The Christian Left

christianleft @ 2009-07-14T07:14:00

2009-07-14T14:20:34Z

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/15episcopal.html

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.)

Ephesians 5:22

2009-06-21T06:01:52Z

Hey everyone,

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!

Church community?

2009-06-17T15:35:25Z

I've been feeling very conflicted about religion in my life recently, trying to find a church where I'm truly happy and can belong, and I've run into a deep dilemma. Would anyone be willing to offer me advice?

So I grew up in the Christian Science church, and I love my religion. It's non-traditional, places a heavy emphasis on understanding Scripture instead of just reading it, on finding your own answers through prayer and study, and clearly delineates what is and is not a matter of church responsibility. I'm fond of boasting, in fact, that our church doesn't have official positions -- anything that's not directly related to the functioning of the church itself, the church doesn't get to have an official stance on. We, the Christian Scientists, are expected to find our own answers through scriptural study. No blind sheeple here!

I find attending my church to be deeply spiritually soothing; I leave services on Sunday feeling renewed and refreshed, looking at the world through clearer eyes. I truly, deeply believe in my religion.

But I'm also frustrated, and starting to feel very conflicted. Theologically, I don't have a single qualm with my religion, but about the role of the church, I'm very troubled. Christian Science churches have no community activity. They do nothing to better the world, other than sit back in isolation and pray about it. Every now and then, my church tries to do a food drive, which generally results in two boxes of Mac'n'Cheese and maybe a can of cranberry sauce sitting in a box in the foyer for months until someone decides to take mercy on the stillborn attempt to help the needy.

We're supposed to have a prison ministry as well; when I started asking about reviving it in our church, the general reaction had a strong overtone of "Ew, prisoners? I don't want to go be around them." Other churches, I know, have had to combine their efforts in order to organize even a tiny group willing to reach out and help those who so desperately need spiritual guidance.

We have no church social life; that's seen as too secular, treating church as something less than sacred. Our services give us no chance to share anything with each other. You come, you sit, you listen to readings, you sing a hymn, you leave. Maybe you chat with people for a few minutes before and after, but that's it. That's all the community life we have.

I think it would be fair to say that I love my religion, but I'm increasingly disappointed in my church.

I've started attending the Unitarian Universalist church near me; the idea of drawing together people of disparate faiths for a shared religious experience has a great deal of appeal to me, it's quite a bit closer than the nearest Christian Science church (a roughly twenty-minute drive as opposed to forty-five if I ignore the speed limit), and I'm deeply enamored of the variety and types of community involvement the Unitarian church encourages. Environmental efforts, active involvement with local food banks, homeless shelters, the battered women's shelter, and other organizations aimed at bringing aid to those most deeply in need of it, and a strong sense of church community -- it seems to me like almost every Sunday, there's some type of social event taking place after church so that the members can mingle and socialize with one another, and I've never arrived there and not had someone reach out to me to make me feel very welcome and comfortable there. Every time I've attended, I've felt that the people there are genuinely, truly happy to see me coming.

But the services themselves don't give me that same sense of spiritual renewal. They're nice, and I can appreciate them on an academic and "Oh, I like the thought behind this" level, but I don't feel that same kind of spiritual contact that Christian Science services give me. I don't feel like I'm walking out afterward ready to look at every single individual I deal with, no matter how unpleasant, as a beloved child of God with innate worth and quality. While there's less emphasis on church attendance than there is in the Christian Science church (obviously, since the Christian Science church has very little beyond church attendance!) I still feel like being satisfied with the service itself is an important aspect to choosing a church to grow with.

I just don't know what to do. If I could take Christian Science services and Unitarian Universalist community activity and graft them onto each other, I would have my ideal church. I don't like the idea of alternating Sundays between the two of them; that to me feels artificial, kind of a stopgap measure. "No one can serve two masters." I can't decide what's more important to me -- strong spiritual renewal with a refusal to get involved in the community feels hypocritical, and no spiritual renewal with a strong desire to help the world feels good, but leaves me feeling a little empty of the spiritual resources I need.

The Unitarian church has a choir, and I've been longing to get involved in music again.

