9 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

I looked up JS Spong, he has a Wikipedia page. This is what it says about his education:

He attended the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he was elected to the Phi Beta Kappa honor society and graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1952. He received his Master of Divinity degree from the Virginia Theological Seminary in 1955. He has had honorary Doctor of Divinity degrees conferred on him by Virginia Theological Seminary and Saint Paul's College, Virginia, as well as an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters conferred by Muhlenberg College in Pennsylvania.

In 2005, he wrote: "[I have] immerse[d] myself in contemporary Biblical scholarship at such places as Union Theological Seminary in New York City, Yale Divinity School, Harvard Divinity School and the storied universities in Edinburgh, Oxford and Cambridge."

I have read most of Spong and I know his education. However, I believe he has said of himself that he is not a biblical scholar (not that he has not been immersed in them) and, frankly, I have never read such wild speculation ( ex.Paul and Mary) from biblical scholars. So I take some of what he says with grain of salt. I do like him better as a theologian.

55 minutes ago, Elen1107 said:

What do people think of this verse from the Old Testament?

 Deuteronomy 21:18–21 

18 If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” 21 Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+21:18-21

Do you think it's "the word of God"?

Not the word of God just the time/culture bound 'insight' of the writer and the community at the time.

We are free to disagree given our own insights.

2 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

I keep thinking about what JS Spong has written and said about Paul. That Paul was just a person and just a man. Sometimes articulate and inspired, other times sorely mistaken, mislead and confused. He never met Jesus during his earthly life, he was not one of the 12. 

Sometimes he reminds me a bit of the way I think of Bruce Springsteen. He can say/sing something great and inspired one minute and then something odd and dysfunctional the next, sometimes in the same song. Difference is, no one expects Bruce Springsteen to be singing "the word of God". Not the same for Paul.

It's in JS Spong's book, 'Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism' that he writes about Paul in this way, as well as in some of his other books and lectures. The Book was a NY Times bestseller. He wrote it before he was teaching at Harvard. 

I have read other actual biblical scholars on Paul and never remember them saying anything similar to Spong (above).

I do love Spong but I don't always agree with him. Like Paul was gay and Mary was raped? Again, no scholarly confirmation/agreement and Spong was not an actual biblical scholar (if I remember correctly).

He does have access to the best medical experts..................he simply believes that he is brighter than them even though they didn't pay someone to pass admissions test for them. Odd??

6 minutes ago, Elen1107 said:

😄 

Well he seems to have heard of one of these:

Romans 13:1ESV : Let every person be subject to the governing authorities.

Titus 3:1 ESV : Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work

1 Peter 2:13 : Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.

Problem is, he thinks this just pertains to everyone else and not to him. I've heard some of the state governors and senators call him out and let him know in no uncertain terms that he cannot do things that are un-Constitutional and unlawful.

Wonder how the Jews and a lot of the allied nations felt about these verses during the Nazi occupation of Europe.

Dumpster!!! Maybe we should  use d's insdead of t's . . . 😄 

Actually he probably never heard of the above verses - he just wings it based on what is best for 'donald' and lets the chips and the people fall where they may.

1 hour ago, Pipiripi said:

I mean what I say, it is better believe in an Almighty God Jehovah and His Son Jesus Christ of NAZARETH, to believe in an ape man Charles Darwin. 

Some of us are very comfortable with both God/Jesus and Darwin: belief in Darwin's theory and a faith response to the God revealed in Jesus. Try it, you might like it.

Also you might have misread Darwin, he is not an ape-man. 

13 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

I keep thinking about his having the protesters teargassed off the street so he could get a photo-op in front of a church.

A reporter had to ask him like 5 times whether he ever did what he said he could do concerning grouping and being a celebrity, before he would give him an answer.

They say that the American creed is based on Christian foundations.

Seems like the dumpster never heard of the following verse, even though he stands there with a bible in his hand:

1 Timothy 5-2 Treat older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity.

Nope he just missed or skipped that one.

I love it: the trumpster is also the dumpster !!!!!!!!!

He seems to have skipped all the verses ..........

Only in the trumpster's version of America do we have such nonsense:

Trump’s New Favorite COVID Doctor Believes in Alien DNA, Demon , and Hydroxychloroquine

The trumpster just can't accept that he was wrong on hydroxychloroquine and he (re)tweets a doctor whom he presents to the American people and when questioned says 'he knows nothing about her.'

