SOCIAL GROUP: Discussing Progressive Christianity

[Izzy]

-

[Izzy]

-

[sparrow]

Rosie, I think what I want is to stop making myself look at an ass online.

 

Thank you to all who responded. Quill, thank you very much for sharing your experience and trying to explain what I can't. Matryoshka and izzy, thank you for such an articulate response. You obviously spent some time and thought. And thank you to onceuponatime and EL as well, wise words.

 

Jenny, I am so sorry to contribute to the downward spiral here. I'll bow out now. Being the perpetual optimist, maybe it's has provided some definition as to the common purpose and direction? Please continue on learning from one another on this path. Really.

 

Kate, I understand and you're definitely not making yourself look like an ass. That's exactly why I've stopped posting on this thread. Fear of saying the wrong thing. I feel like if I share my feelings and beliefs they'll be picked apart and while people are typing that everyone's thoughts are welcome, I can't help but get a judge-y vibe. We're all just trying to work stuff out and a lot of us have baggage from our previous church/religion experiences. There are things that surprise me, that I hold on to from my past, that probably wouldn't be considered progressive enough and I consider myself agnostic. I think :blush: .

 

I'm sorry. I guess I don't know what I am, what I'm looking for, or what the tenets of Progressive Christianity are, but I do I know I don't like feeling yucky and this thread ended up making me feel that way for some reason. As I previously said, I've had issues with organized religion. Maybe I have issues with organized Social Groups, too :001_smile:.

 

My issue folks. Carry on. Be gentle with each other, please :001_wub: .

[Matryoshka]

Jenny, I am so sorry to contribute to the downward spiral here. I'll bow out now. Being the perpetual optimist, maybe it's has provided some definition as to the common purpose and direction? Please continue on learning from one another on this path. Really.

 

Everyone needs to stop bowing out! :crying: There will be no one left to talk to! Kate, I think you have comported yourself just fine on this thread; I don't think you've made yourself look bad at all. I have also really enjoyed your contributions to this thread!

 

Maybe we should start a new thread, with those 8 tenets of Progressive Christianity in the first post, so that there's less confusion? I haven't seen anyone say they have a problem with those points??

 

Especially considering this point:

 

3. Seek community that is inclusive of ALL people, including but not limited to: Conventional Christians and questioning skeptics, Believers and agnostics, Women and men, Those of all sexual orientations and gender identities, Those of all classes and abilities;

 

Which would include Kate and Quill, Mergath and Rosie all. Why is it so hard to have a conversation if we are all okay with not agreeing on all the details?? :001_unsure: I am also a perpetual optimist, so I'm still hoping we can make this happen. :cheers2:

 

I'd still like to talk about things that have been referred to but not actually discussed yet. Discussing some of the books mentioned, by Borg and others. Discussing things like the history of the bible and the historical Jesus, how might Paul fit in, the gnostic gospels, and yes, even things that might come from outside Christianity but still resonate. And I'm sure lots of stuff I haven't even thought of that others might have on their minds.

[Izzy]

-

[Amethyst]

Hi Everybody! I've been trying to read this whole thread before responding, but it's taking me a while. Just wanted to say that I"m following this thread with interest.

 

I'm a Catholic, but not feeling it any more. I try and try. We continue to go to Mass semi-regularly, but dh and I discuss our motives a lot. We go to meditate, to (try to) feel some connection with the spiritual realm, and because we are hypocrites. Three of our four kids are confirmed Catholics and I'm trying to hand in there until the youngest is confirmed next year. At this point I view Confirmation as a way to become a "card-carrying Catholic" as my dh calls it - that way if they ever decide to marry a Catholic, they'll be able to do it in the Catholic Church. Hypocrisy, I admit it.

 

As a Catholic, I never took the Bible literally. It still boggles my mind that some people do (no offense intended). I've always told my kids that the creation story is a story, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have something important to tell us. But it just occurred to me while reading this thread that I do take the New Testament literally. And perhaps that is what my stumbling block has been. Someone early in this thread mentioned Jesus as metaphor and really got me thinking. And I'm re-reading Life of Pi right now which (I think) is also taking the attitude that just because religions are stories doesn't mean that they don't have something important to tell us.

I feel like I didnt do a very good job of explaining why the topic of this thread interests me. About 15 years ago or so, dh brought home the book Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time. Dh really enjoyed it, I never finished it. I was confused when I read it. How can this guy call himself a Christian when he's basically saying that Jesus is not God??!! And I didn't see how it was supposed to help me have more faith. I've been struggling with faith for years and years, but still trying to raise my kids with faith. Not an easy task (witness the two oldest are agnostics). But dh is a real seeker. He isn't the type to just say, ah there's no God, let's not think about that anymore. No, he thinks about spirituality a lot. And pulls me along, like it or not.

 

At times, I thought that perhaps I needed a different denomination. Two problems with that. One, all the problems I have with the Catholic Church, would still be there (did He really rise from the dead? Did He exist? Does God interfere in our lives? What does it mean to have a relationship with a Being that I can't see or talk with?). The second problem with switching was the realization that religion is a cultural activity. And I am culturally a Catholic. It still remains, so far, the best way that I know how to seek the spiritual.

