|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: What would a "Spongite" Church be like?
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
In other news, I've just changed my avatar image in the wild hope that it will help myself and everybody else keep track of what I wrote and what Radical Whig wrote...
Thank you!!! ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
Community, beauty, and ethics are all fine things, but I demand that Christianity be something more. All those things, for the average person, are not based on objective standards but on social conditioning. Community is not really based on love, but on norms imposed for the smooth functioning of society. What one culture considers beautiful is considered pale and anemic to another. What one community considers morally praiseworthy is morally abhorrent to another. So why must there be a recourse to Jesus Christ for any of those things? In truth, I don't think any of those things do take any recourse to Jesus Christ.
What's worse, attempts to shoe-horn Jesus Christ into teaching those things only makes Jesus Christ the servant of culture and society. The Almighty damn well better bow down to what we think is good and beautiful! Our society is good, Lord, so either conform to us or be consigned to the outer darkness of myth!
That’s what I think the Incarnation is about. Jesus Christ is in of himself more important than any teaching about ethics or community. Community, ethics, and beauty? All rubbish compared to Him. Otherwise, we demand everything bow down to us. Truth. Goodness. The Almighty. Everything.
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
Radical Whig
Only seen this this afternoon and posts rather too long to try to listen to all the way through, but I have read all of yours and as usual of course I like very much what you say.
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
If you want to understand what bugs us, one more resource might be Dietrich Bonhoeffer.
There's a general sense that when religion gets reduced to a particular culture, a reflection of our particular human ideals, bad things happen. State religions sound nice in concept, but have a long bloody history in practice going back at least to Catholic Spain, if not Constantine himself.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
The simple answer is 'empty'.
The Unitarians started off successfully, grasping the spirit of the age but they are now struggling with tine congregations.
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RadicalWhig
Shipmate
# 13190
|
Posted
Zach 82,
I think you are about 180 degrees away from what I'm trying to say. I don't know why this is so difficult to communicate.
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Community, beauty, and ethics are all fine things, but I demand that Christianity be something more. All those things, for the average person, are not based on objective standards but on social conditioning. Community is not really based on love, but on norms imposed for the smooth functioning of society. What one culture considers beautiful is considered pale and anemic to another. What one community considers morally praiseworthy is morally abhorrent to another. So why must there be a recourse to Jesus Christ for any of those things? In truth, I don't think any of those things do take any recourse to Jesus Christ.
Look at what Jesus did to his own culture. Replicate in your own.
quote:
What's worse, attempts to shoe-horn Jesus Christ into teaching those things only makes Jesus Christ the servant of culture and society. The Almighty damn well better bow down to what we think is good and beautiful! Our society is good, Lord, so either conform to us or be consigned to the outer darkness of myth!
Again, I'm not sure how you manage to portray a Jesus-based radical critique of society into an anemic apology for it.
quote:
That’s what I think the Incarnation is about. Jesus Christ is in of himself more important than any teaching about ethics or community. Community, ethics, and beauty? All rubbish compared to Him. Otherwise, we demand everything bow down to us. Truth. Goodness. The Almighty. Everything.
Which is exactly what you are doing. Who invented the incarnation? People did. Who made him into Him? People did. Human cultures did. Perhaps you don't see it like that, but to me what you are really saying is that all must bow down to Christ as understood through the Man Made Religion of Christianity).
I don't know of any religion which was not made up by people, and is not necessarily a product of human culture, ideas and inspiration - it's just that most seem to lack the honesty to admit that.
--------------------
Radical Whiggery for Beginners: "Trampling on the Common Prayer Book, talking against the Scriptures, commending Commonwealths, justifying the murder of King Charles I, railing against priests in general." (Sir Arthur Charlett on John Toland, 1695)
Posts: 3193 | From: Scotland | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
RadicalWhig And isn't that exactly what you are attempting: A man-made religion?
You say "man-made religion" like it's a bad thing, but then you deny that any other kind exists, ISTM.
As Jesus Christ was fully human, I suppose even the orthodox would have to admit that in a sense, Christianity is ultimately man-made by a particular man.
And: quote:
Look at what Jesus did to his own culture. Replicate in your own.
