The "nones" and their importance

[cheese_sdc]

More food for thought. Now what do you think that the word “believe” means in this sentence?

Interestingly enough, Matthew doesn’t seem to require a theological exam to enter Heaven:

When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

 

[Porknpie]

Interestingly enough, Matthew doesn’t seem to require a theological exam to enter Heaven

True. Belief in performing good works is very Catholic of you! Matthew also writes that Christ himself says one must keep the commandments

16 And now a man came to him and asked, ‘Master, what good deed must I do to possess eternal life?’
17 Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you ask me about what is good? There is one alone who is good. But if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.’

And John says that you must eat the flesh of the Son of Man.

53 Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.

Does your church stress the importance of keeping the commandments & receiving the Eucharist? Should I mention Baptism or the need to confess sins?

Some thoughts to think about I hope.

 

[cheese_sdc]

Does your church stress the importance of keeping the commandments & receiving the Eucharist? Should I mention Baptism or the need to confess sins?

No need, I’m no longer a Christian.

 

[Porknpie]

No need, I’m no longer a Christian.

Cheese-

The nature of your answer invites the question of what then are you?

I assume then you reject the God of Israel as myth? Do you believe Jesus as a person existed and that he was not devine?

Just trying to get a sense of your beliefs.

Peace.

Pork

 

[GaryTaylor]

No need, I’m no longer a Christian.

A theory not held by the Catholic Church. There is no leaving…for where? As St Peter said; “And where shall we go Master?”

For one to say they are not any longer Christian would mean they concluded Jesus Christ in no longer God or never was? Do you know the statistical probability of Jesus being exacly who he said was…The Living God? 1x157 to the 10th power. Which in effect would be a basket the size of the Universe filled with BBs, and ONE with a different color. Then you placing your hand in that basket and pulling out that One! Are you a believer in the odds?

So you reject the Doctrine of the Trinity?

And what revelation has produced the certainty that Jesus Christ isn’t God or the Holy Spirit isn’t a relevant aspect of a triune God?

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.”

Course one could always deem the book itself irrelevant but I know of no other book of more significance, can you think of one? Once upon a time on the cover of the Bible use to be the word “The Greatest Book Ever Written” Today we see a variation of “The Greatest Words Ever Spoken” in Jesus. Point being I do believe the Bible still holds this prestigious title? No? If you won’t believe the Bible what will you believe?

 

[cheese_sdc]

Just trying to get a sense of your beliefs.

I’m a lil’ bit Monotheist, a lil’ bit Taoist, and a lil’ bit Pagan.

 

[cheese_sdc]

A theory not held by the Catholic Church. There is no leaving…for where? As St Peter said; “And where shall we go Master?”

For one to say they are not any longer Christian would mean they concluded Jesus Christ in no longer God or never was? Do you know the statistical probability of Jesus being exacly who he said was…The Living God? 1x157 to the 10th power. Which in effect would be a basket the size of the Universe filled with BBs, and ONE with a different color. Then you placing your hand in that basket and pulling out that One! Are you a believer in the odds?

So you reject the Doctrine of the Trinity?

And what revelation has produced the certainty that Jesus Christ isn’t God or the Holy Spirit isn’t a relevant aspect of a triune God?

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.”

Course one could always deem the book itself irrelevant but I know of no other book of more significance, can you think of one? Once upon a time on the cover of the Bible use to be the word “The Greatest Book Ever Written” Today we see a variation of “The Greatest Words Ever Spoken” in Jesus. Point being I do believe the Bible still holds this prestigious title? No? If you won’t believe the Bible what will you believe?

You seem quite happy within Christianity and I applaud your devotion. I am also quite happy with my path.

 

[Porknpie]

I’m a lil’ bit Monotheist, a lil’ bit Taoist, and a lil’ bit Pagan.

Cheese -

How do you answer the questions below from my previous post?

I assume then you reject the God of Israel as myth?

Do you believe Jesus as a person existed and that he was not devine?

 

[Publisher]

No need, I’m no longer a Christian.