 

I've never heard the term "progressive Christianity" before but it intrigues me. I'm a pretty liberal person. As a homeschooler, as plenty of you have probably also experienced, I've bumped into so many homeschoolers that are extremely conservative in politics and orthodox in their faith. It has left me feeling very frustrated. Even with Catholic homeschoolers, I"m always the oddball.

 

So, I pulled out Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time. I'm going to start reading it again. I'm eager to read some of the other books mentioned here. This thread is already so long that I can't seem to finish it, but I'll be back often to read. I thank all of you for sharing your thoughts and feelings.

[Liz CA]

Just wanted to say one thing: Knowing Jesus and getting to know him and politics are not inextricably woven together. You don't have to become someone you are not in order to believe in Jesus.

 

:)

[sunflowerlady]

I have been reading this whole thread over the past few days and have found it very refreshing and helpful. I don't want it to go away either, so I am jumping right in. :)

 

Really, I have nobody IRL to discuss these things with. I do consider myself a Christian, but have been struggling with being "different". I am not a political conservative and the behavior of some Christians around election time was not good. I'll leave it at that. I understand why some people say they are uncomfortable identifying as Christian because other Christians would not consider them to be one. I identify as a Chrisitan, but am very different in various ways that other conservative Christians. They just don't know I am different because I keep it to myself.

 

Also, I struggle with some of the things in the Bible. Honestly, I don't struggle so much with creation as with other things in the OT. These things are the law involving treatment of women and also scriptures that say God told the Israelites to to into areas and kill everyone including women and children. But then he said "Thou shalt not murder". There is much more but maybe I can go into that later if the thread continues.

 

The points of Progressive Chrisitanity that were posted were helpful. Honestly, I totally expected this thread to be inclusive and that there would be people with varying beliefs , some more traditional and some less so. That is exactly what I am looking for her. Already I have been helped by many posts about how people see their spirituality.

[Guest]

I'm sorry for losing my temper. Carry on. :nopity:

[Onceuponatime]

I have been reading this whole thread over the past few days and have found it very refreshing and helpful. I don't want it to go away either, so I am jumping right in. :)

 

Really, I have nobody IRL to discuss these things with. I do consider myself a Christian, but have been struggling with being "different". I am not a political conservative and the behavior of some Christians around election time was not good. I'll leave it at that. I understand why some people say they are uncomfortable identifying as Christian because other Christians would not consider them to be one. I identify as a Chrisitan, but am very different in various ways that other conservative Christians. They just don't know I am different because I keep it to myself.

 

Also, I struggle with some of the things in the Bible. Honestly, I don't struggle so much with creation as with other things in the OT. These things are the law involving treatment of women and also scriptures that say God told the Israelites to to into areas and kill everyone including women and children. But then he said "Thou shalt not murder". There is much more but maybe I can go into that later if the thread continues.

 

The points of Progressive Chrisitanity that were posted were helpful. Honestly, I totally expected this thread to be inclusive and that there would be people with varying beliefs , some more traditional and some less so. That is exactly what I am looking for her. Already I have been helped by many posts about how people see their spirituality.

 

 

I think a lot of people struggle with the issues of violence and treatment of women in the Old Testament. One possibility is that these stories are just a reflection of their times and the attitudes of the people who wrote them. Human beings are often willing to enlist God as the reason or supposed supporter of their actions, after the fact. For example, suppose the Israelites conquered a tribe and then said that God was with them since they won, in spite of the cruelty. Then a reason for God's support of these actions must be manufactured. It is also possible that the stories are embellished and made worse than they actually were. Some history books question wether the Israelites did conquer the land to the extent it says they did in the Bible.

 

I think this kind of thing still goes on in the world today. Each people group writes its own history differently than the next.

[Izzy]

-

[Izzy]

-

[Izzy]

-

[Izzy]

-

[sunflowerlady]

I think a lot of people struggle with the issues of violence and treatment of women in the Old Testament. One possibility is that these stories are just a reflection of their times and the attitudes of the people who wrote them. Human beings are often willing to enlist God as the reason or supposed supporter of their actions, after the fact. For example, suppose the Israelites conquered a tribe and then said that God was with them since they won, in spite of the cruelty. Then a reason for God's support of these actions must be manufactured. It is also possible that the stories are embellished and made worse than they actually were. Some history books question wether the Israelites did conquer the land to the extent it says they did in the Bible.

 

I think this kind of thing still goes on in the world today. Each people group writes its own history differently than the next.

 

Those are good points. I never really thought about it in that way. My background in churches has been taking the Bible literally in every way. It is not easy to see the God of love that we are taught about doing these things. However, since we are taught the Bible is literal, then he must have done them-then where does that leave us. It leaves us questioning and sort of misttrusting of a God that loves us-except for numerous times he harms us or others. I am going to be looking about for some of the books mentioned here and get reading. :)

[sunflowerlady]

I'm only on Chapter 10 in Living the Questions but it already addresses all of those situations in the bible. I highly recommend reading this book! It helps you look at the bible more metaphorically and shows you the context and time in which these books were written. I already see God as a loving God and not the blood thirsty God that demands justice. I feel at peace with God if that makes sense. :)

 

I am going to be looking for this book as well as some others mentioned in this thread. Like I said on another post, I have only been taught that the Bible is literal. I will be brand new to studying this out and honestly I am lookig forward to it.

