PaulS

Cheers Tom. I think we have had our run. My 'more' is this life and what I don't know about it. It's my children, my wife, my friends, my work, my experiences. I step away from all that knowing (in my head) that one day the lights will go out and I will cease to have any sort of consciousness. All i can say is that does not translate into meaninglessness for me. Clearly it does for you and so you need to find whatever it is that gives your life meaning. All power to you and the ancient greek myths! Clearly this has been a conundrum for humans ever since our brains evolved to this point. Maybe one day they will evolve past this point too. Peace & goodwill Paul

I'm not sure we need to error check or determine what results we should be striving for. Just be and do.

"Posting what one does not believe is a waste of space." You know what you are doing.

Burl, Your insults are not welcome here. Please keep them to yourself. Paul

I like to have a bit of a drink. In fact drinking alcohol is a pretty much embedded part of my social life, well life even when I'm on my own for that matter. In fact, here's a pic of my spare fridge in anticipation for Christmas 2017. Not that I drank it all alone, but a man needs to be prepared (as do women too of course). My favourite drink of all time is a quality Shiraz wine, preferably from the Barossa Valley in South Australia, although I think my home state of Western Australia offers some pretty close seconds. I have been lucky enough to partake in some, what I consider ridiculously expensive red wine (Penfolds Grange - $700-$800/bottle) but I found it no more satisfying than a good $100 bottle of Shiraz. But then again, I am probably a peasant when it comes to class wine! White-wise I probably prefer a nice crisp SBS - semillion blanc sauvignon. However lately I've taken a fancy to Pinot Gris, yet I also have a taste for a nice limey, minerally, Riesling on a hot summer's day. The above said, I am a man of a wide variety of taste and to contrast against say a nice $50+ bottle of red, I also enjoy a few glasses of my homemade Rhubarb wine (yep, you can make alcohol from just about anything!). And if I'm going to promote a Nectar of the Gods, one can't go past Joe's Ancient Orange Mead (just Google it). Astoundingly that particular drop has some fairly close origins with this forum (wink wink, nod nod). I have also made some spirits through my mate's still and my own WTF Bourbon from NYE 2015 is still talked about today (even if the participants are unable to remember what TF hit them that night!). How about you? Do you have a favourite tipple that you would like to share? Have you made your own from the world's resources or are you content to buy already made? Next on my home brew hit list is a lemon mead wine and some more rhubarb wine of course (as I grow 5 rhubarb plants). Now if I could just work out what to do with some water at a wedding!

Welcome Heidi to the Forum. How goes it in the hunt for youngish professionals at home raising kids in small communities being moderate to right leaning?

I like that thought, Craig - the real Trinity. They seem like solid values and principles and both compliment what I think the 'more' is that so many seek. I think Jesus was on the money with his parables and the sermon on the mount (or plain for that matter) - it's the other bits that got twisted in translation, interpretation and scribing, in my opinion. Thanks for sharing.