Friend Cheese, My sister is UU. She was going to a “welcoming” Baptist church with her family for about 10 years. They switched pastors and the more “conservative” members “took over” and became less tolerant of diversity in the congregation.

I gave her a a book about UU called “A Chosen Faith: An Introduction to Unitarian Universalism”, she and her family now attend the UU’s and are very happy there. She went to meeting with me but she likes the teaching aspect of Sunday morning she was familiar with among Baptists…but now she says the messages are uplifting, inspirational and challenging to her daily life.

She struggles with the conservative definition of “Christian”. She and I have had many hours of great discussions.

While neither of us consider ourself one of the “Nones”, we both relate to the difficulty they have with 'organized" religion that neglects cultivating the spiritual life lived out in practical life.

 

[Porknpie]

Friend Cheese, My sister is UU. She was going to a “welcoming” Baptist church with her family for about 10 years. They switched pastors and the more **“conservative” **members “took over” and became less tolerant of diversity in the congregation.

Publisher - define “conservative”

Tx,

 

[cheese_sdc]

I assume then you reject the God of Israel as myth?

Not really. The Jewish people experienced the Divine in a certain way based on their history, geography, and culture. Those factors shaped their understanding to be what we see today. It works.

This seems reasonable to me.

[/QUOTE]

 

[Publisher]

Publisher - define “conservative”

Tx,

**

How do you answer the questions below from my previous post?

I assume then you reject the God of Israel as myth?

Do you believe Jesus as a person existed and that he was not devine?

Friend Prknpie, your questions to friend cheese in the affirmative would be one indicator of “conservative”.

I do not believe the Bible is an infallible 'how to book" but rather a very human record of man’s search to understand their experience with the Eternal. The God of Israel went from tribal deity among many, but the only deity Israel was to deal with, to the One True God of whom the prophets declared. The early Hebrews were “henotheistic” not “monotheistic”. It was only after the return from Exile that the Jews truly became monotheistic.

I do not believe Genesis is anything other than sacred myth, seeking to answer “just so” questions the writers were seeking. Adam and Eve were not living persons, they were mythic, as were Noah, Enoch, Shem, Ham, and a host of others.

Abraham may very well have been a mythic figure, who in reality was simply a compiliation of many men in one character…as was Moses. The Red Sea did not part, pillars of fire and clouds did not lead Israel thru the desert, water did not flow from rocks, the sun did not “stand still” in the sky to give Joshua more time to win his battle victory. Jonah did not get swallowed by a “great fish”…Jonah and Ruth were not histories of events, but religious texts written during the time of the prophets to call the Jewish nation away from their ethnocentrism as the belief in the One Universal God of all humanity was taking form in the fertile consciousness of the Jewish nation.

I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was a remarkable man, and that this God of love and mercy was expemplified in him to such a degree that one could say God was with us in Jesus of Nazareth.

The gospels are not biographical treatise of his life, but were written to be used in the liturgy of the Jewish synagouges that had a large group Christian adherants, the gospels cast Jesus of Nazareth as the New Moses, and those stories found in the gospels are retellings of the sacred history of the Jewish people with Jesus of Nazareth as the new revelation of God in their midst…they were never to be read as literal biographical novels.

For myself, in Jesus of Nazareth God is revealed…in Jesus of Nazareth, love and grace and mercy and hope and peace are realized. The Kingdom of God is truly present among now. God is Holy Mystery, and beyond our comprehension. But if I want to know who God is, He can be met in Jesus of Nazareth…in some way I cannot understand…only experience.

If such ideas you find heretical…I’d most likely include you among the “conservative” group.**

 

[cheese_sdc]

Friend Cheese, My sister is UU. She was going to a “welcoming” Baptist church with her family for about 10 years. They switched pastors and the more “conservative” members “took over” and became less tolerant of diversity in the congregation.

I gave her a a book about UU called “A Chosen Faith: An Introduction to Unitarian Universalism”, she and her family now attend the UU’s and are very happy there. She went to meeting with me but she likes the teaching aspect of Sunday morning she was familiar with among Baptists…but now she says the messages are uplifting, inspirational and challenging to her daily life.