 

BTW, please do not back out of the thread. I want everyone to stay including Mergath, Joanne, Quill ,Rosie,Jenny and everyone else. I joined this thread because I want all kinds on input and insight, not just limited to certain views.

[Guest]

 

I am going to be looking for this book as well as some others mentioned in this thread. Like I said on another post, I have only been taught that the Bible is literal. I will be brand new to studying this out and honestly I am lookig forward to it.

 

BTW, please do not back out of the thread. I want everyone to stay including Mergath, Joanne, Quill ,Rosie,Jenny and everyone else. I joined this thread because I want all kinds on input and insight, not just limited to certain views.

 

 

 

Thanks for saying so, but I have to go. I am terribly upset with myself for even getting into this. I should have left 5 pages ago. There is no peace in having an internet thread working at my brain all day long and there are much more significant problems in the world that deserve my attention. Reading the boardie's sorrowful event with her daughter makes me remember that. It's better that I go.

[Halcyon]

 

 

I keep trying to stay away from this saying this but I can't. I am surprised at how many people expressed interest in a "Christianity" thread who are not Christian. I say that very matter of factly, no judgement. But it seems the thread is pointing away from being "Christian" in nature and instead toward just an open and inclusive spirituality. Perhaps it should be renamed the good 'ol "spiritual but not religious" thread, which would be accurate, more inclusive of the pagan, earth based philosophies and not give people the impression that participants believe in the divinity of Jesus like the name Christian infers.

 

 

I believe in the divinity of Christ. I accept Christ as my Saviour. I am not a 'spiritual but not religious' person, although I have been in the past, and it is totally fine with me. I have always been interested in other religions, and have studied them to some degree.

 

I, for one, am not interested in a 'spiritual but not religious' thread. I am interested in a Progressive Christian thread. For me, that means people who identify as Christian but don't _neccesarily_ hold typical evangelical perspectives on homosexuality, abortion, gay rights and the holy word that is Fox News. Who identify as Christian and who believe in the mandate to actively help the poor, fight for justice, stand up for the belittled, the bullied and the outcast, and to embrace, with love, all the broken, heathen, addicted, heart-hardened people out there in the world....to wholly accept them for who they are, what they have to offer and what they hope to become. Not in a "love the sinner, hate the sin" sort of way, but in a "love and accept every single bit of a person and don't dare to judge them as that is the job of God in Heaven" sort of way.

[Halcyon]

Just read this lovely article today about a meeting between the Dalai Lama and Bishop Desmond Tutu called God is Not a Christian: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/07/god-is-not-a-christian-tutu-dalai-lama_n_2421553.html

 

Thought others here might find it enlightening

[Joanne]

I'm going to disagree.

 

I don't think one needs to accept the divinity of Jesus in order to be a Christian. I think, as a Buddhist follows the teachings of the Buddha, a Christian is one who chooses to follow the teachings of Jesus. And there's room for an awful lot of debate about exactly what those teachings are.

 

Saying you can't be a Christian unless you pass this one particular test some other Christian decided to put in place is exactly the kind of thing that turns off people who might otherwise be packing the pews.

 

 

Since I don't want to cull posts to support my frustration, I'll just quote and agree with this post of the OP.

 

I stopped contributing because my concern was not heard. What I was reading read like the rhetoric and reasons I left non progressive Christianity.

 

I believe in Jesus and I believe that his reported words are, indeed, his words and thoughts. Granted, I believe everything else in what we know as the Christian bible is man, myth, and fable. IMO, though, I in progressive Christianity, I shouldn't have to share my Jesus credentials at all.

 

I was hopeful to come here, to this thread, and to not have my participation questioned.

[Jenny in Florida]

Okay.

 

I had to take some time away and think for a bit. I had been so excited to find a group of people with whom I could talk -- really talk -- about these questions and my discoveries, and then I was unduly upset when it began to deteriorate. Nonetheless, I apologize for dropping the ball.

 

I don't think we need a new thread.

 

I don't think anyone needs to leave.

 

I do think maybe we need some ground rules. I think those eight points are a grand starting point for discussions here. They certainly reflect my understanding of the term "progressive Christianity." So, I think I'll go back and edit the very first post in the thread to add them as clarification.

 

With that said, I see no reason that even someone who quibbles with or outright disagrees with one or more of those points shouldn't stay, if they feel they belong and are willing to be respectful of the fact that most of us are coming from that point. It's not a statement of faith, because that would be ridiculous under the circumstances. It's just . . . a place to start.

 

We don't all have to agree about every detail to make this a valuable and safe place to talk. We just have to recognize that many of us are bound to be a bit tender opening up about such big, important, personal things and be willing to extend to others the grace and respect we want for ourselves.