I had never noticed that the 8 Points listed on the front page weren't the current ones. I can only imagine they were left like that because they have a number of discussion threads listed against them and I guess to compensate in some way the 2011 version of the 8 Points is listed lastly as its own discussion thread. Perhaps it is time to archive the old version in some way. I'll look into it. As for the points themselves, like you Rom I find the latter 8 points much easier to adopt and agree to, with only some minor differences to you (possibly). I found shelter in PC when escaping biblical inerrancy and the whole 'Jesus is the only way' mentality associated with fundamental Christianity. I am loathe to move away from it because I find value in delving into Christianity taking into account historical and biblical scholarship. Sometimes I struggle with Christianity per se, even here, but find that in the main it is an excellent place to bounce around ideas and discuss thoughts and beliefs. As it is the religious tradition I grew up in I am much more comfortable relating to thoughts and beliefs from this point of view than I am say with Islam or other religions. I think I am pretty flexible with my beliefs and if something should be presented that makes more sense than what I currently believe then I think my beliefs might change (or elements of them). Clearly that sort of flexibility is not everyone's bag and a number of times I have been told I am not considering the 'evidence' properly, or I have a closed mind, or I'm choosing to ignore the 'correct' way to understand Jesus, blah blah blah. But even then such people have something to offer in a discussion thread so I try to smile and push on. But as for the 8 points: Point 1. I think much of what is attributed to Jesus does offer a take on humanity that can see us be our best selves and get along together. To that end I think Jesus' teachings can assist with understanding the sacredness, oneness and unity of all life. I think Jesus' teachings can help with this irrespective of whether there is actually a 'God' or not. Like you, I don't see the need for capitals. Point 2. Probably the easiest of the 8 to affirm for me and like you I think it is just one source of wisdom and not an exclusive one. Point 3. Communities are tricky things. Clearly we all have opinions and beliefs which don't always agree. To me the important thing is that we can put aside our disagreements and still be a community that shares. I think we're always going to get people that want to exclude others, but we can only try our best. Language is limiting and I suspect 'atheists' weren't invited either because of a conatation that they wouldn't want to participate or simply because it was easier and more efficient to list agnostics in contrast to believers. Maybe catchier? Point 4. I agree with this point and suggest that your behaviour probably does fully express what you believe. Controlling yourself and perhaps not saying something that you'd like to is still an expression of your belief. Maybe you mean something else but I would have thought our behaviours can't help but represent what we believe, even when behaviours seems to be cognitively dissonant with what we outwardly say we believe. Point 5. For me, taking grace as 'courteous goodwill' as well as ease, elegance, and smoothness, feels more to me like gently bobbing down a stream floating in and out of different thoughts, beliefs and viewpoints. I am comfortable in this search and have learnt that most of the time absolutes are not what they seem. Point 6. Yes, it probably is a bit motherhood-ish, but I feel like I agree with it. I'm sure there are those who strive much more than I do, but I like to think I do my little bit. Point 7. Again, there are others who strive more than I, but I like to think I am doing my bit to some degree. Maybe like you suggest we don't have the free will to decide that, but I'm not sure how that is different to anything else we think we choose to do, so I'm content to take the point on as one for me. Point 8: I think by my very nature I am committed to a path of life-long learning, as is everybody else to varying degrees. Certainly I express compassion, and selfless love at times, but like everybody else I think this is present in varying degrees in varying circumstances. It's not a one size fits all as was reportedly demonstrated by Jesus in a variety of ways - sometimes loving the little children, other times overturning tables and cursing fig trees. For me the 8 Points simply 'point' to a way - they are not THE way. Like all creeds, these 8 Points don't capture all things in all ways and they still leave things to be desired. I don't see them as a tool to weed out people who some regard as not precisely fitting the mould, but more as a guideline to suggest why you may wish to participate here. After all, we aren't the only progressive christian movement in the world with all the right opinions and views, but just a tiny little corner of the universe in this current time. Progressive Christianity existed long before this forum and it's parent site coined it, but being humans we like to categorise and put things into certain boxes for convenience.

I was merely throwing in my two cents worth from an Admin perspective as you raised that there were "two Forum Administrators posting on that site....", just to explain why/when Admin may get involved. I didn't mean to speak for Rom precisely.