She struggles with the conservative definition of “Christian”. She and I have had many hours of great discussions.

While neither of us consider ourself one of the “Nones”, we both relate to the difficulty they have with 'organized" religion that neglects cultivating the spiritual life lived out in practical life.

I struggled for years with Catholicism. I love the sacramental system - all of it. I believe that it captures the reality of Divinity infusing the physical. What I had trouble with is that I never experienced a loving, forgiving God of Christianity. The harder I looked, the more the God of Christianity seemed angry, unforgiving, and spiteful (apologies to the Catholics here - this is my personal experience and no amount of “You’re Wrong!” will change it. I’ve tried all already anyway).

When I finally let go of Christianity, I laughed, b/c my experience was was the same as many people describe when they convert - colors were brighter, the sun was cheerful, and birds sang sweeter.

I now try to live as authentically as possible - true to my own experience of the Divine. I exist, It exists, and we both are happy.

 

[Publisher]

I struggled for years with Catholicism. I love the sacramental system - all of it. I believe that it captures the reality of Divinity infusing the physical. What I had trouble with is that I never experienced a loving, forgiving God of Christianity. The harder I looked, the more the God of Christianity seemed angry, unforgiving, and spiteful (apologies to the Catholics here - this is my personal experience and no amount of “You’re Wrong!” will change it. I’ve tried all already anyway).

**When I finally let go of Christianity, I laughed, b/c my experience was was the same as many people describe when they convert - colors were brighter, the sun was cheerful, and birds sang sweeter.

I now try to live as authentically as possible - true to my own experience of the Divine. I exist, It exists, and we both are happy**.

As a Friend, I would say you experienced the Light Within as a Reality.

 

[cheese_sdc]

As a Friend, I would say you experienced the Light Within as a Reality.

You are too kind. It is quite hard to describe the reality of it - both exhilarating and terrifying.

 

[Publisher]

You are too kind. It is quite hard to describe the reality of it - both exhilarating and terrifying.

Each of us are on this amazing Journey. It is an Awe some, terriblely terrifying Journey full of the Unknown. But I believe we can make this Journey in confidence that the One who knows us best, love us most, and is Present with us.

For me, the story of the incarnation puts it in persepctive for me…God walked among us, as one of us in every way. He knows us best and holds each of us in His Hands…He won’t let us fall. I chose to live in faith, that there is One who hold my future in loving Hands, and come what may, I will make it thru.

I read somewhere…“Sometimes He leads us out of the darkness into the light…and sometimes He leads us into Light Itself.”

 

[manualman]

If such ideas you find heretical…I’d most likely include you among the “conservative” group.

In other words, if you believe in a form of christianity that would be recognizable to ANY significant christian group that existed before the year 1800 or so, you’re a “conservative.” Interesting definition.

Does it ever bother you in your worldview that God left absolutely nothing objectively reliable by which we can know him? Perhaps you’re a better man than me, but in your shoes I could rationalize a LOT of things I sometimes find myself inclined towards.

Us “conservatives” notice that an awful lot of people these days ARE pretty good at rationalizing whatever it is they want to do.

But I’ve also come to recognize that the labels ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ are political labels ill suited to religion. A priest on the radio put it well when he said the divide in the world today isn’t really between liberals and conservatives, but between those who believe in a supernatural / personal God who has revealed himself to man throughout history … and those who don’t. I’m not sure which one you are, actually. Your description above sounds a lot more like the New Age than the basically christian beliefs that used to undergird Quakerism. Is God a person (a Trinity of persons) or an impersonal force?

 

[cheese_sdc]

Does it ever bother you in your worldview that God left absolutely nothing objectively reliable by which we can know him?

I have a few issues with this statement. By definition, Divinity is completely beyond our comprehension. When It is revealed to our very finite senses, it is incomprehensible and we are left grasping for a vocabulary and terms which are a pale reflection of the Awe Inspiring Reality of Divinity.

