minsocal

I have a cat, now 18 years old. Several months ago, he seemed to have given up on life. I considered putting him down, he was that "bad off". Then, I thought, just make him comfortable. Ease his way. So I cleaned his head twice a day, combed him out ... and then I realized he was "down" because he could not do this for himself. It did not matter if I did it for him, he just needed to be clean. Well, he is still here. Cranky, as always. As healthy as an 18 year old cat could be.

Likewise Dutch, Myron

As for myself, I frequently revisit the of story of The Garden of Eden. Here is a story of a dawning, of becoming. Well, at least as I read it, anyway. It is a human story, very human. Somewhere along the way evolution spawned consciousness. The element of consciousness most important here is that of awareness. I am aware of myself, others, and the consequences of human actions. With that comes ... responsibility? I cannot change the laws of nature, but then, conscious awareness is now a "law of nature". Hmmmm ...

Unless I am mistaken, or my computer is malfunctioning, your comment is the only one on the 8 Points for the entire year of 2013. You might just have a point here.

As I scan through the 8 Points in brief review, I find community, purpose, sacrifice and work to be a major theme. This my understanding, at least and it has been the view of PC I have lived with most of my life. It is a constant return to Micah: "... do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God". Myron

To say that "t do not know" is one of the most honest and intimate responses a human could make.

Human consciousness is what it is for very good reasons. The constructs of time, place and causation are built into the structure and function of the evolved mammalian brain. We could not function without them. At the same time, they are constraints or boundaries few humans, if any, can transcend. In a sense, this is what Micah meant when he said, "... do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God".

I think that Jesus had a message to deliver. That message is not all that complex, is it? Are we hiding the message behind endless debate?

As C. G. Jung put it, there is no proper or prescribed objective notion of how anyone can or could access the transcendental. He followed Kant on this point, as well as Spinoza. You must find it within ... and what you find is OK.

There you have it ... to get "overly philosophical". The problem that some earlier Progressive Christians railed against.

Yes, I do. It was made clear some time ago. I'll go through it again, if you like.

It is entirely possible to reverse the question and ask "Why is God Not Love? If the first question is valid, as well as the second, then we know, to some degree, that we are human and not God. Not a bad fact to consider? It is not a new concept, BTW, as it has been around for a very long time.

Computer games are just that, "games", and not much more than that. They replicate some human motivations, but not all human motivations and they do not represent all of the choices we are able to make, not? So, all that is left is to develop games that tap positive emotions and positive motivations ... but that will not sell well, will it?

Norm, I have not been around this forum much of late, but i have to agree. We do seem to manufacture our own hell. But this is not necessary is it? Myron

How many times DO I need to tell you, I'm NOT Steve?

Your second quote refers to 'Steve' and I'm not 'Steve'. Why do you think I want to leave this site?

After due consideration, I am joining George in exiting this site for the last time. So long, all. Maybe another day. Myron

My apologies, I did not notice that you were a 'global moderator' and have expertise on the subject beyond mine.

George gave it a good run for the money. I see his point.

In the United States, children became a "protected class" because they are NOT fully developed. That change came about, in part, BECAUSE of Progressive-Liberal elements is our society, and those elements have a strong link to Progressive Christianity.

What does harm, and what does not? One VERY difficult concept, not? How does Progressive Christianity directly face this issue?

The term "sexual orientation" has more than one interpretation. It could be behavioral or emotional or both. As used in American academic circles it refers to the emotional or affective component, the behavioral component is another issue. The problem here is more complex than a definition. A concept to consider is the emotional development of children and the element of "doing harm". Where I live (California) all psychotherapists are mandated reporters. They must report pedophiles who act on their impulses. They are also governed by a set of ethics which requires them to "refer out" a client if their own internal ethics conflict. This is quite often the case, BTW. Another concept has to do with mutuality and consenting. That is where a line becomes drawn that, in my experience, most Progressive Christians I know are willing to accept.

No, your article says ... " Not all pedophiles are child molesters (or vice versa).

Could someone here tell me exactly what it means to be 'non-religious'?

I would add that my own perspective is one of a post-post modern, that is, as Jung put it "contemporary".