Well it is lunchtime here and I have a day off, so no sleep issues for me right at this point in time (which clearly will be the opposite in about 12hrs time)! We simply have a philosophical difference. I go back to Sisyphus: he is alive but any purpose is illusion: it mattered not that he was. If he were not, nothing would be different. This is happenstance. Sisyphus did not make a difference - at all. It was a valiant struggle, a great act of defiance, an effort to matter, of trying to influence - but again, nothing. It is illusion. I'm not sure you and I are any different to Sisyphus. How could his purpose be any more an illusion than anybody's purpose in this life? If there is a more, even if one doesn't believe in such, are they not living out just as much a purposeful life as somebody who thinks there is a more? Clearly it did matter that Sisyphus lived or else we wouldn't be talking about him today. So whilst he may not believe in a more, nonetheless his life still had purpose and meaning. Perhaps he was just too miserable in is own philosophy to realise it! That is exactly it, in this scenario, it is all is meaningless. In the scenario I accept (and I am not arguing it is better because I accept it), all has meaning, all is caught up in the meaningfulness, the ultimate purposefulness of creation. Again, in my scenario, one's influence, one's life is not at all meaningless, no matter if you live for a day, 12 years, 50 or 90. And all has meaning in itself and as part of All. Again, it is not about after-life. You concentrate on the 'end' while my focus is on the on-going beginning: the Why of it all. If I understand you correctly, you have no reason why, it just it (accident, happenstance?); it has no meaning. In my scenario, it does!. My focus is not on the after life but I fail to see the difference in living a life without thinking there is a 'more' versus living a life wondering about the 'why of it all' along the way. End result - the same non-existence (unless you do think there is an afterlife?). You get to the end of your life as do I - is the meaning of our lives any different because you thought there was a 'more' to life whilst i did not? Do our lives stand for any more than the other's did? If not, then are they meaningless lives? Again, it is not wanting to live forever or getting bored; it is first and foremost about the Meaning/Purposefulness - of being at all. There is either Purpose or there is not (unless there is another scenario that somebody else has that we should consider). And, to try to clarify, let me add (for lack of a better description) I am referring to an ultimate or overarching Purpose/Meaning and not simply the purpose that a Sisyphus tries to make when he recognizes there is no Meaning. If there is such Meaning, is it such that I become It (so to speak) now and will continue to participate in the All? Well, I have faith (in the purpose or better the One who is Purpose (again for lack of a better way to phrase it right now) and therefore, I have hope that I will be (that's what faith and hope is, no certainty). Simply, if there is no God (and I don't mean a theistic, supernatural version) there is only absurdity. I admire Sisyphus but don't want to be him. Your afterlife may not be sitting on a cloud playing a harp, but you seem to promote an existence in some manner by becoming part of or contributing to said 'more'. Unless you exist in some degree after your mortal body and consciousness ceases, then you seem to be saying your earthly existence was meaningless. Is the 'more' you are proposing no different to the current period that I say I am contributing to also? Once I'm gone I'm gone, but my contributions to the 'more' continue on? How is that any different to what you're proposing? You need to think there is a more or you think you're not contributing in this life? Having now looked into Sisyphus a little bit more, it would seem to me that your view of his rock rolling task does seem to be toward the negative end of viewing his actions of any benefit. You might think his task of rolling the rock repeatedly up that hill only to have it roll down again was fruitless, as Albert Camus did to some degree, but Camus also concluded that "one must imagine Sisyphus happy" as "The struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man's heart." There is Sisyphus' meaning and purpose right there - the struggle itself. Nothing outside of the struggle of this existence is required. Enjoy and contribute to it for what it is.

Whilst it is inconvenient to be discussing similiar content across two different threads, there were issues in the past with some members being upset that what they perceived as non-PC posts were being made in the PC section of the forum. Whilst personally i don't have an issue with such as I see the whole forum as PC and pretty much no such thing as a non-PC post (unless somebody is being rude or aggressive and in breach of the guidelines) I do appreciate that some people have a need for such a section and I don't want to be the person causing angst for them. As it is not too hard to avoid I tend to go along with that. I believe (not by choice ) that Rom is acting in good faith also going along with that. There is no expertise in being an Administrator here other than in attempting to keep the forum on track and within the stated guidelines. I think if people need a space to support one another more closely in what they consider Progressive Christian to the exclusion of others who they feel may upset the apple cart, so be it. There's plenty of room for everyone here.

But we are agreeing here Thormas. Yes, one chooses to investigate new avenues and expose themselves perhaps to uncomfortable information that may contradict beliefs they hold, I'm just trying to say that when the 'penny drops' or 'it clicks' for them that the new information holds a new truth for them, that one doesn't 'choose' that belief, it just happens naturally as a result of the new information seeming now apparently as the truth. You can choose to ignore that information, but like it or not, if it rings true for you then you will believe. That is what I am saying we have no choice over. Clear as mud? You only made the decision to review the information, not accept it as true. That bit you had no control over. Yes, you did the work of reading it, but the illusion is thinking you 'chose' to believe rather than understand it as simply unstoppable either way - you would have believed or not whether you wanted to or not. Once you hold a belief you may action it, but whilst those actions may be choices as a result of belief, I don't think one chooses the belief itself. As you point out it is not realistic to ignore what you believe, which is precisely why I say belief is not a choice. You cannot 'choose' belief. You have it in something or you don't. You may change your beliefs (as we all do) but that is because something speaks to you as the new truth, not because you consciously said I will believe this now over that. Well, it wouldn't be the first time people have continued to flog a dead horse! (or is that just an Aussie saying?) Life isn't happenstance but has purpose, because you are alive. There is meaning and we can make a difference, even though it's lights out at the end of it and there is no afterlife (if I am right that is). Are the things around us that don't have a consciousness meaningless simply because they don't carry on after this life? Are flowers, waterfalls, mountain ranges,and even rocks meaningless? I suspect not. They shape our lives and the lives of people to come. The influence you have on your children and the planet are not meaningless simply because you cease to exist after 80 or so years. Whether one believes in an afterlife or not, usually their 'memory' lives on after they are gone. We talk about holding the deceased 'in our hearts' after they are gone. I don't think we think their lives are meaningless even if we think we are never going to see them again. But I understand the attraction of wanting to live forever (in some way, shape or form and perhaps with a little bit of variation so we don't get too bored). I think that's where faith and hope maybe got started then later became terms for some sort of certainty about the afterlife (i.e rather than just being terms for hopeful thinking that one's existence will continue on in a good way, they often now are terms used as something to be 'required' in order to get to the afterlife - i.e. one MUST have faith/hope in Jesus). Look, if there is an afterlife then maybe you will get to tell me "I told you so' and we can finally share that bottle of red. If I'm right, then you won't know about it anyway.