 

Here is the current version of those 8 Points, according to the Center for Progressive Christianity's website:

 

By calling ourselves progressive, we mean we are Christians who…

 

1. Believe that following the path and teachings of Jesus can lead to an awareness and experience of the Sacred and the Oneness and Unity of all life;

2. Affirm that the teachings of Jesus provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life, and that we can draw from diverse sources of wisdom in our spiritual journey;

3. Seek community that is inclusive of ALL people, including but not limited to:

• Conventional Christians and questioning skeptics,
  
• Believers and agnostics,
  
• Women and men,
  
• Those of all sexual orientations and gender identities,
  
• Those of all classes and abilities;
  

 

4. Know that the way we behave towards one another is the fullest expression of what we believe;

5. Find grace in the search for understanding and believe there is more value in questioning than in absolutes;

6. Strive for peace and justice among all people;

7. Strive to protect and restore the integrity of our Earth;

8. Commit to a path of life-long learning, compassion, and selfless love.

 

Now, let's get back to the good stuff, okay?

[CyndiLJ]

So I have missed this thread other than the beginning because life got busy for a few days, then I came and read the last page to discover there was some sort of brouhaha...but I am electing not to go back and read it all so I can get sucked in.

 

That being said, I'll leave it behind where it probably belongs and ask if anyone has read Borg's book out last year, "Speaking Christian". I have long felt that part of the problem in being a Progressive Christian is that our language...the common Christian language we culturally share with all Christians, has been tainted for some. Words mean different things, or carry very heavy baggage causing us to reject using the very words that really fit, but mean something quite different depending upon one's perspective.

 

I know that personally, I completely avoid or even cringe at certain words these days...words like "salvation", "bible", "born again", etc. are laden with meaning...meaning that is NOT how I understand them. Borg's book was EXCELLENT in helping me work through it a little, or at least give it serious thought.

 

Which brings me to the question for you all...are there certain words in the Christian lexicon that you hate hearing, struggle to use yourself, or which are just outright banned from your conversations? And, if so, do you find yourself struggling to explain your Christian faith to others because of it?

 

Will be very curious to read any responses!

[Snow]

Jenny, your post and your composure about all of this is amazing and inspiring. Thank you for being so level headed and positive.

 

5. I think your sensitivity on this topic is clouding what you see when you read, and you are certainly not the only one. But *shrug* it is to be expected when discussing important topics outside one's own head."

Yes, completely. Thank you for saying it delicately. I've always been an observer to people who had public meltdowns on forums and never thought I would be the one doing it. And i definitely never wanted to say "I'm leaving the thread" and then come back :glare: but, alas there is a first for everything. Kate's lesson learned number one: humility. :blushing:

 

Rosie, I've read your post quite a few times now and I finally get it. And now that my head is more clear, i am realizing how sincere your intentions were:

"6. If we don't work through our misunderstandings, the ones within ourselves and the ones with others, we will never solve them.

7. .... I can chew on this all week if it'll do you or anyone else any good.

8. If you want to continue this but feel too raw for public conversation, I'm sure pretty much anyone on this thread would be happy to converse privately, whether to resolve issue or help put ideas into words so you can come back and share them here.

 

Finally, this image is not only hysterical, I see it as a very kind gesture of you to offer some self- deprecating humor in the name of support and camaraderie.

7. My ex said I was like a terrier with a rat when it comes to problems, that I'd sink my teeth into it and keep biting until it was dead. Not a flattering portrait, but true enough. I can chew on this all week if it'll do you or anyone else any good

 

Thank you for that. I know I'm not the only one who hopes you'll come back (and *everyone* else).

[ksr5377]

I just wanted to thank everyone for joining this thread. I have never heard of this term before, and from everything I'm reading about it, I just keep thinking "THIS IS ME, THIS IS ME!" I really appreciated the link to ProgressiveChristianity.org There are several churches listed on there in my city and I am excited and hopeful about checking them out. I have been church hopping for about 6 years now, always looking for the right fit and never really finding anything close to it.

[Onceuponatime]

So I have missed this thread other than the beginning because life got busy for a few days, then I came and read the last page to discover there was some sort of brouhaha...but I am electing not to go back and read it all so I can get sucked in.

 

That being said, I'll leave it behind where it probably belongs and ask if anyone has read Borg's book out last year, "Speaking Christian". I have long felt that part of the problem in being a Progressive Christian is that our language...the common Christian language we culturally share with all Christians, has been tainted for some. Words mean different things, or carry very heavy baggage causing us to reject using the very words that really fit, but mean something quite different depending upon one's perspective.

 

I know that personally, I completely avoid or even cringe at certain words these days...words like "salvation", "bible", "born again", etc. are laden with meaning...meaning that is NOT how I understand them. Borg's book was EXCELLENT in helping me work through it a little, or at least give it serious thought.

 

Which brings me to the question for you all...are there certain words in the Christian lexicon that you hate hearing, struggle to use yourself, or which are just outright banned from your conversations? And, if so, do you find yourself struggling to explain your Christian faith to others because of it?

