romansh

A couple of observations: We define mental illness into and out of existence. Spirituality seems to be different things for different people. For me spirituality is the few moments that I have had in my life that I was in awe. One such moment, as an example, was looking down a microscope looking at a pre-zygote when my wife and I were trying IVF. Those four tiny cells - potential human being. Anyway is not acceptance (as opposed to apathy) a form of spirituality?

Perhaps --- what we call (G)god and the universe are one?

Three Joseph Campbell quotes which I quite like: and and Campbell quoting Jung To be fair, I would take all three quotes together with a hefty dose of metaphor.

In a way it may not be important, but it may help clarify the question. What if we ask, what did a later anonymous author mean (might have meant), when he put the words on paper and attributed them to Jesus?

A couple of interesting posts, I thought. I am glad there is a semantic reason as well as the pragmatic reasons highlighted by Overcast. Based on the little bit of reading (and study by others) John 17:21 and 10:30 were unlikey to have been uttered by Jesus, but added by later authors. This in of itself is no big deal, but I can't help but have sense of irony here. It is almost as though the Christian author is promoting a pantheistic viewpoint on Jesus's behalf. Interesting

I don't have anything specific for Spong ... but I can recommend the works Joseph Campbell. I think Spong and Campbell would have enjoyed each others perspectives. My favourites are: Power of Myth ... available in DVD ... I prefer the transcript. Myths of Light Pathways to Bliss Welcome ...

I can't say that I speak for any PCs here and certainly I am not one as such. But I think many would identify with this Joseph Campbell quote I came across today.

And understanding there is nothing that actually requires forgiveness, where does this sit on the strength scale?

Welcome overcast As a devout agnostic and atheist by some definitions ... Progressive Christianity is harmless or in the updated version of the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy, mostly harmless. it is a play on Douglas Adam's writings ....

"Salvation"? Personally not a lot. I hear it used in, for what is to me, a really sad way ... primarily by Christians of various orthodoxies.

I like the metaphor of Indra's net. Something is a reflection of every thing (the universe) Every thing is a reflection of that something. Everything and something are one. We shape the universe much in the same way the universe shapes us. We and the universe are one.

Paul ... I would embrace the relative certainty of the here and now. Like you say, I too can't imagine being dead as a 'bad' thing.

One of the literal translations of the word religion is to reconnect. For me the question becomes to reconnect to what? Is it each other? To God or god? The universe? The fact that you are asking am I a true Christian is likely a just a reflection of your environment. If you were bouht up in India would you be asking am I a true Hindu? Speaking personally it is all about having a connection to the universe and understanding that connection. I must admit I find the word hypocrite a judgemental word ... which in itself is a judgement, so I too am 'guilty'. I think the point is to cut others and oneself some slack. You are 8 h drive from me which I suppose is fairly close by continental standards.

Welcome zzmel, In terms of full disclosure I do not consider myself Christian. Personally I do not fear death no more than I fear going to sleep every night. I am not looking forward to the act of dying ... but it is something I don't think I will be in a position to choose the how and the where. I trust it will be swift. Regarding the afterlife ... as a devout agnostic I pay lip service to not being sure, but as somebody with a scientific background it has to be a nonsense ... other than some Lion King Great Circle of Life ... that sort of makes sense to me. So my advice would be, we should make the most of our years whilst we are alive. And finally to your question ... If you call yourself Christian then that is fine by me. You may not be Christian by some dogmatic definitions, but I suspect the few people that are here pay little heed to dogmatic definitions, it is your actions that count not your beliefs.

I think if we first separate Christ from Jesus, then we can put the two concepts back together again. If John 10:30 is as accurate for me as it was for 'Christ' ... that tends to lead us to some pantheistic world view ... I think.

Can't really describe myself as any kind of Christian, but I am giving up sobriety for Lent.

For me the two videos are about interconnectedness ... it is not just our interdependence of one another ... it is about out our interdependence on everything. To think of oneself as somehow separate from the rest of creation is for me, one of the greatest dogmas that we don't even have to preach.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-ts=1422411861&v=hwyuQbIb0Xs&x-yt-cl=84924572 related ....

Maybe.

Here is a useful link on free will ... from a naysayers perspective: https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/category/free-will/ the latest blog, 13 Nov 2015, is quick review of Dennett's review of Mele's book.

Only if you can incorporate some sex during play.

an interesting view point http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/brainwaves/2013/12/02/why-life-does-not-really-exist/ and what is life? http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428655.800-widen-the-goal-in-the-search-for-alien-life.html#.VLdXNk05DIU

Is there any sensible evidence that god has wants and desires? Often we wander off into the territory where god is transcendent, ie beyond all categories of thought. So any answer we come with as to the reason for population density of our galaxy is by definition unverifiable or meaningless. So it is left to those who god is made in our image to explain why there may or net be life on other planets. See my previous paragraph.

Well if fundamentalist interpretations (seemingly literal) are true then god definitely is not great, and it has a great deal of explaining to do at least for me. Of course god is not going to do that, then it is up to fundamentalist apologists to do that on god's behalf. But I must admit I question do these people have any greater access to the interpretation of god than say, I do.