Oh my god!

1 minute ago, Elen1107 said:

I wonder if all the hierarchical and dysfunctional stuff was taken out of the bible, all the stuff JS Spong calls the "The Sins of the Scriptures", if a lot more people without ulterior motives  would show up in the churches, and those with ulterior motives would pack it up and go away. It would make church a lot better experience, and as far as I'm concerned one much closer to Christ.

Maybe not show up in churches, although some would, but to have an understanding that resonates for them in the 21st C could mean a world of difference. 

It did for me in the later decades of the 20th C........and it continues today.

Just now, thormas said:

Apparently somebody, back in the first centuries didn't think so, and there have been a lot of people since then who have been willing to up hold that point of view. Maybe they don't know how to think for themselves or something, I don't know.  

I don't think people necessarily surrender anything as what they were taught or heard was all they had to go on - especially in times of low literacy. I allow that many generations of people were too busy just getting by and simply trusted and depended on what they were told, what was preached. 

2 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

I grew up in a world where it wasn't done and didn't happen at all. I grew up in a world that didn't even have a female Muppet on Sesame Street, and when they finally did is was a vain, selfish pig. I've seen things getting better, but how much is another question.

This quote and link is from the Hartford Institute for Religion Research (it was done in 2010):

"The Faith Communities Today 2010 national survey of a fully representative, multi-faith sample of 11,000 American congregations found that 12% of all congregations in the United States had a female as their senior or sole ordained leader. For Oldline Protestant congregations this jumps to 24%, and for Evangelical congregations it drops to 9%."

Here's the link to the article

Many grew up in that world but I was speaking about liberal or progressive expressions (including this and Spong's sites) in which there seem to not be those problems. I'll look at the link but it is dated by a decade.

2 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

Probably pseudo-Paul. But so many people don't know that there is any such thing as "pseudo-Paul", never mind that so many of the books in the New Testament were written decades after the "earthly life" of Christ, or that they were edited and verses were inserted that were not in the originals and or not in the first textual witnesses. So many people think that it's "the word of God" and that's that.  

Many might not know but knowing makes a difference (and others can always learn): the real Paul, (one of) the greatest theologian of Christianity did not say that. It might be a letter included in the canon but now we know it was not Paul but one with a different view that used Paul's name. That is liberating knowledge!  If someone is convinced it is the 'word of God' then any like us who know 'better' might be barking up the wrong tree. All one can do is present and it is up to the other to listen or not.

2 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

I grew up in a world where it wasn't done and didn't happen at all. I grew up in a world that didn't even have a female Muppet on Sesame Street, and when they finally did is was a vain, selfish pig. I've seen things getting better, but how much is another question.

This quote and link is from the Hartford Institute for Religion Research (it was done in 2010):

"The Faith Communities Today 2010 national survey of a fully representative, multi-faith sample of 11,000 American congregations found that 12% of all congregations in the United States had a female as their senior or sole ordained leader. For Oldline Protestant congregations this jumps to 24%, and for Evangelical congregations it drops to 9%."

Here's the link to the article

http://hirr.hartsem.edu/research/quick_question3.html

 

I agree with you that some people continue to grow and others not so much.

Probably pseudo-Paul. But so many people don't know that there is any such thing as "pseudo-Paul", never mind that so many of the books in the New Testament were written decades after the "earthly life" of Christ, or that they were edited and verses were inserted that were not in the originals and or not in the first textual witnesses. So many people think that it's "the word of God" and that's that.  

Yeah, that feeling of kind of being "controlled" ends in about the 5th grade if not before.

Good to hear you don't feel that way either. It would mean like surrendering like your own discernment and discretion and intelligence to what ever any speaker is saying. I think it's a good and necessary skill to develop these things and it's very intellectually and spiritually helpful and important. Apparently somebody, back in the first centuries didn't think so, and there have been a lot of people since then who have been willing to up hold that point of view. Maybe they don't know how to think for themselves or something, I don't know.  

We made sure we gave that gift of not surrending her own discernment and knowledge to our daughter:+}

35 minutes ago, Elen1107 said:

I keep wanting to get back to the main topic of this thread and the opening post, but I it's so searingly painful that my mind just goes blank and I keep avoiding and not looking at the subject.