 

Will be very curious to read any responses!

 

 

I read it. I admit that I struggled through it. Mostly because I have come from such a literal/fundamentalist background. All of the terms were ones I had been wrestling with redefining for my self. A lot of it was encouraging and affirming. Some was "huh?" I have trouble seeing how some of the old terms can carry over when they have such strong historical definitions, especially "salvation" and "resurrection." I think there is room for some more discussion on ways to clarify terms for people unfamiliar with progressive Christianity. I do think it is an excellent book, and very much needed to approach the topic of religious language.

[Halcyon]

So I have missed this thread other than the beginning because life got busy for a few days, then I came and read the last page to discover there was some sort of brouhaha...but I am electing not to go back and read it all so I can get sucked in.

 

That being said, I'll leave it behind where it probably belongs and ask if anyone has read Borg's book out last year, "Speaking Christian". I have long felt that part of the problem in being a Progressive Christian is that our language...the common Christian language we culturally share with all Christians, has been tainted for some. Words mean different things, or carry very heavy baggage causing us to reject using the very words that really fit, but mean something quite different depending upon one's perspective.

 

I know that personally, I completely avoid or even cringe at certain words these days...words like "salvation", "bible", "born again", etc. are laden with meaning...meaning that is NOT how I understand them. Borg's book was EXCELLENT in helping me work through it a little, or at least give it serious thought.

 

Which brings me to the question for you all...are there certain words in the Christian lexicon that you hate hearing, struggle to use yourself, or which are just outright banned from your conversations? And, if so, do you find yourself struggling to explain your Christian faith to others because of it?

 

Will be very curious to read any responses!

I havent read that book. but will try to find it at my library as we are heading there today.

 

Re Christian words....I'll be honest here. I don't talk about my Christian faith much at all. To anyone. I don't know exactly why. Maybe it's because it's fairly new and tender to me, and I need to protect and nurture it until I grow into it a bit more. Maybe it's because my family is not particularly religious, and in fact, scoff at religion a bit. I think a lot of it has to do with how Christianity, "Christian", "saved" and other such words have been coopted (sp?) by right wing, conservative Evangelicals, and I just don't want to get into a long discussion of how I am not one of "those" Christians.

 

It's probably the same reason I don't have a Jesus fish on my car. To me, it sends a message of a particular kind of Christian which I am not. It's unfortunate, but there it is.

[elegantlion]

So I have missed this thread other than the beginning because life got busy for a few days, then I came and read the last page to discover there was some sort of brouhaha...but I am electing not to go back and read it all so I can get sucked in.

 

That being said, I'll leave it behind where it probably belongs and ask if anyone has read Borg's book out last year, "Speaking Christian". I have long felt that part of the problem in being a Progressive Christian is that our language...the common Christian language we culturally share with all Christians, has been tainted for some. Words mean different things, or carry very heavy baggage causing us to reject using the very words that really fit, but mean something quite different depending upon one's perspective.

 

I know that personally, I completely avoid or even cringe at certain words these days...words like "salvation", "bible", "born again", etc. are laden with meaning...meaning that is NOT how I understand them. Borg's book was EXCELLENT in helping me work through it a little, or at least give it serious thought.

 

Which brings me to the question for you all...are there certain words in the Christian lexicon that you hate hearing, struggle to use yourself, or which are just outright banned from your conversations? And, if so, do you find yourself struggling to explain your Christian faith to others because of it?

 

Will be very curious to read any responses!

 

When I was involved in church I was good at speaking what I call Christianese. As I've moved away from church, I find myself redefining but not avoiding all the vocabulary. I've worked a lot of diverse jobs in my life before children, everyone had a jargon, a language no one on the "outside" would necessarily understand.

 

I don't have a problem with most words because I can separate the traditional christian meaning from my own life.

 

I do cringe sometimes with prayer chains and requests. Some prayer requests border on gossip, in my real life experience, or its just thinly veiled. I once sat in a Sunday school class taking prayer requests that were to be confidential. A man in the group starts asking for prayer for a co-worker who had shared a confidential prayer request with him. Totally different group, but he felt it was okay to share name and quite personal information with a group that didn't even know this man. It jarred me, because this was a situation, that if had gotten around because a lot of people worked at this location, could have cost the co-worker his job. I think in the name of community some of the boundaries of respect can easily be broken.

 

Personally, I have a harder time now saying I will pray for someone. I try to offer my thoughts and wishes and say that instead. I don't want someone to assume I am petitioning God on their behalf as part of my daily devotion time, again part of the jargon I used to read behind the words. I try to do like Jenny mentioned earlier, set aside a few moments to think upon this person and send some well wishes.

 

So I don't ask for prayer anymore alone, I also ask for thoughts, vibes, whatever a person believes. I wrote this down a few years ago, it's still my belief..."Voicing hope is a beautiful thing regardless of where you believe your voice ends up."

 

 

 

I printed off the 8 beliefs yesterday and put them above my desk.

