fatherman

Thanks for the encouragement, but I'm more trying to make a point than express a concern for myself. I'm comfortable with where I am. I'm just curious about the consensus of this forum on the subject. I'm upset with the views expressed by some specific progressive Christians in my former faith community.I want to know if they are in the minority.

As I've said, I do not believe Romansh is a troll! Though many atheists troll Christian sites. We've had our trolls in the 10 or more years I've been a participant here, but they were not atheists. They were conservatives. The atheists troll the conservatives!

So many wonderful responses to the question! Thanks. I'll weigh in. I'll confess that I've seen a lot of elitist bs from PCs on this issue. I may be one of the few here who has actually been a member of a 100% progressive congregation. Seriously, like they had the 8 points posted outside of the sanctuary! I'm no longer a member because I took a music ministry job at another church, it's a moderate congregation; conservatives and liberals. I have found that I am more free to explore my honest questions and emerging beliefs without the dogma of the left or the dogma of the right. It's interesting to see that the conservatives at my church are adamantly anti-intellectual. I've also seen the PC church bad mouth the less intellectual more faith-based Christians. I'm not accusing any of you here of that kind of behavior, but I don't like it when I see it.

My personal view is that intellect can actually be a blockade for my faith, but that I can't really help who I am. I grew up in a highly intellectual family. My father has a PHD in physics and became a Presby minister. My mom has a master's in education and taught civics for 20 years. So, my natural tendency is to approach matters of faith with intellect. But it never made me a more faithful Christian. I had to become less dependent on logic and reason to experience the mystery of God. Now that's what worked for me. Doesn't mean that works for everyone. Not everyone even wants to experience the mystery of God.

Let me give you a practical example for the question of intellect. I'm a voice teacher. Some teachers teach the science of singing. To achieve good singing you have to make this muscle to do this and this organ to do that. I may understand all that, but that's not how I actually sing or teach. I know how it should sound and feel. I know the signs of good singing. Also, ultimately, singing is worthless without expression. That's harder to teach. There's no science for that. You can make all of the muscles do the right thing, sing all of the notes correctly and yet it's still not music. I'd rather listen to a bad singer with expression than an amazing singer with no expression. Just as I am moved more by the faith of the intellectually handicapped woman in my choir who prays for me when I'm struggling. What does she know? What of Spong or which letters Paul actually wrote does she know? She knows how to express faith and love.

It's hard to get out of my head. It's hard to let go all of my conundrums, christologies, theologies, and ideas, and just be a Christian.

Well not being a Christian here is my take on the question.

 

It does not answer the question directly.

 

Atheists are on average more 'intelligent' than theists. This is reflected in the better education one has received, the more likely there is a lack of belief. But teasing apart education and intelligence is tricky.

 

Of course there are incredibly stupid atheists (should we end up judging this way) and very smart theists. Now personally I have not seen any studies on the intelligence of traditional Christians versus progressive Christians; but I would hold off pronouncing a conclusion until I have seen some data.

 

Speaking from personal observation, I have taken on cultural values and beliefs of my peers at least to some degree. The two universities I have inhabited were relatively godless places. Though the church I attended in my youth, I think I could say the same thing.

Personal question. Why have you posted more than I have on a Christian site even though I'm a Christian and you are not? I don't think you're a troll. Just curious.

It might be easier to believe the dud bits of the bible if one has a lower IQ, but there's plenty of high IQ people that believe in the dud bits too, so I don't think intelligence is necessarily reflective of reasons for belief. I think it's got a lot more to do with one's culture, upbringing, societal experience, and life experiences in general that contribute to how we think and what we do or do not believe

Talk more about "dud bits" and the relationship between "one's culture, upbringing, societal experience, and life experiences" and Christianity. Not disagreeing with you, but I just want to know a little more about what you mean.

I'm sorry you've had such a bad string of luck with church clergy. That's terrible! I call it luck because I've been a part of 6 church communities in my life and not a one had the problems you're describing. I think you should hang in there. The VAST majority of churches do not have sexual misconduct issues with their pastor. One study shows that less only 1.29% of people experience sexual misconduct with clergy. 10% of married clergy have had affairs which is far less than the general population (70%).

Is there another reason you're struggling with going to church?

