http://queersunited.blogspot.com/2009/10/g
http://queersunited.blogspot.com/2009/10/g
Anyhow, just thought some of you would find it interesting. Unfortunately they haven't gotten to Matt 5:39 yet, I'm really dying to see how they mesh that with their brand of conservativism.
x-posted to
Learn more about this ridiculous and unscientific claim as well as info on protests.
http://queersunited.blogspot.com/2009/09/u
I'm willing to believe that Genesis is allegorical, metaphorical, mythical, explanatory but not meant to be taken as literal history. The point of Genesis is that God somehow is the creator (whether God wound it up like a watch and went away, or kept an eye on it, tweaking a molecule here and making a quantum wave collapse there in order to guide evolution is not critical to this discussion), but that humans have chosen to walk apart from God and as such are separated from God, and as a result the entirety of creation has "fallen" from grace. We do not live in a perfect universe and Genesis explains God made it good but we humans screwed up. Ok...
But I believe that the story of Christ's ministry, death, and resurrection is NOT allegory. It refers to a unique point in history where the divine reality and mundane reality intersected, God walked as man with us, lived with us, and died and came back to life, so that somehow (insert your favorite theological explanation here), in the part of the historical timeline that is post-zero A.D., humans can live in a way that is "right with God." The universe as a whole is still screwed, and life is still brutal, bloody, and short; but individuals can now live with that intersection of divine and material reality, in a relationship with God in a way they could not before. Something that was wrong has been made right (or at least right-ish).
But working within that framework, I still have some problems, namely: Was the universe created by God to be good?
If it wasn't, then either God didn't create it or God created it flawed (helloooo, gnosticism!). Unacceptable, either way.
If it was created by God, and it was created as a good thing, then WHEN did it go wrong?
Were the dinosaurs in a state of grace? Are we digging up the fossils of a perfect world? I doubt that very much, but if not, why not?
Who had screwed up, given humans didn't show up for another however many hundreds of millions of years after them? (Following this line of thought and with thanks to C.S. Lewis, did Jesus come as a dinosaur to the dinosaurs, as a neanderthal to the neanderthals, as a human to the humans?)
You can see the problem I'm having: We have a point in time in which God intervened to fix things, but we (or at least I) don't have a clear point in time when things originally went wrong. Which means they were either always wrong, or that nothing was ever wrong to begin with. And neither of those answers is really acceptable (with one being gnosticism and the other being humanism).
I appreciate that in the scale of problems that includes solving world hunger and stopping global warming, this is not a big deal. But it's a theological inconsistency that is bothering me. Anyone have any thoughts?
How do you guys deal with the conflicts that can come up?
Also, I'm hoping to do some Bible study on my own, but I really ain't that academically minded; right now, I feel if I just tried to read the Bible, I'd miss half of what they were trying to say! Can anyone give me a nice rec for a study Bible or websites?
http://starflyrpro.smugmug.com/MLP/G


________________________________________
And 71 percent acknowledged "confusion" over same-sex sexual attraction by age 14-15. That's according to the study "Listening to Sexual Minorities on Christian College Campuses”, conducted by researchers Mark Yarhouse, Stephen Stratton, Janet Dean, and Heather Brooke, had 104 "sexual minority" students at three schools within the Council of Christian Colleges and Universities complete anonymous surveys about their sexual desires. (Alas, it's unclear what researchers used to define a "sexual minority," but we believe it's safe to assume it means all things LGBT.)
So, for those of you that reject original sin, how did you come to that conclusion? How do you support it? And what difference does it make to your faith? Any other thoughts are welcome as well. Thanks!
cross-posted to christianity, protestantism and ljchristians
Speaking as an Episcopalian, Whoo hoo!!
Ordination to any ministry in the Episcopal church is now formally open to anyone regardless of sexual orientation!!
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/us/15e
Which is hardly the most celebratory write-up of the news--most of the blogs that are pro-justice and equality are going nuts about it. Both the House of Deputies and the House of Bishops passed it 2-1 in favor. (Google on the resolution name, D025, to see what I mean.)
First, a short introduction. I classify myself as a recovering Pentecostal - the church experiences I had growing up in several Assemblies of God and Pentecostal congregations spiritually wounded me and nearly caused me to abandon my faith all together from disillusionment until I discovered a more progressive and socially conscious Christianity in college. I've been lurking here periodically since last summer as part of my attempt to understand and analyze the myriad multi-fasceted points of view and interpretations of what it means to be a follower of Christ.
On to my reason for posting. My boyfriend and I recently got into a discussion of "biblical" marriage roles. He's very much a traditionalist; the husband is the head of the household and decision-maker, and the woman submits to his authority. I take a more feminist-informed, egalitarian point of view: husbands and wives ought to respect and love one another, the husband showing strength by acting as a support.