[Onceuponatime]

When I was involved in church I was good at speaking what I call Christianese. As I've moved away from church, I find myself redefining but not avoiding all the vocabulary. I've worked a lot of diverse jobs in my life before children, everyone had a jargon, a language no one on the "outside" would necessarily understand.

 

 

 

 

I've always had a problem with jargon, probably because it is exclusive and sometimes seems pretentious. I hardly use slang either. It feels fake to me. I never could say "Praise the Lord" or "Hallelujah." I never talked about being "born again." Like you, I've also had a problem telling someone I would pray for them. That has gotten easier, because I've lost the feeling that I'm being dishonest when I say it. So, what I'm doing is not what they would call praying, but It is similar enough and accomplishes the same purpose.

 

I guess my reluctance to mold myself to a group is why I've often been a loner. Maybe that made it a little easier for me to look at things in a different light than it might have if I had steeped myself in the jargon of literal/fundamentalist Christianity.

 

I would really like to discuss what "salvation" means in terms of progressive Christianity. I'm very familiar with the literal/fundamentalist doctrines, but how does one use this term if one does not believe in a literal heaven or hell? (I know not everyone is going to agree on this, I am interested in any viewpoints anyone has to offer.) Is the word even necessary? It is one that has me currently befuddled.

[Snow]

I'm reading it right now and it's been helpful for me on two levels. one, understanding the words on a deeper level than the fundies would have us believe. and also, just in getting over some of the language in general. I remember being a teenager and looking at a bible for the first time. i skimmed through some pages and just felt scared and sick inside. I thought, this is supposed to be comforting? This is supposed to represent the goodness of god? It's filled with such strange language, evil doers and enemies and the call for righteousness all over the place. It's intimidating and scary and so borg's book has helped me get past that a little. The bible is definitely for mature audiences only, imo.

[Onceuponatime]

It's filled with such strange language, evil doers and enemies and the call for righteousness all over the place. The bible is definitely for mature audiences only, imo.

 

 

That's why I read it so much as a child. I know, I was strange. I learned a lot. Parents don't forbid children to read the Bible. ;-)

 

Actually, in a way, the knowledge I gained saved me from things my parents did not teach me about.

[Snow]

Wow, so did it scare you as a child? Or, how did you perceive what god thought of you? I remember being so afraid that god must think I'm bad for all my faults. Back to that fear of hell problem someone brought up a while ago.

[Onceuponatime]

Wow, so did it scare you as a child? Or, how did you perceive what god thought of you? I remember being so afraid that god must think I'm bad for all my faults. Back to that fear of hell problem someone brought up a while ago.

 

 

The stories did not scare me that I remember, but I did have a terrible fear of being "bad" and of God disapproving of me. I was a very prim and proper little girl, lol. I didn't have a fear of hell until I was older and the need to be "saved" was stressed. There is little to nothing about Hell in the Old Testament. I didn't think of myself as a sinner in the New Testament sense until I heard it preached that everyone is.

[Joanne]

I don't immediately think of terms, but I do think of a couple of concepts that bother me.

 

One would be the emphasis on Mary's virginity, and the association of "pure" with her. I don't like how virginity is elevated and sex, by implication, is unpure. The whole "virgin birth" thing seems, well, silly and I read it with the same perspective as I do the dramatic, wild tales of other ancient mythology.

[Jenny in Florida]

I would really like to discuss what "salvation" means in terms of progressive Christianity. I'm very familiar with the traditional doctrines, but how does one use this term if one does not believe in a literal heaven or hell? (I know not everyone is going to agree on this, I am interested in any viewpoints anyone has to offer.) Is the word even necessary? It is one that has me currently befuddled.

 

 

For me, at this point, "salvation" isn't on my radar.

 

I don't believe in a literal heaven or hell, meaning the work of this life is not, for me, focused on assuring myself a good place in a later one. I guess, if I think about it at all, that I'd consider myself "saved" if I can get to a place in which being my best self -- focusing outward instead of inward, having compassion come naturally, etc. -- isn't a constant battle, in which I can use the energy I now waste coralling all of that stuff to improve the world around me. At that point, which I don't actually expect to reach, I would know I had fully tapped into and "grokked" (to borrow from Heinlein) Jesus/God/the Universe/what have you.

 

But that's just kind of off the top of my head, and subject to revision.

[sunflowerlady]

Just wanted to say one thing: Knowing Jesus and getting to know him and politics are not inextricably woven together. You don't have to become someone you are not in order to believe in Jesus.

 

:)

Yes, this is so true. I just wish most conservative Christians knew this. Politics and Christianity have been meshed together in the minds on so many in the past couple of decades or so. I am becoming secure in my faith and who I am , but I keep it to myself a lot in real life because I really believe I would be on the receiving end of lots of negativity. Although I don't NEED approval, I also don't need stress.

[Onceuponatime]

I don't immediately think of terms, but I do think of a couple of concepts that bother me.

 

. The whole "virgin birth" thing seems, well, silly and I read it with the same perspective as I do the dramatic, wild tales of other ancient mythology.

 

It seems amazing to me know that I had never questioned the doctrine of the virgin birth until last year. I did a study on Mary and the stories surrounding her and did come to the personal conclusion that there wasn't a virgin birth.This was strengthened by a study of the history of the time period Jesus was born.