Have you ever actually tried to do this with your whole heart, soul, mind, body, and strength? I'm amazed you have the time to post on an internet discussion board!
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
It is very clear what you are trying to say. It's been said thousands of times by thousands of people. You believe the beauty, moral teachings, and community of the Christian religion are more worthwhile and true than any petty doctrine.
What I am saying is as clear, I hope. Community, morality, and beauty are mere human constructs, and to make any of them divine is to worship a human construct. Idolotry!
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RadicalWhig
Shipmate
# 13190
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bullfrog.:
RadicalWhig And isn't that exactly what you are attempting: A man-made religion?
You say "man-made religion" like it's a bad thing, but then you deny that any other kind exists, ISTM.
I'm just honest about it, and about its limitations.
quote:
Originally posted by Bullfrog.:
quote:
Look at what Jesus did to his own culture. Replicate in your own.
Have you ever actually tried to do this with your whole heart, soul, mind, body, and strength? I'm amazed you have the time to post on an internet discussion board!
The same could be said of anyone - we are all trying, imperfectly, to do these things. And yes, I do think that in my own small way I try to challenge, and improve, the world around me - and this underpins my vocation as an academic political scientist.
[ 28. July 2010, 17:00: Message edited by: RadicalWhig ]
--------------------
Radical Whiggery for Beginners: "Trampling on the Common Prayer Book, talking against the Scriptures, commending Commonwealths, justifying the murder of King Charles I, railing against priests in general." (Sir Arthur Charlett on John Toland, 1695)
Posts: 3193 | From: Scotland | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
quote:
Originally posted by Bullfrog.:
RadicalWhig And isn't that exactly what you are attempting: A man-made religion?
You say "man-made religion" like it's a bad thing, but then you deny that any other kind exists, ISTM.
I'm just honest about it, and about its limitations.
quote:
Look at what Jesus did to his own culture. Replicate in your own.
Have you ever actually tried to do this with your whole heart, soul, mind, body, and strength? I'm amazed you have the time to post on an internet discussion board!
The same could be said of anyone - we are all trying, imperfectly, to do these things. And yes, I do think that in my own small way I try to challenge, and improve, the world around me - and this underpins my vocation as an academic political scientist.
ETA: actually, I figured I should fix it...
Push comes to shove, every Christian I know accepts the limits of their religion and its human elements. God is bigger than us. Are you trying to imply that we're saying that the Church is perfect?
And if you reduce it to its human elements, which are the source of all the clusterfuck in the first place, why then try to build a purely human church? You'd just get even more humanity!
To the latter. People have been doing that since the beginning. Why start something new when there are so many that have been trying to do the same? I know it's tough to take criticisms directly from people you think are wrong, but are you hearing what everyone says about Spong?
I'm not sure anyone is saying that you have to be Orthodox or Spongian, but if you wanted to be a visionary heretic, there are better models out there than the retired bishop.
[ 28. July 2010, 17:04: Message edited by: Bullfrog. ]
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
RadicalWhig
Shipmate
# 13190
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
What I am saying is as clear, I hope. Community, morality, and beauty are mere human constructs, and to make any of them divine is to worship a human construct. Idolotry!
But your doctrine is also a human construct, as is the Bible, as is the idea of the Trinity. To worship these - or to claim these as uniquely divine - is, I think, a sort of idolatry too. Let's just be honest about that, and say that the God which exists is bigger than our human doctrines or our man-made religion; then we can approach and experience the divine with a profound and awed agnosticism, while concentrating on living well, on the fact that this is a hurting world, which we'd like to make better. As part of that, we can acknowledge Jesus as one of the great, or perhaps even the greatest, of those who have penetrated into the human condition and taught us to live well.
--------------------
Radical Whiggery for Beginners: "Trampling on the Common Prayer Book, talking against the Scriptures, commending Commonwealths, justifying the murder of King Charles I, railing against priests in general." (Sir Arthur Charlett on John Toland, 1695)
Posts: 3193 | From: Scotland | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
I've got one word for ya, RW:
Pelagius. Best heretic the church has ever known.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
But your doctrine is also a human construct, as is the Bible, as is the idea of the Trinity. To worship these - or to claim these as uniquely divine - is, I think, a sort of idolatry too. Let's just be honest about that, and say that the God which exists is bigger than our human doctrines or our man-made religion; then we can approach and experience the divine with a profound and awed agnosticism, while concentrating on living well, on the fact that this is a hurting world, which we'd like to make better. As part of that, we can acknowledge Jesus as one of the great, or perhaps even the greatest, of those who have penetrated into the human condition and taught us to live well.