I'm afraid that if I change my church affiliation and become a full member of the Unitarian church that I'm making my decision for all the wrong reasons, all the ones that have nothing to do with religion itself. But staying with the Christian Science church makes me feel like a hypocrite, all of us hiding our light -- the good we could be doing in the world -- under a bushel.

Help.

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

LEap of faith"

2009-06-15T14:50:54Z

“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”.

christianleft @ 2009-06-07T15:47:00

2009-06-07T20:47:58Z

What are your favorite Christian blogs?

a view from the "undertoad"

2009-06-03T14:09:40Z

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

Consistent ethic of life (cross-posted)

2009-06-02T13:12:13Z

Does anyone have some good links to articles/essays to recommend about a "consistent ethic of life," a philosophy which is "pro-life" not only as to unborn life, but extends to us mere borners as well (opposition to capital punishment, etc.), whether it is explicitly based on religious faith or is stated on general ethical and moral principles? I know there's a lot of good writing out there on this, and given enough time I'll find it, but I'd like to know what other people would recommend as the best written and most coherently argued pieces.

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.

Marriage in California (Cross Posted from my personal weblog)

2009-05-30T03:44:55Z

This is a cross posting from my personal blog. More people read this blog so I wanted to share it here. Please tell me what you think! I wrote after getting the third or fourth email with those oh-so-familiar bible verses condemning Homosexuality. I am "straight' but my LGBT friends call me an "ally".

Dear Friends;

I am very troubled by yesterday's ruling of the California Supreme Court upholding Proposition 8 which defines marriage as "between a man and a woman".

To many, this decision seems like a "no-brainer". After all most marriages are between an man and a woman (or in certain cultures between a man and MANY women!) But it's likely less of a "no brainer" -- once you take the time to reach out and get to know everyone - regardless of racial and sexual orientation.   I see the love same sex couples have. I see their solid committed relationships lasting decades until parted by death. I see their love, faith and prayer together.   I see their solid family values in providing a home for their children. This solidity in a committed relationship has so far eluded me in mine.

I am a Christian who is studying for ordination. Yet I know I go against many friends and family who share my core faith values - in my firm belief that "All are welcome at Christ's Table". This really upsets me as I am sure it equally does my Christian friends and family who think I am wrong in my beliefs here. We all use the same Bible and we need to somehow get around this. There is one answer and God has it -- not us.

I am not emotionally or theologically equipped to enter into a debate on this here. There are enough faith leaders and theologians with a lot more "horsepower" than myself debating this issue on the Internet from all sides.

However, from a mere legal standpoint, I have trouble with this law as it narrowly defines what many feel is a blessed relationship and in the way it is written serves first to effectively disenfranchise 2 out of 10 people in CA, and also leaves the door open to other similar laws -- i.e. interracial marriages, marriages after divorce, etc. Again, many lawyers are debating both sides of this issue today. Read what they have to say. But aside from theological implications, it is an evil piece of legislation which takes away peoples' rights and opens the door to the type of federally mandated discrimination of days gone by.

So here we go for the record:

I am a Christian.

I believe Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior - The Way The Truth The Life.

BUT

I believe sexual orientation is part of who someone is. I believe - and science increasingly confirms this - that sexual orientation is likely defined genetically before birth. It is not a "Choice", a "perversion" or "something to be prayed over and healed".

Who people are and who they love is part of who they are as God's blessed creation, as the Bible says. I see it with so many of my LGBT friends and family.

When I assist in serving Communion, I feel God's hand in my serving Communion to all. Jesus turned no one away from His table.   Nor, when assisting in Communion would I. People come to Christ's table for God's blessing. Who am I to decide who God will bless?

I pray daily to God that we may all learn to love one another. We need this now more than ever. I love and cherish my friends who think I am wrong here. I still do and I pray daily about this issue. My stance is based on a lot of prayer, biblical study and contemplation over many years.

One last note.
When quoting biblical justification against homosexuality or same-sex marriage, we must be sure to take this handful of passages in context and also in the context of the Greek and Hebrew source texts which still exist. If we take Leviticus literally, for instance, I'd best be prepared to start ducking rocks. Not just for what I've said above, but for my two divorces. And maybe for eating that Carnitas Burrito last week!