One question is how does it hurt men (or males, so as to include boys/children in this), and how does it help or enhance male's lives if women are given equal voices and say in church and in spiritual matters?

One thing I can think of here is that women get the advantage of learning from all the men and male insights in scenarios where only men are doing the talking. We can then get together, just women/females and exchange ideas and insights among ourselves.  This gives women more opportunity for spiritual growth, insight and learning. I'm wondering if men are getting left out of a good number of ideas and even getting left behind.

The other thing that often jumps out at me, is that Paul said women cannot be preachers because he doesn't want women to be in "control" of men.

Over my lifetime I've listened to numerous teachers and preachers and lectures and so forth and I've never felt like any of these people were in "control" of me.

If I disagreed with any of them, I might not have been able to say something right then and there, but I've never felt like I couldn't express my outlook at some other time.

I don't see how being a preacher or a teacher or a lecturer puts one person in "control" of another.

Your question (how does it hurt males) seems to not appreciate that most of us engaged in this site are progressive Christian site and we have moved beyond or some have never had any issues with women voices in the Church. For example, I attended grad school in the 80s and my class included both male priests or seminarians, lay people and women including a woman priest/minister. I also have a college (female) friend who is a  priest. I am also active on Spong's old site and there are numerous women pastors/leaders who contribute and are heard. Actually, I haven't encountered any men is decades who have problems with women having an equal voice in the Church or spiritual matters. Of course, outside PC there are some leaders of the Catholic (and I'm sure other) church(s).. but who listens to them :+}  Are some men against women having equal or leadership voices? Seems so but I doubt any of them labeled themselves progressive or liberal.

I don't think women have more opportunity for spiritual growth: some have grown and continue to grow, others not so much - jut like men. 

Are you quoting Paul or pseudo-Paul?

And, I too have never felt controlled by any teacher or preacher - although I guess it could be said that as children we were 'controlled' in what we were taught and how to think about thinks ........at least for a while.

8 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

Has anyone ever done that? Refused to leave when they have been voted out of office?

Refused to leave? No.

1 hour ago, Elen1107 said:

I wake up every day thanking Heaven for term limits. 

Good one and if 'he' loses and refuses to leave, he'll be shown the door ..........

13 minutes ago, Pipiripi said:

The conclusion is, better waisting my time believe in God, then waisting my time don't believing in nothing. Just following man teachings. Believe in a fantasy created by man between 200 years ago

That is not a true faith response, just hedging your bet.........

What fantasy?

3 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

There's a book being supported here on the PC website called, 'The Spiritual Danger of Donald Trump'. It looks like it might be a good and interesting read.

https://progressivechristianity.org/resources/the-spiritual-danger-of-donald-trump/

I haven't read it but most of us know the trumpster is a 'danger' on many levels to us as individuals and as Americans (and the world).  

50 minutes ago, Pipiripi said:

My friend if something that not exist for me I don't used something that doesn't exist. Find out why you have the year that you have now I correctly. My believe have a beginning and an ending story. My believe have names from the first persons on this world. A father and a mother. Your believing begin in the middle of history and ended when you die. But we true Christians will have eternally life. If God not exist, if I die what I have to loose? Nothing.  But what about there is a God, and I don't believe? Isn't it better to believe in God?

Actually Jesus's earthly time was not at the beginning, perhaps more to the middle so I' right on target :+}

Careful P as now you're judging who will have and who won't have eternal life - 'true Christians' don't make such judgements.

45 minutes ago, Pipiripi said:

The word of God is: " Belief in Jesus and keep God's 10 Commandments. 

That would need to be spelled out in greater detail P. 

Seemingly the Word is spoken and followed by belief or better a faith response to the Word, to Jesus.

22 hours ago, JosephM said:

In my view, individual and ethnic teaching and education. A pew research poll shows that Blacks place more importance on ethnicity than other ethnic backgrounds. We Italians were once in that boat in the US as were the Irish and other groups and there was much violence. Peaceful assimilation into society requires that your ethnic background not be more important than the society you are assimilating into. Otherwise, it seems to me,  peace will not come as 'them' and 'us' refuses to exist as one.

This statement misses the point:

the Italians and the Irish were..........white. After 'a while' it became easier and easier to assimilate because they looked liked everyone else - they were WHITE. However, it is also obvious that some Italians and Sicilians greatly valued their ethnicity for decades after the boats as did some Irish - something that becomes obvious every St. Patrick's Day.  This has waned as time has gone on but no one, consciously or unconsciously, was systematically stacking the desk against the Italians and the Irish for 400+ years.