When I saw that all the same stories and descriptions were used for the mythology surrounding the emperor of Rome, I felt silly.

 

I understand that this is one of the hardest teachings to give up. It is really the bedrock of fundamentalist Christianity. If I thought that it had actually happened, I would be changing my whole way of thinking again.

[sunflowerlady]

So I have missed this thread other than the beginning because life got busy for a few days, then I came and read the last page to discover there was some sort of brouhaha...but I am electing not to go back and read it all so I can get sucked in.

 

That being said, I'll leave it behind where it probably belongs and ask if anyone has read Borg's book out last year, "Speaking Christian". I have long felt that part of the problem in being a Progressive Christian is that our language...the common Christian language we culturally share with all Christians, has been tainted for some. Words mean different things, or carry very heavy baggage causing us to reject using the very words that really fit, but mean something quite different depending upon one's perspective.

 

I know that personally, I completely avoid or even cringe at certain words these days...words like "salvation", "bible", "born again", etc. are laden with meaning...meaning that is NOT how I understand them. Borg's book was EXCELLENT in helping me work through it a little, or at least give it serious thought.

 

Which brings me to the question for you all...are there certain words in the Christian lexicon that you hate hearing, struggle to use yourself, or which are just outright banned from your conversations? And, if so, do you find yourself struggling to explain your Christian faith to others because of it?

 

Will be very curious to read any responses!

That is a great question! I have been thinking about it and a few phrases and concepts that bother me at this point due to my background and spiritual baggage are:

 

godliness

 

righteousness

 

repentance

 

Bible-believing Christian

 

Those are just a few. I will surely think of more.

[Onceuponatime]

Yes, this is so true. I just wish most conservative Christians knew this. Politics and Christianity have been meshed together in the minds on so many in the past couple of decades or so. I am becoming secure in my faith and who I am , but I keep it to myself a lot in real life because I really believe I would be on the receiving end of lots of negativity. Although I don't NEED approval, I also don't need stress.

 

I believe this is just one reason that Politics and Christianity have been meshed so much in that last few years:

http://fakehistory.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/%E2%80%9Cno-king-but-jesus%E2%80%9D-and-the-american-revolution/

 

I have seen this modern myth taught in Christian homeschool curriculum.

[Joanne]

I thought of a phrase that makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up:

 

Christian worldview

 

I'd feel much more comfortable with a Jesus worldview (which I personally believe to be similar to a Martin Luther King Jr. worldview, a Ghandi worldview, a Buddha worldview, a Dorothy Day worldview..........).

[MIch elle]

I am a traditional Christian. I'm Episcopalian - that's traditional Christianity. I am NOT a literal, fundamental, or evangelical Christian. The Episcopal service/mass is liturgical and comes from The Book of Common Prayer. The Episcopal Church believes EQUALLY in following Scripture, Tradition and Reason as the foundation of our church.

 

I am a traditional, Episcopal, progressive Christian. :thumbup:

 

I do believe in a literal heaven and hell but it's in THIS life, not in the afterlife. The kingdom of God is THIS kingdom here and now. Salvation is about a path of transformation here and now NOT later.

 

Back to Marcus Borg, "Salvation in the BIble is never about the afterlife." "The message of the New Testament is about transformation of self and world in this life, not preparation for the next." Embracing an Adult Faith p.35

 

“Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest? He said to him, You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the greatest and first commandment. And second, is like it: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Matthew 22:36-39 NRSV

[Onceuponatime]

I am a traditional Christian. I'm Episcopalian - that's traditional Christianity. I am NOT a literal, fundamental, or evangelical Christian. The Episcopal service/mass is liturgical and comes from The Book of Common Prayer. The Episcopal Church believes EQUALLY in following Scripture, Tradition and Reason as the foundation of our church.

 

I am a traditional, Episcopal, progressive Christian. :thumbup:

 

I do believe in a literal heaven and hell but it's in THIS life, not in the afterlife. The kingdom of God is THIS kingdom here and now. Salvation is about a path of transformation here and now NOT later.

 

Back to Marcus Borg, "Salvation in the BIble is never about the afterlife." "The message of the New Testament is about transformation of self and world in this life, not preparation for the next." Embracing an Adult Faith p.35

 

“Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest? He said to him, You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the greatest and first commandment. And second, is like it: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Matthew 22:36-39 NRSV

 

 

Point taken. I hereby revoke all the statements I have made with the word traditional and replace with "literal, fundamental, or evangelical," which is what I meant. That just happened to be my traditional background. :)

[elegantlion]

It seems amazing to me know that I had never questioned the doctrine of the virgin birth until last year. I did a study on Mary and the stories surrounding her and did come to the personal conclusion that there wasn't a virgin birth.This was strengthened by a study of the history of the time period Jesus was born.

When I saw that all the same stories and descriptions were used for the mythology surrounding the emperor of Rome, I felt silly.