Church gives fresh meaning to 'offering' plate

2009-05-18T21:09:45Z

Just came across this nifty little story while I was surfing the news. How cool is this?

Church gives fresh meaning to 'offering' plate

The pastor of a non-denominational church in Argyle, Texas, passed around the collection plate to his congregants earlier this year -- and asked them to take money from it.

Donations at the Cross Timbers Community Church had slumped because of the economic downturn. Pastor Toby Slough thought that his congregants had to be hurting, too.

His gesture, instead, was met with an unexpected response: The church had its highest offering ever

7 Guidelines for Biblical Scholarship

2009-05-14T02:12:38Z

April DeConick is one of my favorite Bible scholars. She is a Professor of Biblical Studies at Rice University and describes herself as a historian of early Jewish and Christian thought. She is probably best known for the scholarly work she has done with regard to Gnosticism. She has a great blog that I read on a regular basis. Lately she has been blogging about how Jesus came to be viewed as God, and in one of her early posts she lays out some ground rules. I think these are fantastic guidelines that should be used for any study of religious texts or religious history. Here they are:

1. This is a critical venture, not an apologetic one. This is perhaps the most important ground rule we can put into place, and stick by at all costs. What the theologians back in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries realized is that for the study of religion to be an academic enterprise comparable to the study of history or literature or the arts, it cannot be apologetic. If we want to understand how any religion comes into existence and grows, we cannot be invested in the promotion or rescue of that particular religion. We have to leave our own theological interests at the door.

2. We cannot grant special privileges to the religion we are studying. This means that we cannot allow for God to perform miracles when it is convenient for our explanations. We cannot suspend what we know to be scientifically true about our world and grant a religion special treatment or supernatural explanations. The critical study of religion is not about proving or defending one's own religious beliefs or the special claims of a particular religious community. It isn't about disproving them either. The critical study of religion does not amount to outsiders attacking what should not be attacked. It is about dealing fair and square with religion in an objective scientific manner using reason that relies on verifiable research, and not allowing for special knowledge of God, revelations, or privileges to be granted to the religion. For those people who want to use the post-modern avoidance strategy and argue that there is no objective truth but only pluralisms, well you need to go back and reread your philosophy and your science. Although the historical enterprise is recognizably subjective, this does not mean that it is unscientific or that it does not result in research that is as objective as possible.

3. We must suspend canonical thinking and boundaries. We must deal equitably with all of our ancient sources, having no preconceived judgments about them based on whether they are in or out of the bible, whether they support or deny traditional theological or christological formulations, and whether they were written by the winners or the losers in the battle over Christianity. There are no heretics or heretical literature, except in terms of how various historical groups may have perceived each other.

4. We begin with the assumption that Christianity did not fall out of the sky one day, but it originated on earth among human beings and developed in complex social, political, and religious environments.

5. The sources that have been left behind were written by human beings and reflect the complexity of the growth of Christianity.

6. Our sources are not neutral. They were not written to report objective factual history. They were written for a variety of reasons including apology and polemic and propaganda. They often reflect a communal interest, and thus do not necessarily tell us what happened but what the community wanted to happen, thought should happen, or wanted remembered about them.

7. Our sources are dependent on the human being, physiologically, psychologically, emotionally, socially. The stories they relate are the consequence of human experience and human memory which itself is a constructive process with many implications. Eyewitness testimony (even in those cases where we might have it in our sources) does not guarantee the "reliability" or "authenticity" of anything reported. Not only is intentional lying a possibility that we cannot simply set aside, but human memory (because it is a social constructive process) has been proven to distort. Social memory likewise.

What's the "hook"?

2009-05-13T12:53:09Z

Something I've been wondering about lately... what attracts people to be Christian?

C.S. Lewis said that it happens when somebody realizes that they're not right with the power that oversees the universe, and they need to get right. I don't doubt that is the thought process for some people, but that is not the way it came about for me. I came up with an even more general version of this, which is... people come to try to know God better when something in their life isn't working, and they want to find a better way. I think it's true, but it's also kind of vague (intentionally so) and I can't seem to come up with anything more specific.

Apart from the threat of going to Hell if you don't believe, what's the "hook" for Christianity? What's going to motivate somebody to become a Christian?

