romansh

Exactly So their education never gave them pause for thought? The ramifications of physics, chemistry and biology? Perhaps I am a little different? I am a product of my environment, even my secondary education specialized on the sciences, as did my tertiary education. Thereafter spending spend three and a half decades in a research facility. While I get this … what I don't get is the apparent avoidance of the myriad aspects of the real world. Heaven and hell is such a nonsense concept at least the literal one, why even wonder about/debate what the ancients meant. Always remember my RI teacher telling us that Jesus taught from his own authority, and yet here we are looking to contemporary authorities to tell us what ancient authorities were actually telling us. Well we could start a thread discussing the implication of the findings of science on human condition.

Fine.

I give up.

I was recognizing your quote was out of context.

yep

You must have missed:

This type of thing is often used in context of free will debate. OK here it is a little out of context. Nevertheless: I make predictions all the time. Some are more accurate than others fair enough. I predict the sun will 'rise' tomorrow in this part of the world, a near certainty and I will live to see it, a far less certain prediction, but not a bad one I hope. So when someone says we can't predict the future that is a fallacy. At first glance it seems reasonable but prediction here gets confounded with absolute certainty. I don't think this is an intentional thing, but for one of those subliminal things. This is not so much for the benefit of thormas, but for others, just evaluate the language being used. an example of a predictable chemical reaction

I think this is an interesting blog https://datadivine.wordpress.com/2019/02/07/atheism-and-the-ten-commandments/ I have known Gus (virtually) for twelve years now … interesting Guy

I am sure you have other interests Paul, and I understand this site is not the optimal place to be discussing your hobbies, work and family etc. Though these should not necessarily be excluded. My point is there have been great advances in understanding on how the universe ticks made over the last two thousand years. How these may impact on our understanding of say heaven, hell, suffering … hey even the human condition remain untouched. What are the underlying causes for this phenomenon? You suggested "people sticking in their comfort zone". But you will struggle to find threads on this website regarding what the last couple centuries have brought to bear. You will find lots of stuff on other ancient traditions. This is what I mean by 'reduced' OK … I get it, this place is a stepping stone, more often than not, away from traditional religion. Baby steps I suppose.

So existence is not within PC's comfort zone and we are reduced to speculating about the meaning and authenticity of some 2000 year old story? Interesting.

I also enjoyed deleting your PM, Burl. But there are traces of your reply to my question "why do we here show so little interest in things outside of Progressive Christianity and religion in general?" It would seem that you think PCs are not interested in how the universe ticks. Interesting.

In some ways I get this interest in what the original authors 2000 years ago meant by heaven and hell. It is some academic puzzle to be solved. If it simply means, heaven and hell are actually our perceptions of now, (this is the interpretation I lean to, admittedly on minimal study) then fair enough. Stuff has been written about this universe since then, and I don't mean the interminable interpretations of Biblical texts (and other religious texts). I find this to be a really interesting universe, how it ticks and unfolds is amazing and yet we seem stuck. I suppose the question I am asking why do we here show so little interest in things outside of Progressive Christianity and religion in general?

This might explain why new atheists seem a little intolerant at times.

I likely have posted this before … it is Blackmore talking about the process of evolution as applied to things other than biology.

And the strange thing Burl is, Paul might be more Christian than you. Remember it is actions and not labels.

I do, all the time

3 and 8 were in the present tense.

If we follow Merriam Webster's renown - a state of being widely acclaimed and highly honored I don't have a clue.

Reminds me of Campbell: Moyers Like all heroes, the Buddha does not show you the truth itself, he shows you the way to the truth. Campbell But it’s got to be your way, not his

two more blogs on religion from my website Aston Villa … this is a little bit about me and a tongue in cheek juxtaposition of religion and football and Monism … a slightly more formal look.

But there appears to be an arbiter … some of the club directors by the looks of it. I would say up to a point. I have seen an atheist welcomed that what I interpreted as an warning. The replies to Billmc's post gave me pause for thought. In what non traditional sense did you mean? More flexibility? No I was not personally fine with that. Better warn life, Thormas is on the loose.

what do you think my point was?

So who is the arbiter of what me mean by God? Are Progressive Christians welcoming of other perspectives of God or not? Who is the arbiter of what can be considered, in the latest version, "God". My "rock" might happen to be a reflection of the universe. And you will find even the latest version of the points does not require any worship of rocks etc even God.

Yes Do you have to self identify as a Progressive Christian to be welcomed on this site? Then it is not ALL Ultimately it would be trying to change someone's behavior regardless of what tools you would use. To use Joseph's term our idealized concept of Jesus would be accepting of these people. Not necessarily apathetic to what they have done. And yet I think I am helping while I try and explain my point of view and hope that you might share it.