It's not the first time somebody who has it 'right' is telling me I am 'wrong', that I am refusing to believe that which is so plainly correct for others, (which seems to be a far too common trait when it comes to spiritual matters), and often just a 'hint' of 'you'll be sorry' thrown in for good measure! I mean seriously, issues that have been debated ever since man swung down from the trees yet you have all the answers at this point in time! Honestly David, I find it more humorous than serious that you take this view of others (in this case, me). I don't set myself up at all as 'knowing' more than Jesus. At best, I say we simply 'don't know much about what Jesus was reportedly on about. Much of Jesus ' life has been scrutinised and what his 'real' message was has been thrashed by many a scholar and theologian and lay-person. There are as many different opinions about what Jesus meant and was saying as there are grains of sand on the beach. Does that mean there is nothing to be gained from thinking about Jesus' words, from questioning what he may have been saying, to consider and interpret in modern times what somebody 2000 years ago may have meant? Of course not. And to dare to do that on this site which encourages and celebrates diversity is exactly why I choose to participate here, whether that is in alignment with what you believe or not is not my issue. In short for you David, read the rule set of the site. Understand that PC embraces agnosticism, atheism, even Satanism! We respect that others have different or opposing points of view and we enjoy discussing them here. We don't try to run anybody out of town or try to put them down simply because they hold different views and/or may argue for them. Jesus' teachings CAN lead to and awareness and experience of the Sacred and the Oneness and Unity of all life, but for some (like me) that sacredness, oneness, unity does not necessarily live outside of our simple worldly experience and mortal bodies, with or without the existence of a soul. I believe (not by choice) that to some degree some of the words attributed to Jesus have helped me to that point to where I am at today. Does every single word attributed to Jesus help - no, in my opinion. I also believe there is much even the likes of you don't truly know about what Jesus meant, even if you are convinced you know the truth (as mentioned previously, clearly not an unusual trait in religious/spiritual circles). However, I suspect you will have no regard for my views as you are so thoroughly convinced of your own.

There is no contradiction - I slowly began to believe something different, not because I chose to but because the new information 'made' me believe the way I did. This is precisely what I am saying about belief not being a choice. Evidence or data speaks to you and you do or don't believe. You don't get to choose what you believe. The illusion is that you think you are making a choice - you're not. I never put old data aside but was open to new data which made me change my beliefs, but not because I chose to change them. They changed because they were required to change with the new information (and for some beliefs, new information doesn't change the belief). A true choice would be ignore what you believe and go with something you don't believe, but say you believe it. Not sure why you would feel depressed about not having an existence after this one, but I would argue that just because we don't like something is not a good enough reason for it not to exist. I expect religion is very much a product of people not wanting to die, rather than the other way around. Perhaps the evolution of mankind's intelligence is a curse in this regard.