This is not intended to be an attack or a judgement, just an honest discussion worth having.

I've been around progressive Christians who have a bias with intelligence and education. I've held that bias at times. I've gotten the impression that some believe that the dumber you are, the less progressive you are. Perhaps we believe that conservatives are getting it wrong and we are getting it right.

So this begs the question:

1.) if you believe that the smarter you are the more progressive you are apt to be

2.) If you believe that Progressive Christianity is a better path than other Christian paths

Then how smart do you have to be to be a good Christian?

Perhaps you think that's a loaded question. So I'll ask it differently:

Does Intelligence make you a better Christian?

If the answer is yes, then what would you tell someone with a low IQ?

I realize that I've made an assumption that there is a way to determine what a "good Christian" is. We all have our definitions. For me, the fundamental quality of a good Christian is loving. If you get that wrong, then you get everything else wrong. Like when I go to a new Italian restaurant, I always get the spaghetti and meatballs, because if they can't make that, then how are they going to make any Italian dish worth eating?

As far as I'm concerned, there is room for the supernatural ways of God in PC. I really don't think God cares what we believe about it. If God's gonna do it, he's gonna do it. And he's certainly done it to me. Welcome to the board!

Hey Rhino,

This is a tough situation. I go to a church where I disagree theologically with many of its members. I also disagree with some of the United Methodist doctrine. For example, their official stance against same sex marriage. I attended a very progressive church for 15 years. I loved going to a church where everybody agreed, but I felt that I was missing something. As I started exploring a relationship with Jesus, and studying the Bible. I found that I was increasingly at odds with people. Many progressive reject much of the Bible, or at least the orthodox views of it, and the notion that Jesus could be something other than a wisdom tradition.

I left to take a job as a music minister at a more moderate church...also Methodist. I have actually found that I was more free to explore my faith there than in the "open minded" church. Both Progressives and Conservatives can both be rigid and dogmatic. Even though I'm a progressive, I've found that a moderate church which encompasses a greater range of belief in its members has been better for me.

I would also add that Presbyterian Church USA is one of several churches that support gay marriage. PC USA is a good place for progressives because the conservatives branched off into 2 other Presby denominations. Worth a try!

The parable of the prodigal son is one of a series of parables Jesus wrote to teach others about forgiveness.

 

The main point of divergence between Jesus' theology and the theology of other religious groups in first century Palestine was Jesus' understanding of the mystical power of forgiveness. Jesus' understanding of forgiveness is the key that unlocks the meaning of the Kingdom teachings, including the parables.

 

Jesus' teachings on matters other than forgiveness don't sound a whole lot different than the teachings of other groups. Jesus, like the Pharisees -- and, indeed, like most religious groups of the time -- believed in the importance of ethics, moral choices, and obedience to a code of moral conduct because, well, it's the right thing to do. So Jesus certainly didn't invent the idea of moral codes. But he did build on the radical teachings of the Jewish author we call Job to present a minority understanding of how to be in relationship with God. The minority understanding of Jesus (and Job before him) presented a model for relationship with God that was built on forgiveness (not mercy, not atonement, and not contract law); on agape/love (not obedience, not fear, and not contract law); on a "thinking" faith (not blind faith, not prophecy, and not revelation); on humbleness (not religious humility, not religious salvation, and not on status addiction);on radical inclusiveness (not clan chosenness, not honour-shame cultural norms, and not sectarian segregation); on courage (not fate, not predestination, and not abdication); and finally on the totally crazy idea that God is not a lone male figure (YHWH) but two distinct and separate figures, one male and one female (YHWH and his Asherah?), who together are the One God and make all decisions together based on mutual forgiveness, agape, thinking faith, humbleness, radical inclusiveness, and courage. As above, so below.

 

The parable of the prodigal son reflects Jesus' theology, Jesus' understanding of how we can be in full relationship with God during our lives as human beings.