Black men and women are not white and indisputable arguments have been made (acceptable by any fair minded person) that there has been systemic (i.e. built into society) 'racism' against blacks for centuries. The racism begins with the 'introduction' of black men and women to America ............as slaves. Of course they have placed importance on ethnicity (their shared group): they were not brought here (from their homelands) to be assimilated; when freed, they were still not allow to assimilate by many whites especially in certain states; Jim Crow never let them assimilate; anti-civil rights did not ease their way for assimilation; George Wallace prevented their assimilate; the KKK actively prevented any assimilation; and, the indiscriminate stopping (and targeting) of black men by police and the brutal treatment of blacks does not shout assimilation. Even the greater vulnerability to Covid - as opposed to the Irish or Italians - speaks to not being equally assimilated into the American society. 

Peaceful assimilation into society happens only when that society and its people allow, encourage and let happen the true assimilation of others into that society. 

11 hours ago, PaulS said:

Conspiracy theories and distraction seem to abound in the US.  I would suggest trying to stick with the issue.  But each to their own.

They do indeed, especially in certain (Republican) circles.

Thank the gods of politics that the 'other side' (the Dems) don't need conspiracy theories, they just listen the the trumpster: "person, woman, man, camera, tv."

And don't forget the crowd size from day 1. This stuff can't be made up as it is the sad reality of the orange man.

11 hours ago, PaulS said:

These statues and memorials were never placed just as historical markers, they were only ever placed to honor those they represent and what they stood for.

The community at the time were racist, so who cares that they thought white supremacy was appropriate.  It's not.  

Exactly and what they represented was the support of slavery of other human beings.

14 minutes ago, Elen1107 said:

I don't think that you know what it's like to be hurt so badly, so constantly and continuously that one is rendered simply incapable and unable to forgive.

Or to have forgiveness used as a way of getting away with crimes and then re-perpetrating  them, and then blaming the victimized for forgiving them and letting them get away with it, and making out like their perpetrations are then the victims fault because they forgave them and let them get away with it.

I hope you never experience anything like this. But it is important to know that these things do happen and they need to be looked at and addressed. 

Neither of us knows the other.............and no one is saying anything should not be examined and addressed.

On 7/25/2020 at 7:31 AM, Tarquin said:

I have some experience with Sufism and have recently returned to identifying as a Christian rather than a Muslim. I can explain about that if anyone is interested but suffice to say I see no conflict between the two and my return to Jesus isn't in the manner of a rejection of other things. It's more than that. 

But that's a different issue, what I wanted to say was that my understanding of Sufism has always been that it is not in fact exclusively Islamic but that it is essentially a method of 'waking up' or finding God. As such it is one of many such paths which have always existed and the method is not in fact a religious one but the method has traditionally manifested in religions because societies were until recently religious. 

So yes, you can have Christian Sufism and I know of several examples. 

Also I would say that 'Sufism' (again, just my opinion) is not actually a word known by Sufis traditionally. It was coined in the 19th century by a Christian theologian but there is no Middle Eastern equivalent. There is 'the state of being a Sufi' but that is not an ism and no Sufi would really call themselves such. An exact equivalent would be the Western Gurus who claim to be enlightened. You kind of suspect that making such a claim speaks against it and the person who never claims enlightenment is more likely to be. That's the idea anyway. 

Jesus is particularly relevant to Sufis and Sufis generally regard him as being a Sufi in the sense I mentioned above. 

Anyway, is an interesting discussion in this thread... I hope it can get resurrected!

There is a site called contemplative life.org: it is progressive and as you scroll down it has a small section of Sufism.

Also have been reading John Hick's book 'The Fifth Dimension' where he talks about the various human responses to the Transcendent and in one part mentions Al-Junayd's saying, "the water takes its color from the vessel containing it."

We are the vessels.

On 7/25/2020 at 6:35 AM, PaulS said:

Would be great to hear about other people's practice or any advice! 

Not so much something I consider a practice but mine in a continual and lifelong awareness, consideration and, at times, 'conversation' with 'God.'

Greeting 4BM,

Our back stories have a lot in common. Hope you enjoy the site and the conversations.