 

I understand that this is one of the hardest teachings to give up. It is really the bedrock of fundamentalist Christianity. If I thought that it had actually happened, I would be changing my whole way of thinking again.

 

What resources did you use for your study of Mary?

[Izzy]

:)

[Onceuponatime]

What resources did you use for your study of Mary?

 

I did a lot of poking around on the internet to see what the different Christian doctrines of Mary were and what the arguments were for and against them. Then I also researched into whether a virgin birth was possible from a scientific point of view. I also read Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan's book The First Christmas. A few of Borg's books have a little something about Mary in them. I think The Rise and Fall of the Bible by Timothy Beal may have covered it too. Frankly, a lot of what I've read is starting to flow together in my mind and I'm having trouble remembering exactly where I read some things. I think I will have to start taking notes.

[elegantlion]

I did a lot of poking around on the internet to see what the different Christian doctrines of Mary were and what the arguments were for and against them. Then I also researched into whether a virgin birth was possible from a scientific point of view. I also read Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan's book The First Christmas. A few of Borg's books have a little something about Mary in them. I think The Rise and Fall of the Bible by Timothy Beal may have covered it too. Frankly, a lot of what I've read is starting to flow together in my mind and I'm having trouble remembering exactly where I read some things. I think I will have to start taking notes.

 

 

Thank you.

[ktgrok]

I don't immediately think of terms, but I do think of a couple of concepts that bother me.

 

One would be the emphasis on Mary's virginity, and the association of "pure" with her. I don't like how virginity is elevated and sex, by implication, is unpure. The whole "virgin birth" thing seems, well, silly and I read it with the same perspective as I do the dramatic, wild tales of other ancient mythology.

 

I want to comment on this, and am hoping that Joanne will understand where I'm coming from and not take offense that I picked her post out as an example to comment on. I've stayed out of progressive Christianity circles, and stopped reading Spong because of the idea that things like the virgin birth are "silly". I know Joanne doesn't mean to say that I'm silly to believe in it (which I do), but it still kind of grates. Far worse is was Spong's Why Christianity Must Die, which I ended up throwing against the wall as I got tired of him being patronizing. He implied (or maybe out and out said, now that I think about it) that no intellectual could EVER believe in such silly ideas as the virgin birth, the resurrection, etc. Well, maybe HE doesn't believe in them (and I do question how/why he justifies being a priest in a church where he no longer believes the creed he must say every sunday), but I do believe in them. I very much do. I have no issue with the idea of miracles. I watched a documentary on PBS once that showed how the virgin birth is possible from a scientific standpoint, even if you don't belive it was miraculous. But either way, I believe and that doesn't make me dumb, or clueless, or whatever the way that some of the spokespeople for progressive Christianity seem to say it does.

 

I embrace the label of progressive christianity because I believe that the Bible does have errors, as it was written by man and man makes mistakes. I believe that a lot of it was just man looking to justify his actions by saying God told me to do it. I believe God loves love, gay or straight. I believe in evolution. I believe that God has many ways to bring people to her. I don't believe that non Christians are going to hell. So I embrace the label progressive Christianity, but yeah, get tired of other progressives (not on this board, in books and other places) acting like belief in any part of the unprovable is ridiculous.

[Guest]

I believe that God has many ways to bring people to her.

:thumbup: Nicely done.

[Joanne]

 

I want to comment on this, and am hoping that Joanne will understand where I'm coming from and not take offense that I picked her post out as an example to comment on. I've stayed out of progressive Christianity circles, and stopped reading Spong because of the idea that things like the virgin birth are "silly".

 

Understood, with no offense.

 

I believe in miracles. :)

 

I just believe that the construct of the virgin birth (and the impregnation of Mary by God, directly) is a manifestation of literary hyperbole - an object lesson device used in ancient pedagogy.

 

I personally believe that the science of reproduction IS a miracle - it is miraculous. Mary as virgin (perpetual or not), IMO, is a manifestation of patriarchy. The virginal reverence is found in more than one major religion - and I think it is creepy in all of them.

 

I believe that Jesus was a God-inspired man.

[ktgrok]

 

 

I just believe that the construct of the virgin birth (and the impregnation of Mary by God, directly) is a manifestation of literary hyperbole - an object lesson device used in ancient pedagogy.

 

I personally believe that the science of reproduction IS a miracle - it is miraculous. Mary as virgin (perpetual or not), IMO, is a manifestation of patriarchy. The virginal reverence is found in more than one major religion - and I think it is creepy in all of them.

 

 

 

Anyone saying the above would not bother me. It's when it is dismissed as a silly belief, or childish belief, that I get annoyed. I majored in Religion at FSU (a secular program), I get the aguments both ways. And my belief is not something to be dismissed the way it often is in progressive writings.

[mommymilkies]

I don't know if anyone here has read The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People (am I really the last one on Earth???), but p. 117 of my 1994 edition is somewhat relevant here, IMHO. "Because the church is a formal organization made up of policies, programs, practices, and people, it cannot by itself give a person any deep, permanent security or sense of intrinsic worth. Living the principles taught by the church can do this, but the organization alone cannot." There is more, but I don't want to violate copyright. :)