We keep saying "Mere human contruct," but what does that mean? Why is turning to "living well" such a problem? Because we ourselves are not mere human constructs! The human soul is not a thing to be stomped down into conformity, but must triumph above society. Of course we Christians believe we have a pattern of such a thing in Jesus Christ.
This is also why, by the standards of any community, Jesus must be crucified. The inability to function in a community is either criminality or mental illness. So if Jesus is the pattern of rejecting the community, then the community must consider him a criminal or a madman. Either was he is a dangerous sort. So making him a mere moral teacher is impossible.
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RadicalWhig
Shipmate
# 13190
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bullfrog.:
I've got one word for ya, RW:
Pelagius. Best heretic the church has ever known.
Don't see the connection. Wasn't his thing to do with original sin and free will?
--------------------
Radical Whiggery for Beginners: "Trampling on the Common Prayer Book, talking against the Scriptures, commending Commonwealths, justifying the murder of King Charles I, railing against priests in general." (Sir Arthur Charlett on John Toland, 1695)
Posts: 3193 | From: Scotland | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
quote:
Originally posted by Bullfrog.:
I've got one word for ya, RW:
Pelagius. Best heretic the church has ever known.
Don't see the connection. Wasn't his thing to do with original sin and free will?
His thing was that humans can achieve salvation via perfect emulation of Jesus Christ.
I'm not sure what his views on the incarnation were, but he is said to have effectively said you had to do what Jesus did to be saved. Atonement by perfect emulation.
If you think about it, it kind of pushes all the supernatural out of the picture. All you have to do is be like Jesus.
I'm caricaturing him a bit, but I think I'm pretty close to how he's been caricatured by the orthodox church.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
RadicalWhig
Shipmate
# 13190
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
This is also why, by the standards of any community, Jesus must be crucified.
And Socrates must drink hemlock.
--------------------
Radical Whiggery for Beginners: "Trampling on the Common Prayer Book, talking against the Scriptures, commending Commonwealths, justifying the murder of King Charles I, railing against priests in general." (Sir Arthur Charlett on John Toland, 1695)
Posts: 3193 | From: Scotland | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
Certainly Christians through the ages have admired Socrates for that very thing. Yet, Socrates ultimately taught that community was higher than the individual.
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Certainly Christians through the ages have admired Socrates for that very thing. Yet, Socrates ultimately taught that community was higher than the individual.
Zach
Did Christ do the same?
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
Christ taught that the only judge is God.
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683
|
Posted
There is a total disconnect here, with two different fields of discourse. This means that neither will, in the end be able to meet the other. It will end up until it gets to this:
Person A: The incarnation, the salvific crucifixion and resurrection, the ascension etc are all human creations.
Person B: No they're not - they are event s that happened
Person A: The God you believe in doesn't exist in the way you think he or she does
Person B: Yes She does!
Person A: It is all human-made
Person B: No, it is revelation.
Person A: No it isn't
Person B: Yes it is
Person A: No it isn't
Person B: Yes it is
...
and so on.
I wish Spong was more honest and not use the term 'Christianity'.
--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com
But maybe not
Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Addendum and question: How is Spong's God any different from a guest on Oprah dispensing lifestyle advice?
1. Spong's God has never been on Oprah;
2. Spong's God doesn't dispense lifestyle advice.
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
Finally, it is worth remembering that what Spong offers here is a reform agenda. It assumes the pre-existence of a Church and a Christian tradition which he is trying to re-interpret. He's not inventing a new religion entirely ex nihilo.
He's trying to highjack the church and make it into something it has never been, because that something better fits with his own post-Christian worldview. Calling that "reform" is twisting the word beyond any meaning it's ever been forced to carry before.
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
What would a "Spongite" Church be like?
Empty.
Granted, as the wise Archdeacon said, "Most people prefer cornflakes to muesli."
Or, most people prefer watching a programme to a blank TV screen.