The passage in Ephesians 5 regarding husbands and wives came up, and I was curious about it's actual interpretation. Traditionally, these verses are read in a way that places the man as the "head of authority" over the wife, who is supposed to be obedient. But I can't help but think that such an interpretation reads too much Western patriarchal ideology into a more deeply significant metaphor. I found a few articles online that referenced the idea that Paul didn't mean head as "authority" but rather as part of the metaphor as the husband and wife as one flesh: as Christ is the head of the church, his body, so husband and wife are joined together as head and body (hence the whole, "love your wife as you love your own body"). It's also important to take into account that the majority of the chapter challenges all Christians to respect and submit to one another and to walk in love.
That said, I was wondering if any of you could offer some more resources for the further exposition of these verses. Further thoughts and opinions welcome!
( Cut for a long and somewhat rambly discussion of what's bothering me )
tl;dr I feel like choosing a church based on activities, rather than on spirituality, is missing the point of church, but I also feel like staying with a church that doesn't try to better the world is hypocritical.
Crossposted to my personal LJ
“And he sold all that had had and followed Him”
Yesterday I met a man with amazing faith. He is only a bit younger than I am but he accepted a “call” and with his family, is making a gigantic leap of faith.
This man had his life changed by a Christian residential treatment and retreat center in New Hampshire. Over the years he has spent weekends and long weeks working at the facility as a volunteer, handling the duties of the Center's working farm, sawmill and buildings.
Now by the end of the summer, he and his family will have sold their home, sold off excess possessions and moved to New Hampshire. The job includes use of a home.
The same day I met this man, I received a worrisome letter from our parish church's Finance Director. Our little Parish was decimated a year ago when a bulk of the parishioners left is protest over our stand on certain social issues. Now it seems, after a promising start at rebuilding member, our church is running out of funds. While the letter did not say this outright, it is quite apparent from looking at the numbers that unless sometime miraculous or unforeseen occurs, we will be broke by the end of the year.
I'm balancing these two events in my mind. We both have great faith, but the man heading to New Hampshire's faith is strong. Speaking for myself, my faith in the parish's ability to survive is shaken.
The man going to New Hampshire is taking a giant “leap of faith”. What comes to me is that our parish needs to do the same. We in parish leadership need to spend time in “prayer and fasting” even as we work our regular jobs and go about our daily and family obligations.
People arrive to a place where there is no church and “plant” one there because they feel compelled by God to do so. 25 years ago, a small city parish in Sacramento made the decision to leave its inner-city location and move to where it is today. It took a giant leap of faith and purchased a ranch house with a large “great room”
Today that “great room” is our sanctuary. This church started as a seedling 25 years ago and has grown to what it is today. Tomorrow night, at a Vestry meeting, we need to talk seriously about it's future.
If you are reading this, and if you're so inclined, please offer a prayer for St. Mary's parish. Please help us find our “leap of faith”.
I have been asked what challenges the church faces at the present time. This is a difficult question to answer. I gave this some time before I posted it.
I would say that churches, for the most part, are reflections of a fearful, self-righteous and consumerist culture. They are tools for political and social ideologies that are opposed to the Gospel. This has occurred because we have forgotten or ignored the Gospel and have translated its message to suit ourselves rather than allowing it to challenge us.
I would say that churches are business ventures consumed with the bottom line. They view people as means to an end. They are obsessed with survival, money and attendance. Discipleship is not in their vocabulary. They give very little real thought to God or the challenge of the Christ. They have lost their souls.
I would say that we a nearly broken beyond repair. I think Jesus is looking for people who are open to him and He will find them whether they are in what we call the church or in the world.
We are wholly owned subsidiaries of a political and religious ideology which is conservative in the worst sense of the word. We are not interested in transformation but in the preservation of the status quo. We have lost our passion for people in our lust for power and prestige.
We have made the Gospel of God a statement about OUR distinctiveness and OUR values and in doing this we have prostituted the Gospel to serve our interests.
What is the way out of the downward spiral? We must again submit ourselves to the discipline of the Word of God. We must approach it with a humility which recognizes our sinfulness and complicity in brokenness of the world and the church. We must repent and recognize that the Gospel is about God; what God has done, what God is doing, what God wants, what God is calling us to become. It is never about us or our survival or glorification. It is about God’s glory and His agenda.
Until we reject our mercenary use of God and his Church we will continue to be largely ineffective and irrelevant and we will continue to wander through the wasteland of our culture as a false oasis. We will continue to be ineffective. We will continue to have an identity crisis.
We must become a compassionate society rather than a competitive one. We must become a giving culture rather than a consuming culture. We must be taken out of ourselves so we can see the need of those around us. Only then can we navigate with clear vision.
And we must understand that the Church is not in danger of failing or disappearing. We are in danger of failing and have virtually disappeared. God can and will raise a new Church. He may even be in the process of doing so as we speak. Let’s join him. Let’s repent. Let’s get on our knees.
Peace
Someone I know linked to a rather chilling and frightening article, George Tiller is Dead: For Whom Shall We Mourn? Sadly, this kind of attitude is too common, and yes, it scares me.