 

Jesus' parables always ran counter to the Wisdom literature of his time -- what Michael Coogan once called "anti-Wisdom Wisdom" in his commentary on Job. It was Wisdom literature (currents of which ran through most major world religions of the time) which taught that obedience to divinely revealed laws and cultural norms would guarantee "happiness" and eventual acceptance into the heavens (in whatever form "the heavens" were envisioned in a particular religion). Those who willfully disobeyed God's laws (again, in whatever form they were envisioned) would surely be punished -- and rightly so. Wisdom literature (which was already ancient by the time Jesus lived) insisted that Materialist laws of cause-and-effect governed all Creation (including God's own choices) so stability, order, safety, and happiness could be built into a society by observing Creation's laws in scientific ways and then applying reason, justice, and piety to the whole affair.

 

Of course, the world doesn't really work this way, and Jesus knew it. He saw a completely different paradigm in operation in the world around him, a paradigm that blended both Materialist and non-Materialist laws of science in complex and intertwined ways. His parables reflect the anti-Wisdom Wisdom paradigm he observed. He didn't invent what he saw. He simply allowed himself to see what was already there. He allowed himself to hear what God was already saying. And then he tried to share with others the process of emotional, intellectual, spiritual, and physical change that would allow them to willingly and voluntarily enter "the kingdom of the heavens" as Jesus himself had done -- as any of us can do, according to Jesus (though it's a lot of hard work!).

 

The Kingdom parables are confusing, messy, non-linear, multi-layered, and filled with anti-Wisdom Wisdom because life is confusing, messy, non-linear, multi-layered, and filled with all sorts of irrational (but totally wonderful) emotions like love and gratitude and devotion and forgiveness and the courage to change.

 

Paul didn't agree with any of this, but that's another story.

This is a superb post, Realspiritik. But you know, of course, what I have to zone in on. Talk a little more about Asherah. I thought she was considered a foreign god, connected not to YHWH but to Anu.

I've been the prodigal before. I've been welcomed back into a home. So this story is powerful to me. I think that one of the messages can be that Jesus came for the sinners. The righteous will get their reward, but it's the prodigals in the world that Jesus focuses on the most. He would leave the 99 to find the lost sheep. It's a warning to the righteous to be compassion to those who are struggling rather than think themselves better.

apexcone. I'm going to challenge you a bit on this, for the sake of this discussion of your provocative article. So what do you tell your clients who are having marriage trouble? what do you tell people who are planning on getting married? If I was looking for a family therapist to work out marital issues, and I looked you up and found this article, I'm quite certain I would go elsewhere. It seems like it would be like going to Richard Dawkins for faith issues.

I'm happy to hear you are in a successful marriage as well. I had assumed that you were not. I confess that I view a family therapist's perspective differently than a bitter divorcee's.

I write this more for myself than for your sake or even for discussion's sake.

I'm thinking of the people of my generation in my life. Most of them are Christians; both progressive and otherwise. A group of us all got married and had kids around the same time; mid-nineties. One couple is divorced and one is separated ( out of the 10 or so couples). I don't know why the first couple got a divorce other than their life views had become radically different and she stopped drinking. The second couple, the husband is an alcoholic and a pill addict...possibly an adulterer. The rest are finding a way to make it work.

I'll be candid. I've struggled (and given in) with all of those vices and on top of that I'm bipolar, and what motivates me to stay vigilant against it all is the salvation of my family. I will do anything to make it work. Now, all the vigilance in the world wouldn't make a difference if my wife didn't 100% believe in our vows of richer poorer sickness health better worse. We both believe in that. We both believe in reaching out to a God who cares about our family when the going get's tough.

It must be frustrating for you to see so many marriage fail. I wonder what percentage of the couples you counsel are already on their way to divorce. How many healthy happy couples do you counsel? I just saw a headline that said only 17% of marriages are happy. That's sad, but I wonder how much of that is due to changes in our views on marriage. Perhaps a 100 years ago, if a woman had a man that provided and didn't beat her often, she was "happy". She knew that she and her children would not starve. Perhaps the man would be "happy" if his wife was a good cook, was obedient, and bore him children. But that's not enough for us anymore. Women need husbands that are sensitive and know how to listen and tend to her. Men are forever struggling with their understanding of what it means to be a man in an age where it has been completely redefined. It's not enough for a man to provide, and it's just as likely that a woman will provide or they'll do it together. He's cooking, cleaning, mowing the lawn, changing diapers, fixing the car, taking his daughter to buy clothes, or perhaps even staying home with the kids. And she's doing the same, too. Women are damned if they work and damned if they don't in the eyes of society (especially of other women). Our social structure is being reconstructed post women's lib. Just as the South was reconstructed with the emancipation...and it was bloody. The casualties of this reconstruction is the family...at least as it was, the nuclear family. Now families are taking on all kinds of shapes and sizes...not all bad.