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I honestly don't know what 'he believes Jesus is Lord' means here
Well. You, me and the baker would probably have different versions on that too. Are we not Christians all?
It would be more helpful to say what you mean by 'Jesus is Lord' than to get defensive about it and clam up.
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
What would a "Spongite" Church be like?
Empty.
No. That's what he said traditional churches would be in Why Christianity Must Change or Die.
And he would seem to be right on that score.
The ironic thing here is that it's the churches that are closest to Spong theologically-wise: the very liberal mainlines, that are shrinking. The con-evo theologically unyielding churches (in the US at least) are the ones that are growing. The data so far suggest Spong is 180° wrong.
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
But I do think there are more ways of believing in God than to believe in a theistic God, and more ways of following Jesus than to believe he was the incarnate and resurrected Son of God. Why is that so difficult to accept?
It's not difficult to accept. It's just not Christianity.
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
In other news, I've just changed my avatar image in the wild hope that it will help myself and everybody else keep track of what I wrote and what Radical Whig wrote...
It really does help. Thank you! If I ran the farm, no two people would be allowed to have the same avatar. But I'm probably more easily confused in that way than most are.
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
Look at what Jesus did to his own culture. Replicate in your own.
I can't. I'm not God incarnate. You don't think Jesus was anything but a man, so you think it's possible for a mere man to do this. Knock yourself out.
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
But your doctrine is also a human construct, as is the Bible, as is the idea of the Trinity. To worship these - or to claim these as uniquely divine - is, I think, a sort of idolatry too. Let's just be honest about that, and say that the God which exists is bigger than our human doctrines or our man-made religion; then we can approach and experience the divine with a profound and awed agnosticism, while concentrating on living well, on the fact that this is a hurting world, which we'd like to make better.
But "Let's just be honest about that" from you means "Let's just agree with me [RadicalWhig]." Which is rather question-begging. I can't deny what I honestly believe, and call it being honest. We've had this discussion before. You appear to think that, deep down, we all really secretly agree with you, but we pretend that we believe in a personal God, and that the man Jesus Christ was God incarnate, and that God is capable of doing what are normally referred to as miracles, and so on and so forth. You appear to think that "being honest" would be for us to give up these "mythological wrappers." But we really do believe them, and being honest for us is to admit that and deal with it. It would be dishonest for me to say I am a RadicalWhigian, because I am not. Let's just be honest -- we disagree.
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
I wish Spong was more honest and not use the term 'Christianity'.
There it is in a nutshell.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
(By that logic, I can assert that Thomas Jefferson rose from the dead too, because his ideas still make liberals get that warm and fuzzy feeling).
And I wear my What Would Jefferson Do? bracelet* with pride!
* Hand-knitted by a women's co-operative from organic tofu.
(Ok, now I'm just playing into your stereotypes. Enough.)
But I do think there are more ways of believing in God than to believe in a theistic God, and more ways of following Jesus than to believe he was the incarnate and resurrected Son of God. Why is that so difficult to accept?
Several things.
First, sure, you can believe in God without being a theist. However, religions that have a pantheistic or even a pantheistic concept of the divine normally create a plethora of emanations from the unknowable all encompassing Whatever that are actually knowable. Consider Hinduism and Gnosticism for instance.
Second, if Jesus isn't divine anymore than anybody else, why listen to Jesus? People who reject traditional Christianity but wish to maintain a veneer of it do so because the traditional version insults their reason. Hence, reason is an important part of your knew religion. Problem is many of the truly controversial things that Jesus said isn't reasonable. Love your enemies? Your a student of history. What thriving civilization ever loved its enemies? Then all that stuff about hating your family in order to follow Jesus. Should a person ever hate their family and community enough to follow any human being? Your a fan of distributism. Could anything be more heretical to distributism than hating your family and leaving your community to follow a man claiming to be a prophet?