That vocabulary is shaped by culture, history, geography, technology, and experience.

So I would suggest that it is not that Divine changes, rather it is us, the observer of Divine, that changes. As humanity experiences the Other in history, it changes - because we have changed.

Each person’s experience of Divinity is valid, because it reflects a facet of Infinite Truth of Divinity.

 

[manualman]

I have a few issues with this statement. By definition, Divinity is completely beyond our comprehension. When It is revealed to our very finite senses, it is incomprehensible and we are left grasping for a vocabulary and terms which are a pale reflection of the Awe Inspiring Reality of Divinity.

That vocabulary is shaped by culture, history, geography, technology, and experience.

So I would suggest that it is not that Divine changes, rather it is us, the observer of Divine, that changes. As humanity experiences the Other in history, it changes - because we have changed.

Each person’s experience of Divinity is valid, because it reflects a facet of Infinite Truth of Divinity.

Catholicism disagrees (as I understand it). Divinity is “completely beyond our comprehension” in Islam, not christianity. They use the word “inscrutable.” Christians, on the other hand believe that human capacity to reason and comprehend is a feature of being created in the image and likeness of God. God is beyond our ability to COMPLETELY comprehend, yes. But that’s a very different statement than declaring him “completely beyond our comprehension.” See the difference?

Your last line is utterly absurd and you know it. Sincerity is demonstably not enough to avoid catastrophe. Lenin was most likely a sincere believer in communism. That didn’t help since communism is inherently a destructive approach to human community. Things DO have natures, there IS a natural law. These things are knowable because we humans have at least a limited portion of God’s image and likeness within us. But applied as it is written, your closing line allows anybody to justify anything. I sure hope you don’t really believe your own principles.

 

[Publisher]

In other words, if you believe in a form of christianity that would be recognizable to ANY significant christian group that existed before the year 1800 or so, you’re a “conservative.” Interesting definition.

Does it ever bother you in your worldview that God left absolutely nothing objectively reliable by which we can know him? Perhaps you’re a better man than me, but in your shoes I could rationalize a LOT of things I sometimes find myself inclined towards.

Us “conservatives” notice that an awful lot of people these days ARE pretty good at rationalizing whatever it is they want to do.

But I’ve also come to recognize that the labels ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ are political labels ill suited to religion. A priest on the radio put it well when he said the divide in the world today isn’t really between liberals and conservatives, but between those who believe in a supernatural / personal God who has revealed himself to man throughout history … and those who don’t. I’m not sure which one you are, actually. Your description above sounds a lot more like the New Age than the basically christian beliefs that used to undergird Quakerism. Is God a person (a Trinity of persons) or an impersonal force?

I understand that you believe he has left you an “objectively reliable” source in which to know Him…I assume it’s your church teaching and it’s teaching and governing body.

Friends don’t have that “objectively reliable” source to defer to…we must seek to examine our hearts and minds and seek the Light Within individually and corporately and make the best choices we can based on our understanding of the Light Within and seek to order our lives accordingly and seek “incarnation” with Him in this life…to be His Body in our world.

It is a terrible responsibility to be sure, but where we fail, there is astounding grace and mercy available for us.

I don’t know what “God is”, God is “Wholly Other” and my defintions of God are constructs that I am not able to prove or disprove objectively. I can’t even conceive of the physics or science to get to the moon and back, let alone define the Unknowable and Wholly Other Creator of all that is, seen and unseen. I best understand Him in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. According to the testimony of scripture is “The exact representation of the Invisible God”.

I do believe God has revealed Himself in history. The Light Within …“that of God” indwells each of us…so Friends look inwardly to seek the Voice of God and then collectivly seek to assist one another in seeking mutual understanding…realizing we’re sometimes not up to the task…then we must seek His grace and mercy for our shortcomings…and place ourselves in His Hands…a very Good Place to be…“He does all things well”, so I seek to order my life to receive all things from His Hands…if it’s Judgement…I echo Job’s words…“Though He slay me, still will I trust in Him.”…yes indeed…in His Hands is the best place to be.