Perhaps marriage is not realistic in the modern 1st world. Perhaps we are so autonomous that we don't need it anymore. I'd be a wreck of a person without it. I'm very lucky. My parents, so far, are still together. They have a better marriage than their parents. My brothers have good marriages. They are very happy. All of my cousins are married and are happy. The only divorce in my family was due an adulterous gay affair. They might have survived the adultery, but there's no fighting sexual orientation. I hope my children marry having seen what marriage means, and that they know that the impossible is possible.

Divorce rates:

India = 1.1 (population 1.2 billion)

That's a lot of people where marriage is working. Maybe we need to go back to arranged marriage.

So what is India doing right? Reasons sited are:

1.) Families are more likely to choose a compatible mate than if the couple marries "for love" . Compatibility includes: Social compatibility, economic compatibility, educational compatibility and now a days even personal compatibility;

2.) Families support the marriage. They will do everything they can to support the marriage's success, including forcing the couple to stay together and work it out.

I'm happily married (20) years. But it was unhappy for quite a few years. We refused to get a divorce. And what I've learned is that expectations and actions are at the core of a healthy marriage. My personal belief from my experience is that If you tie the success of marriage to loving feelings instead of loving actions, then your marriage will fail. Grace has a lot to do with it as well. Many partners will break vows at some point, but the most important vow in a Christian marriage is that you stay together (in sickness and in health, etc.). Surveys have also shown that divorce is lower among people of faith.

So, I don't accept that marriage is not working for the majority of people worldwide. But I do accept that it is not working well in this country. Other western countries have a minority of divorced people.

I also want to make clear that it is not my place to judge whether a couple should get a divorced or not. My beliefs on marriage apply to my marriage. You will have your own beliefs. I just know what has worked for me.

TCPC is certainly an organization participating in the saving of Christ. I also find the mystical approach to knowing Jesus to be meaningful, but not everyone finds spiritual/mystical experiences to be natural or welcome. The saving of Christ, to me, means to act in the world with love in name of Jesus Christ. If you are loving, compassion, non-judgmental, or anything else that is the opposite of what is hurting the name of Christ in the world, then maybe people will begin attaching their impressions of Christ with you instead of the negative presentations of Jesus and Christianity.

I used to be very reserved in letting people know that I was a Christian. I would make up alternative words to "Christian" that would disassociate me from evangelicals and fundamentalists. But I've decided that calling myself a Christian and being a loving presence in the world was my little way of "saving" Jesus.

It has to start with forgiveness. I think that people are very angry with conservatives as a whole because of some of the not-so-loving public, political displays we've seen over the years. I think it's similar to the way people judge Muslims based on the extremists. I once expressed my Universalist perspective in my Sunday School class at church. It's a mix of conservatives, moderates, and liberals...imagine that! One of the conservatives said, "Now see! We can be friends and worship together even though I think you are dead wrong. I just think that's great." And I did think it was great. He respected me, and I respected him. More often than not, that is my experience with conservatives. He's a loving, mission-oriented, devoted, Christian man.

Facebook can make it worse, or it can make it better. It's what you make of it. Are you posting words and images that bring people together or antagonize them? Yes, I'm dismayed by some of the attitudes of people out there, but as Atticus Finch from To Kill a Mockingbird says

 

 

"First of all," he said, "if you can learn a simple trick, Scout, you'll get along a lot better with all kinds of folks. You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view […] until you climb into his skin and walk around in it."

Conservatives are getting desperate. They see their values becoming more and more sequestered. They want to live in a world that affirms their beliefs and behavior. We all want that to an extent....to an extent. Can we not have a little compassion for them? Love thine enemies. And are they even really our enemies? In my case, we're talking about my aunts and cousins and friends and church family.

