Which theological stream influenced your views the most?

[Lucian Hodoboc]

According to Wikipedia, "progressive Christianity draws on the insights of multiple theological streams including evangelicalism, liberalism, neo-orthodoxy, pragmatism, postmodernism, Progressive Reconstructionism, and liberation theology". Which of these theological streams would you say has influenced you the most and why? 🤨

[thormas]

Welcome Lucian.

I don't typically this in terms of theological streams, more so, I think in terms of authors/theologians. I am drawn to those authors who accept a 21st C worldview and who, finding value in Christianity, attempt to retell the Christian Story to a present day audience. I think theologians like John Hick and John Macquarie are essential, along with Gregory Baum, Gabriel Moran, Roger Haight and a number of biblical scholars. I also like a philosopher from the eastern faith expression: David Bentley Hart.

However, if you ever want to discuss a particular stream, could be interesting.

[Burl]

5 hours ago, Lucian Hodoboc said:

According to Wikipedia, "progressive Christianity draws on the insights of multiple theological streams including evangelicalism, liberalism, neo-orthodoxy, pragmatism, postmodernism, Progressive Reconstructionism, and liberation theology". Which of these theological streams would you say has influenced you the most and why? 🤨

None of the above.  My theological goal is to read scripture accurately in the context of the authors, but any theology is a distant second to prayer and gratitude.

[PaulS]

I would have to say evangelicalism, primarily because that was the theology I was indoctrinated with and that which ultimately helped me research and understand Christianity better when I rejected it as an adult.

[JosephM]

If i was forced to pick one i would say Progressive Reconstructionism. Why? Only because it is the closest to my experience but i was not aware of any such a defined stream while it was happening. (deconstruction and reconstruction) To me, putting a label on a stream , while i understand why people do, does little to accurately portray the complexity of what influenced a person.

[BillM]

For me, Lucian, I find theology (what we think of God) interesting but often confusing and problematic. After all, there are so many gods in the world and even monotheists can't seem to agree as to who/what God is and God's attributes. IMO, PC attempts to be a big umbrella while, of course, preserving something of a liberal Christian approach. I tend to favor cafeterianism (ha ha) and have my own theology that is influenced by Borg, Crossan, Spong, and some of the process theologians (that I can understand). But I am far more concerned about what I do and how I live rather than trying to find or hold to absolute positions where beliefs are concerned. In this sense, I'm more influenced by what Jesus taught and did than by all the systematic theologies that attempt to, perhaps, put God in a box. So, for me, PC is more about how I live rather than a concise list of theological beliefs.  

[murmsk]

My journey came out of my need for consistency . Being a person of science, dismissing data simply because it doesn’t fit a desired conclusion rubs against everything that is me. So if i am going to read the Bible I can’t ignore the more distasteful sections ie: support of slavery and its view of woman for example. I needed a way to read the Bible and view of Jesus and God that is 100% consistent whether in reading about love or that woman shouldn’t speak in church. Authors like Markus Borg encouraged my view that is now common in progressive circles that the Bible are a group of writings, songs and poems written by faithful people, and reflects their views of God, Jesus, history and life. 

So where does that leave me with respect to influences??

s

[FireDragon76]

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, primarily.  Lately I've been trying to study more of Langdon Gilckey's thought.

[Neachley]

My background is evanglicalism. But it is this which led me to a more progressive understanding of God and the Bible. Increasingly I am seeing a church that preaches about poverty and the marginalised yet does nothing for them. 

[Burl]

I identify evangelicalism with Billy Graham.  It is a form of Protestant polity where dogma is linked to a single charismatic leader who owns and operates the church as a sole proprietor.

 

[thormas]

22 hours ago, Neachley said:

My background is evanglicalism. But it is this which led me to a more progressive understanding of God and the Bible. Increasingly I am seeing a church that preaches about poverty and the marginalised yet does nothing for them. 

Interesting. I see something similar concerning abortion and keeping the child. Life is believed to be sacred and abortion sinful. Yet shouldn't we applaud the woman or girl who has the courage of belief and keeps her child, shouldn't we as Church who professes the sacredness of life and putting others before self do everything in our power to house, feed, provide expert medical care and psychological/spiritual support for these women in their hours of need (particularly those women without family), shouldn't we build 'mansions' to house the pregnant women and eventually them and their newborn for a period of time, shouldn't we celebrate them, their decision, their sacrifice, their love?

 

[Burl]

On 10/29/2019 at 9:58 AM, Neachley said:

My background is evanglicalism. But it is this which led me to a more progressive understanding of God and the Bible. Increasingly I am seeing a church that preaches about poverty and the marginalised yet does nothing for them. 

There are many churches that fall short, but remember in Christianity the focus is on improving the spiritual condition of the Christian giver.

The metric is not how much poverty is relieved (the poor will be with us always) but on how much suffering the Christian is willing to accept on behalf of the sufferer (widow’s mite).  

“Giving until it hurts” requires faith.  The well-off who give much out of their abundance are merely acting ethically.

The Buddhist understanding is similar.  The poor provide the better off with an opportunity for spiritual improvement.

Edited October 30, 2019 by Burl

[thormas]

11 minutes ago, Burl said:

There are many churches that fall short, but remember in Christianity the focus is on improving the spiritual condition of the Christian giver.

The metric is not how much poverty is relieved (the poor will be with us always) but on how much suffering the Christian is willing to accept on behalf of the sufferer (widow’s mite).  

“Giving until it hurts” requires faith.  The well-off who give much out of their abundance are merely acting ethically.

The Buddhist understanding is similar.  The poor provide the better off with an opportunity for spiritual improvement.

Doesn't the spiritual condition of the giver only improve if s/he gives himself away. 

Interesting metric but one wonders, with Chesterton, if Christianity has been tried and found wanting or found difficult and not tried (or simply sanitized unto meaninglessness)?

Or, to your point, perhaps we simply don't suffer enough, if we did there might be less poverty and a few more mansions for the unwed mothers.

Good post Burl!

 

[irreverance]

The stream that has influence me most is postmodernism. The authors that have influence me most are John Caputo, Peter Rollins, and Mark Taylor.