A Question

2009-05-09T11:52:16Z

This is a bit more of a historical than a religious question, but since it pertains to Christianity and there are a lot of smart people on this community I thought I'd post it anyways.

I've heard a lot of people, of varing religious beliefs, say that Christianity was influenced by Buddhism. Now, I don't have a problem with this per se. I see a lot of ethical similarities between the two, Buddhism predates Christianity and I think Buddhist teaching are pretty sound although I don't think they contain the whole truth. Anways, the thing is (unless I'm wrong, which is possible) Buddhism was not widely practiced in the area where Christ was born and practiced his ministry. Most subjects of the Roman Empire practiced the Greco-Roman religion or other pagan religions, with a small minority being Jews.

Does anyone have any resources or information about the religous practices of the times?

New prayer community

2009-05-04T17:41:43Z

I just set up an interfaith prayer idea/example/discussion community: ways_we_pray if anyone is interested

Should christians endorse the military engagement in Afghanistan?

2009-05-04T11:01:15Z

What are your views on the involvment of US, UK and 'coalition' troops in Afghanistan?

As a christian, I believe that war must nearly always be the final - the least desirable - option. I mean: I'd defend my family if they were attacked, so I don't feel I can claim to be a pacifist.

But I was dismayed by the Iraq War and set up a local Stop the War group and we demonstrated through our town centre (and, of course, with two million others in London).

And I just don't feel convinced about military presence in Afghanistan, and particularly about strikes from the air and civilian casualties.

On the other hand, as a christian concerned about respect for people's rights, and specifically women's rights, I would hate to see people with the ideology of the Taleban re-introducing islamic extremes like the burning down of schools, the killing of teachers, the subordination of women.

And then the other side of me feels: that future is so bad, so wrong, so totally against the rights and dignities of women, that surely it ought to be opposed.

So I find myself torn between two contradictory convictions.

Torture and the churched

2009-05-01T23:13:59Z

I thought this was interesting, and germane:

The more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to support the torture of suspected terrorists, according to a new survey.

Of course, it's not *causation* but...I think it's a bit disturbing. Nominally Christian people can rationalize away their stances on other subjects in terms of the Bible (incorrectly I think, but, they can...), but it's disturbing that so many of them would hold this view which, as far as I can tell, is so completely antithetical to any of Christ's teachings.

New Community

2009-04-26T19:15:56Z

If this is not allowed, please let me know and I will happily take the post down.

I wanted to let you all know about the community I have just created -- </a></font></b></a>reclaiming_sex . The focus is on people who come from a sexually detrimental religious set of beliefs who are reclaiming a healthy idea of sex. All are welcome, regardless of current or past religious beliefs. If you have been hurt by sexual repression, abuse, the exgay movement, or hate from within a religious idea, or simply want to cultivate or help others cultivate a healthier incorporation of sex into one's life, please join and share your journey with others.

On a personal note, I am a former evangelical christian, though currently highly spiritual person, who once believed that lustful thoughts, masturbation, pornography, homosexuality, etc. were all sinful especially outside of marriage. As someone who was strongly devoted to her faith throughout the teenaged and sexually developmental years, I am still feeling the repurcussions of sexual repression even now, three and a half years into my marriage. My intellectual ideas of sex have changed greatly, but my psychological and emotional responses can still hold on to old habits. I know that I can't be the only one who experiences this, so I am reaching out to the greater livejournal community to hopefully create a network of support for myself and for those like me.

I am aware that this can be a touchy issue. Though tolerance and respect for others, regardless of their beliefs, is expected, you do not have to believe that sex outside of marriage is okay, or support homosexuality in order to join. Maybe you are currently a strong Christian and waited until marriage to have sex, only to discover that years of sexual repression is still interfering with your marital life, even though sex is supposed to be okay now. Whatever the case may be, if you believe you have something to contribute to the community or would appreciate the support of others, please join and spread the word.