I wonder if anybody here has any humorous stories (or concerns) about the appearance of the number 666 in places. I was reminded today when a read a Facebook post by a character called Horus Gilgamesh who's FB page "Awkward Moments Children's Bible" pops up on my feed. He has recently moved back to the midwest in the US and was recounting a story about a service station attendant who thought it was like a mini miracle that his fuel bill came to a precise dollar amount ($30 to be precise). This attracted comments from readers who'd experienced issues when the digits 666 came up in a bill, including not being served unless they bought additional items as their bill was $6.66 etc. Even in Australia I've heard the odd comment about somebody refusing a phone number with 666 in it or a car registration number showing 666, but was never sure if they were true stories or not. Anybody here experienced such? Of course, there is argument that the 'true' number of the beast should actually be 616, but let's not let the facts get in the way of any good stories!

If we just took one group of Christians who share the precise same data and evidence - the bible (and let's say it is the same version they all read) - I guarantee you that there will be different beliefs believed amongst that group. Not because they chose to believe differently, but because they had no choice in perceiving the data the way they did which in turn made it a belief for them, albeit different to the person next door who shared the same precise data and evidence. Some of those Christians might try to convince others that people in the same test group actually had a choice to believe what they did, but I think you would agree that this would not be the case. Take me for instance - I can read the bible and believe in a physical Satan. I certainly did once upon a time. Since those days I read other data and evidence and slowly began to believe something different - i.e. I now don't believe in a physical entity that wars against God named the Devil. I did not choose to change my beliefs but rather mt beliefs couldn't help but be changed when I read and perceived information as the new truth. And who knows, maybe somewhere down the track I will change my beliefs once again, but not from choosing (because I can't), but from reading and experiencing and then feeling that this new information is now the truth. Again, it won't be by choice but it still happens.

I am certainly open to be pleasantly surprised Joseph. Can't say I wouldn't mind that occurring.

I think it is an illusion to think one 'chooses' which evidence they will believe and which they won't. We have a mental apparatus for reviewing all available data and evidence but that doesn't mean we choose which evidence or data to believe, or not. Take for example the multiple beliefs about God etc. Same data, different beliefs. I don't think this is because people 'choose' to believe one way or the other but by the fact that for whatever reason (past experience, emotional state, how their brain ticks, etc) they 'take on' a belief thinking they have come to some rational conclusion of their own making. A little 'pat on the back' for themselves if you like for 'choosing' the 'right' belief. This may make us 'feel' like we're choosing beliefs, but I don't think we are. Again, if you could choose to not believe what you believe, that would be a choice. But one cannot do that, so clearly (to me) there is no choice.

It might not make sense but I think as such it highlights the actual meaning of the word 'choice'. Choice is the act of choosing between two or more possibilities. When you weigh up the data, evidence etc you come to a conclusion. You don't choose one conclusion over another - you are already convinced one way or another based on your understanding of the evidence presented. Having a belief but then choosing not to hold it, would actually be a choice. It seems to make no sense because you cannot not believe what you believe. Hence, I don't think you have a choice concerning beliefs. I am certain we could resolve this if we were at least halfway through a couple of bottles of a good red!

And I doubt you could make yourself choose to believe that that tea is not in fact tea. Agreed. Even when it comes to 'choosing' to make tea.

Perhaps the challenge is simply to do the best with the limited time we have and to be happy with that. I just don't see futility in living a good life and then blanking out so one doesn't recall any of it when they are asleep for eternity. Whilst there are numerous instances of suspecting a 'more' expressed in philosophy, religions, poetry, art, friendship and love, it's not as though 'more' is all those groups stand for or support. I would suggest that the likes of philosophy, poetry, art, friendship and love just as strongly/frequently express a 'nothing more' understanding of life and support a 'make the most of it now for only that reason' viewpoint. I suspect our desire for there to be a 'more' is possibly a hangover of our earlier tribal superstitions and ignorance toward things that were once unexplainable. Possibly it is a trait of higher intelligence that we simply don't want our intelligence ( or ego) to cease and so we desire there to be a more for that reason. Both of these seem a better explanation for me rather than there being a 'more' which somehow still alludes us after millions of years of searching. I'm not saying beliefs won't change - obviously they do. I'm just trying to say (poorly) that I don't think we 'choose' our beliefs. We simply either believe our assumptions (based on data, evidence, experience, etc) or we don't. We simply cannot say "I do not think that is true but I am going believe the opposite" as though we have sort of choice. The fact that we think something is true, or close enough to the truth, is WHY we believe it. We didn't choose it so to speak, it chose us. We have no say in the matter. And when new evidence, data or understandings come along our beliefs may change but again,not because we choose to believe differently, but because what we are presented makes us believe differently. There is a subtle but major difference between changing beliefs and picking and choosing beliefs. And on a side note - thankyou for the understanding, sharing and thoughtful discussion. I think it is so much more fruitful and pleasurable when we can discuss our opinions and thoughts here without barbs, insults, self righteousness and sarcasm. A little bit of humour is always helpful too . Peace & goodwill.