One question to consider is HOW can we be inclusive with conservatives/fundamentalists. As progressives, we feel attacked by conservatives. We want to be defense and lash out. But I believe language and respect is part of the strategy with how to do this. We do this already for other groups when it comes to the names we use for God, the music we sing in church, the liturgy we use, and the kindness and respect we extend. This past week's current events were a great opportunity for using these strategies with conservatives regarding marriage equality. I was, in some regards, successful in having meaning dialog instead of gloating and antagonizing. Here are a few things that I wrote on facebook. I share this not to show off or think myself better, but to demonstrate that when you extend respect and base the discussion in terms that conservatives relate to, the likelihood of inclusion is possible.

Homophobia - fear of homosexuals

We're really slinging this word around a lot these days. There are homophobes out there, that is true, but none of my conservative friends are afraid of gay folks; nor are there beliefs on the matter derived from phobias. They believe being a Christian means believing and accepting scripture as truth and fact to the best of their understanding .

Let me be clear, I don't believe my faith nor anybody's should be used to deny civil rights to anyone, and I know there's a lot of hurt out there, but this name calling is misguided and ugly. It will not help heal our country.

 

Many of my friends both liberal and conservative affirmed this sentiment. The dialog led me to write some stuff that many of you have heard, read, or written yourself.

Believing it is a sin is not hateful either, though there are hateful people. This nation is deeply divided, and names are only going to make it worse. We need healing, not finger pointing

 

 

 

I do not believe it is a sin in today's context. But I do believe, or think it reasonable to believe, that the context described in the Bible was sinful in some regard. The context being that the ancient Hebrews (as in Leviticus) had designated the purpose of sex to be solely for building a nation (God's chosen, as they believed). Any seed wasted would be a seed that could be used to procreate. other cases include pedophilia, rape, and religious sex with a male prostitute of a foreign God. There was no loving context for homosexuality. Men would either be having sex out of wedlock (another sin in that day) or adultery. So I think the scriptural assertion that homosexuality was sin is correct given the context.

But today's world has nothing to do with nation building, pedophilia, and the like. Homosexuality has an appropriate context now. It is not a sin for gay people to be married even by Christian standards, as I see it. I see no conflict in my personal belief that homosexuality is not a sin and my Christian faith.

one conservative response was this.

 

 

that is the best explanation I have heard yet for why context would have been different biblically than it is now. Awesome food for thought, I have never thought of it that way.

And now, this opens up the possibility of a civil discussion. She knows that I'm not going to call her names or disparage her for her beliefs. She knows that I'm not ignoring what was written in the scriptures. How can a conservative have a legitimate discussion with a progressive about the scriptures if I don't start with what is actually written? Cons have there ###### and so do progressives. If the conversation starts with the ######, it is doomed.

You are right. That wasn't fair.

I started a non-fiction book a few years ago, too. Got about 45,000 words in and couldn't finish it without going back to university. So I know the feeling.

 

If I can help at all, let me know.

 

I hope your music is part of the novel.

 

Best,

Jen

There are a few musical elements. The key to the whole book is The Prayer of St. Francis which the main character knows from singing this song

I still have our conversation saved off. I revisited it recently. I never finished the novel involving it. 50k words, then stumped.

And when I said "we all thought she was crazy", I exclude myself from that list.

Hey fatherman, it's so awesome to hear about your journey! I love your list. Mind you, I was a bit surprised to notice my name part way down, but what the heck. What I'm really wondering is . . . why isn't chocolate on the list, too?

 

My list is similar to yours with a few differences. Like you, my list has got longer with time, and, like you. I feel like a square peg in a round hole in church circles. ( I still self-identify as a heretical Christian.) Yet when we believe with all our heart and mind and soul and strength in God's love, we end up needing faith community more, not less.

 

I especially like one of your final insights: "that there is no such thing as supernatural, but there are things that happen that cannot yet be explained by science. all miraculous occurrences are natural." Over the past few years, I've been working hard with Jesus and few other angels to understand better how God builds the fundamental forces (gravity, strong force, weak force, EMF) and how these forces relate to the "emotional" aspects we feel in Creation (Truth, Love, Forgiveness, and Diversity). I've also been using my background in chemistry to better understand the periodic table of elements from God's point of view. (Early days yet on that one.)