Just something to think about ♥

2009-04-24T21:00:50Z

Buddha never claimed to be God.
Moses never claimed to be Jehovah.
Mohammed never claimed to be Allah.
Yet Jesus Christ claimed to be the true and living God. Mark 14:62
Buddha said, "I am in search of the truth."
Jesus said, "I am the Truth." John 14:6
Confucius said, "I never claimed to be holy."
Jesus said, "Who convicts me of sin?" John 8:46
Mohammed said, "Unless God throws his cloak of mercy over me, I have no hope."
Jesus said, "Unless you believe in me, you will die in your sins." John 8:24

The message of Christ is not Christianity. The message of Christ is Christ.

*edited to include scripture references. :)

If I'm Right Then I'm Right

2009-04-24T14:02:54Z

I wrote this post a year ago (almost to the date in fact) and I wanted to share it with you all. I figure there are many of you who can relate to this.

I once had a conversation with my friend Tam: a spiritual lesbian who lives in Australia. We were discussing God and religion and she asked me how would I react if I learned beyond a shadow of a doubt that there isn't a God?

To be quite honest, I've wondered about that from time to time. Any reasonable and intelligent individual questions their ideaologies and re-examines their faith from time to time. Mother Theresa did and according to scripture so did Jesus.

After all, doubt is what makes you careful, doubt is what makes you open to change. Reasonable doubt is a crucial factor in our judicial system. Anyone who is cocksure of their belief system (religion, politics, etc.) and thinks it is impossible for them to be wrong or either crazy, lying and/or a fool. Truth is, whatever we believe or don't believe, none of us know beyond a shadow of a doubt.

In regards to Tam's question, we both agreed on the answer: If I'm right then I'm right and if I'm wrong then I'm still right.

If I learn tomorrow that there isn't a God and everything I believed in was completely fiction, I would have no regrets or be disappointed whatsoever. Fact or myth, if what I believed inspired me to evolve and strive to be a better human being then I have nothing to be ashamed of. Look at history and look at the figures who have accomplished great things because of their faith: Jesus, Buddha, Ghandi, Mother Theresa, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X just to name a few.

If I discovered beyond question that God did not exist, I would like to think that I would be open-minded enough to embrace that knowledge and have the humility and the wisdom to modify my belief system accordingly and continue in my quest to be the best person I can possibly be.

I've learned enough from religion and spirituality and I don't just mean Christianity. I've studied different religions/idealogies/viewpoints and I've tried to adopt the best attributes that each of them have to offer.

From Christianity/Catholicism I learned that the power of faith can achieve the impossible over and over again.

From Judaism I learned much about free will and self actualization. I also learned that a group of people who know about oppression probably more so than any other group will never be beaten and will always prosper, thus teaching me to persevere no matter what hardships come my way.

From Buddhism I've learned about the importance of inner peace and contentment and exorcising those inner demons.

From Hinduism I learned that there are multiple paths to God/truth/enlightenment.

From Wicca/Paganism I learned that there are vast untold secrets in this world. Many that most of us will never uncover. I also learned that women are on equal footing as men in the eyes of God and that femininity has untold power unto itself.

From Islam I learned about standing tall for what you believe is right and not just when it's convenient.

From atheism I learned the importance of self-acccountability and that spiritualism isn't limited to religion or Faith in God. I always loved the old quote: Pray like everything depends on God and work like everything depends on man.

And from agnosticism....from agnosticism I learned that is okay to question and wonder and ask. After all, this is how we evolve and this is how we progress. And that they're probably the most rational and logical of all of us.

Whether or not all these faiths/beliefs/religions are real, we'll probably never "know" for a fact. What I do know is that men and women far better than me have achieved true greatness because they were inspired by these ideaologies and have made this world a better place.

And as far as I'm concerned, that makes God real enough.

Greetings

2009-04-16T19:34:32Z

Hi, everyone -- I just joined this group a couple of days ago and wanted to introduce myself. I'm very glad this group is here. :-)

Deborah 13: Servant of God

2009-04-13T03:15:17Z

Hello, fellow bleeding heart liberals. =D
I just recently watched this interesting documentary about this British girl named Deborah Drapper. It tells about her strict evangelical fundamentalist Christian lifestyle with her many brothers and sisters. While watching it, I didn't get mad at the girl or her parents. I mostly felt pity for them because of the box and religious paradigms they put themselves into. Here's the link to part 1 (there are 6 parts in total):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XduMIK4u65s&feature=channel_page

Can't wait to see what you all think of it!
Happy Easter

Ways you celebrate

2009-04-12T17:27:34Z

Alright, So I come from a pretty secular family. Easter boils down to a box of chocolate, a card and going out to lunch. That's it. I want to know, what do all of ya'll do to celebrate Easter and make it special?
Once I start my family (when ever that happens) I want to incorporate some meaningful traditions. I'd love it if ya'll would share some of yours. :)

X-posted to my person LJ and to crnchychristian

recommendations/suggestions?