I used to think like that, but now I tend to think that it doesn't matter if I like it or not - that is how it is. Also, it doesn't mean nothing if I die and cease to exist. I have lived, been involved in other people's lives, hopefully contributed just a tiny bit to the world being a better place for the next folk, and then there's my kids too who will continue on until they die, etc. Just because I can't celebrate that after the fact (i.e. after I'm dead) doesn't render my life meaningless to me. I am not depressed about that and actually am encouraged that the very same thing has happened to billions of humans before me (and billions and billions of every other form of consciousness on this planet too). I don't regard you as being judgemental and I think I understand where you're coming from. I love your honesty and reflection on this matter. I see how it can be sad - not ever getting to see my children again, or my wife, family, friends, other cultures, other planets etc. But I'm not going to know that - I will be dead. The sadness will be having this life now and not living it to the full, not just for me, but everybody associated and affected by me in any way. If it helps, see if you can think of one choice you have 'made' to believe something and consider if, with all things taken into account concerning what you know about this belief that you hold, can you now simply say I do not believe in that thing. I suspect not. So there simply is no choice. You believe it because your mind believes it. Sure you weigh up evidence and take data and information into account, but I doubt you 'choose' to believe it - you can't not believe it because that's the conclusion you've come to, that that thing is true.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Not sure why the sarcasm is required David. Are you saying my observation of human behaviour is incorrect or just so obvious I didn't need to mention it? My point isn't whether there is or isn't a supernatural God, but rather the behaviour that may result of what one thinks and processes concerning belief in such. I guess I am missing your point to some degree as I am not really sure what point you are trying to make. I thought you were trying to say (and asking for other people's thoughts on) what Jesus meant when he said turn the other cheek. You seemed to suggest he was promoting protesting injustice. I don't think that is represented from what we know of Jesus and his words. Then you brought up the Catholic Church' and Hitler for some reason asking me if I thought they were practising turning the other cheek. My point about turning the other cheek was that I think Jesus was saying end the cycle of retribution, let it go, let it be. I don't think that is what the Catholic Church was considering when it failed to stand up against Hitler, for the reasons I outlined and which you now seem to be sarcastic against. Thanks for sharing your summation of values in the serenity prayer - I don't think I sit far from the same either.

I don't disagree, but I don't see these understandings as pointing towards anything outside of the physical world we exist in. For me personally, i don't have to hold any notions of a 'consciousness' outside of what we seem to know now that somehow enlightens or fulfils us. Definitely there are things we don't understand about ourselves and the world we live in, but I see this as an entirely natural part of us. We only think we need more answers. I don't know if I'm explaining it well, but I've been on this bit of a journey in recent years where I seem to have come to the conclusion that we are born, we live, then we die - there is nothing more to it and I am very comfortable with that. There is no more meaning or afterthought to our lives. However, in that brief 70-100 year period of consciousness (just round figures ) that we do exist, we have a brain that is not content with just eating, sleeping, and reproducing (well, a few of my friends may seem to but that's another story ), and so we seek meaning and purpose and fulfilment etc. The fact that meaning, purpose and fulfilment is so starkly different for every single person, indicates to me that there is no single meaning, purpose or fulfilment available for all as some sort of 'answer'. Our individuality drives us to all sorts of different conclusions, beliefs and other thoughts. For me, the 'Meaning for all' that you suggest religion & philosophy is typically understood to have significance for all humanity, does not exist. It may hit on some obvious themes that our brains have evolved to understand (love, peace, anger, jealousy, pride, etc) but this is simply material fact about our brains and processes. I don't see it as some sort of external consciousness reaching in and providing insight to an existence or understanding outside of the physical world we reside in (and will soon leave). That's where I'm at at the moment, but maybe it'll be different tomorrow .