of the folks on this forum. No one is abandoning G-d, but I do think that G-d is leaving traditionalist Christianity behind. Perhaps this is the real reason for your discomfort? You feel you are being left behind. BTW, as a Jew (the origin of your religion according to your confession), G-d does not have a "name," so I think your obsession with maintaining that language is not Biblical. So, what's wrong with Hallmark? I used to write for them. I think there are sentiments expressed in Hallmark cards that are very powerful. NORM

Perhaps it is G-d who left Christianity behind. NORM

Sadly, they are the exception, and not the rule. NORM

Thanks for the clarification, Dutch. Your comments make sense. My comment was me being lazy. NORM

I don't necessarily WANT to see the demise of religion, it's just my observation that it is becoming less and less of a priority for most folks. On a personal level; I don't really see a need for religious belief. I do like the music, though. I think our own SECULAR United States is a pretty darn good example. It's not perfect, but I've traveled extensively in religious theocracies and they kind of suck in comparison, IMHO. NORM

While I don't think that Christianity or the Bible causes homophobia, it certainly does nothing to ameliorate the societal stigma directed toward persons of same gender attraction. A church I attended in my early 20s tried so desperately to deconstruct a young, gay man in our congregation that it drove him to commit suicide. Arguably, there were deeper issues at work, but the layers upon layers of guilt piled upon this poor soul by well-meaning, but WRONG Christians - a group he wanted to belong to more than anything else - pushed him to a final solution at his own hands. The speaker whose audience dissipated over words that challenged their prejudices underscore the themes meted out within this thread - whether of Christian or secular origin, homophobia is a scourge worthy of defeat. NORM