2009-04-12T13:49:41Z

hello all,

longtime member and lurker here, i am writing because i am in need of some suggestions.

i recently got engaged to my guy of several years, we're planning a september wedding. since we both believe in focusing more on the marriage than the wedding itself, i'd like to find some materials to help us with that. i have spoken to my former pastor who has agreed to act as a pre-marital counselor for us, which is great. however, i would also like to get maybe a book or two, or maybe some audio stuff to compliment the counseling as well as helping us maintain a good marriage in the future.

i have already done a bit of looking around on christian websites and marriages forums but unfortunately the vast majority of themes and materials i have found are of the complementarian variety. as liberal christians, both my fiance and i are definitely of the egalitarian persuasion and find this stuff unhelpful at best and downright harmful at worst.

so, can anyone offer any leads, ideas, recommendations, links, suggestions?

p.s. not sure whether we have a tag for recommendations or marriage. mods?

Happy Easter!

2009-04-12T12:01:17Z

Happy Easter!

Madeleine Bunting: Real debates about faith are drowned by the New Atheists' foghorn voices

2009-04-08T16:00:11Z

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/05/christianity-new-atheism-faith

The Genesis 1 Galaxy is Cool!

2009-04-07T21:34:10Z

We started from a positive acceptance of the scientific data, or facts, on evolution, so we did not even consider a reading Genesis 1 with any fears for 'contradiction' with science. This approach is of course very different from making up our mind upfront, based on our (often primitive, and interpreted) understanding of the Biblical account. When our views need to change, it is not really science changing biblical views, but our own understanding of our environment that changes - and it changes all the time of course, because "times are changing" as the saying goes. In religion, some things never change - but that is particularly true for the high appreciation of the human being, less so for how we perceive the universe for instance.

With this in mind, let us now look at Genesis 1, knowing that we should not treat the Bible as a scientific document.

What kind of story is Genesis 1?

The reading of Genesis 1 may impose a problem if you learned to read it as a literal report on how the creation actually happened, in stead of reading this as a report on more important aspects not covered by science.

As we have seen in the former blogs, the Genesis 1 account reads like an allegory of some kind. Saying allegory is taking a shortcut, as Genesis 1 has also often been described as elevated prose, or a theological manifesto, and other descriptions. It is important however, to realize that allegory does not indicate it has no basis in reality. An allegory is not a fiction. Allegories always have a historical basis. Santa Claus is not an allegory. Most of the parables, a narrative style often used by Jesus, clearly had a historical basis. This was the way stories were often handed down in ancient times, for educational purpose. Still, there is history writing behind it in almost all cases (e.g. the naming of genealogy trees: those names were not just invented of course). You cannot exclude historical truth from an account just because the style of an ancient document was different from what we are used to. Accuracy may not always have been the prime purpose - for instance in Jewish genealogy trees we find gaps. That does not make the account untrue - it just makes it inaccurate on certain points (e.g. exact timing) from a modern viewpoint. The modern viewpoint does not allow unqualified judgments about ancient writings of course: all things must be judged against the background of the time of occurrence. So one may have to make corrections to get the timing right - but historians know how to do this. There's nothing that compares with a fantasy story here.

Go here to read the complete blog.

Feel free to comment on the blog (will never be deleted) or to comment in this group, as you like. It is my wish, not that all Christians accept all about evolution, but that Christians will, at the very least, understand that not all Christians have trouble with evolution. You cannot make christians see conflicts between science and religion if they don't see such a conflict. We have to be able to go on together, not let us be divided on mere 'insights'. If you think I'm stupid, that's fine - but should you reject me as your brother for that reason? That is my major goal with this blog series. 1 or 2 more to follow soon.