 

Yeah, I'm still doing the channelling thing you guys all hated. Maybe one day I'll be able to actually help with what I've learned through my years of quantum conversations. Maybe not. Everybody has free will, so nobody has to accept my contributions. Really. I'm realistic about that.

 

I do know for certain -- and rejoice in the daily wonder of it -- that there's no question and no struggle God the Mother and God the Father won't help us with each and every day of our lives.

 

Take care, all. Jesus says hi.

 

Jen

No hate coming for me. You've been a very helpful influence. Glad to see you! And I'm still interested in the notion of quantum communication.

The more we learn about genetics, the less I believe in free will. It's interesting to me that I come from a family of believers for many generations on my Dad's side. And my wife's dad's side as well. But my son has been an atheist since he was in preschool. He might always be one (15 now) I think it's just the way he's made.

So was I born a believer? Could I be anything else than that? I believe science will know the answer to that in my lifetime. Maybe Calvin was right? Maybe God chooses. #whoadidijustsaythat

Yes! Ok, ok. Circumstances would have to change in order for me to change my mind about what I believe. It happened fairly recently, in fact. A very deeply held belief. But choice isn't arbitrary for me, nor is it sub or unconscious But you're making a good point.

Hi fatherman,

 

I think beliefs are artifacts of unconscious habitual mental tendencies. They are empty in themselves, but are constructed to protect us against the unknown. While we think we are aware ofour conscious beliefs, and that they are accurate, we can't say for sure. We don't know if what we state as a belief is what we believe unconsciously, since much of that was planted early in our lives. So, I think beliefs are a product of memories of the past.

 

There is an old expression that says: "There aren't any atheists in foxholes". If that's true, what does the atheist truly "believe" to make him/her pray in a tight spot? Does it even matter, since there is no evidence either way?

 

Steve

I disagree with much of what you are saying here. Let's take a belief. I believe that God wants us to love one another. I believed it initially because I was taught it. My dad used to say "We love, because God first loved us" As I began to take my faith into my own hands, I believed it because it was written. And now that I am a middle-agish adult, I believe it not only because of my faith and my relationship with God, but because there is evidence to suggest that our bodies are wired to need love and to give love. The chemical state of our brain is affected by this. It rewards us for being loving. Are there unconscious elements at play? Perhaps. But it is primarily my choosing to believe that this is what God intended for us. In fact, I believe that the primary purpose of the creation of humanity is Love.

Is this empty? It is not. It affects my behavior, my thoughts, and my decisions. It affects my understanding of the nature of my relationship with God.

Beliefs are certainly built with or against memories in the past. But they are ultimately set by experience. If you experience life in the living of the past, then your assertion is true. However, if you are living in the present, it is not the case. And perhaps, there is no "belief" at all in the present. On that point, we might agree!

As far as the atheist in the foxhole. Does it matter if it is true or not? Perhaps not. Perhaps it is in the act of surrender and trust and prayer that puts a person into a state to survive and persevere.

I agree, romansh. I think our beliefs have both a conscious and unconscious component, and that the beliefs we have about ourselves, others, and our unique vision of reality are mainly of the unconscious variety.

 

 

Steve

I guess I've never thought about this. Indulge me. I reason out my beliefs to a degree, but I'm also intuitive about them. I'm not a scientist about personal beliefs. I'm not saying I'm anti-science like with global warming or something. I just don't apply the scientific method do determine my personal beliefs....about life, love, death, faith, relationships. Much of what I believe is a conscious choice. I believe some things that have no supporting evidence. I just choose to believe them because they work for me. I'm perhaps even superstitious. I know it's not rational, but what can you do? Or there are things that I just feel in my heart are true. (like Bigfoot, lol) That's dangerous ground, i admit! There are some things I choose to believe so that I can sleep at night. For example, I tell myself that the day of my death is set. there is is nothing I can do or not do to change it...so why sweat it? Is that true? I don't know. I don't really care. But much of what I believe is in a gray zone of some sort.

Example, I'm not sure if I believe in the Resurrection, but I believe something immensely powerful happened; powerful enough that we're still talking about it; an empty tomb, angels, an explosive world-changing idea, a lingering spirit, a compelling hoax...or a resurrection. I don't rule out the impossible, because I DO believe that all things are possible with God.