Lastly, viewing Christianity as symbols and metaphors only works if you stop thinking about them as symbols and metaphors. You have to stop caring about issue of historicity all together. Deep down you may know that it is all just symbolic. However, in order for those symbols and metaphors to be effective, you must live your life as if they are as true as the morning news or they aren't effective. Some people can't do that. It is hard to put forth a lot of effort in service to a nice and helpful metaphor. I'd rather sleep in on Sunday.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
Mousethief: I'm with you on almost everything except:
quote:
The ironic thing here is that it's the churches that are closest to Spong theologically-wise: the very liberal mainlines, that are shrinking. The con-evo theologically unyielding churches (in the US at least) are the ones that are growing. The data so far suggest Spong is 180° wrong.
The Con-Evo churches in the U.S. stopped growing a few years ago.
Huffpo correctly notes the decline but I think misses as much of the mark as to why as you do. They blame rigidity and hypocrisy:
HuffPo: The Great Evangelical Decline
I believe it's demographics. The biggest reason the "liberal" mainline denominations started declining first is that Mainliners tended to be in the American establishment, middle-to-upper class, urban and thusly had few children to sustain congregations as older members died off or people exited. It's been estimated that Presbyterians and Episcopalians, the two historically most upper crust Protestant groups, currently have 1.5 children per married couple.
The [predominately white] Con-Evos [like the Southern Baptists, church of Christ, etc.] drew from the lower class and rural population which until recently had more than the replacement level of children. Increasingly as the Con-Evos assumed similar lifestyles as the Mainlines, their numbers started to plateau and then fall as well. The Southern Baptist Convention has been in numerical decline in several different statistics (baptisms, ordinations, enrolment and membership) for a few years.
Southern Baptist Now a "Declining" Denomination
The only major in the American population comes from immigration and most immigrants are Hispanic and are either Catholic or Pentecostal. Winning them over to historically white Mainline or non-Pentecostal Evangelical traditions in large numbers is a pretty hard sell. You either have to "sheep steal" or go after post-Christians, who are the hardest to reach.
So while I tend to believe that Spong's theology leads to an empty faith, correlation doesn't always mean causation when it comes to membership figures (which are notoriously hard to compare across denominational lines anyway.)
[ 28. July 2010, 19:21: Message edited by: ToujoursDan ]
--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I stand corrected.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PhilA
shipocaster
# 8792
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bullfrog.:
quote:
Originally Posted by Phila:
Again, Spong isn't saying what he does believe. To try and build any faith from what was quoted in the OP is utterly absurd and to then dismiss Spong because he hasn't done something he hasn't done is equally absurd.
Again, and this is why trying to build an entire faith-based institution around Spongite "theology" is impossible.
Agree. I don't think Spong is trying to build a faith based institution.
quote:
RadicalWhig should work with someone of a bit more substance, methinks. Even Paul Tillich (whom Spong is deeply indebted to) would be more useful.
Tillich. Now your talking. He is one theologian I love and agree with on everything I have read of his (haven't read systematic theology volume 3 yet).
IMHO, Don Cupitt is watered down Tillich and Spong is watered down Cupitt.
IMHO Tillich writes a wonderful theology which is a wondrous apologetic for theism and is, rather than an attempt at a reformation of the church, an attempt to help it evolve.
--------------------
To err is human. To arr takes a pirate.
Posts: 3121 | From: Sofa | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PhilA:
quote:
Originally posted by Bullfrog.:
quote:
Originally Posted by Phila:
Again, Spong isn't saying what he does believe. To try and build any faith from what was quoted in the OP is utterly absurd and to then dismiss Spong because he hasn't done something he hasn't done is equally absurd.
Again, and this is why trying to build an entire faith-based institution around Spongite "theology" is impossible.
Agree. I don't think Spong is trying to build a faith based institution.
quote:
RadicalWhig should work with someone of a bit more substance, methinks. Even Paul Tillich (whom Spong is deeply indebted to) would be more useful.
Tillich. Now your talking. He is one theologian I love and agree with on everything I have read of his (haven't read systematic theology volume 3 yet).
IMHO, Don Cupitt is watered down Tillich and Spong is watered down Cupitt.
IMHO Tillich writes a wonderful theology which is a wondrous apologetic for theism and is, rather than an attempt at a reformation of the church, an attempt to help it evolve.
I think it was N.T. Wright who once remarked that Spong wants to follow in the footsteps of John T. Robinson and Don Cupitt but unfortunately he lacks their originality.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
But "Let's just be honest about that" from you means "Let's just agree with me [RadicalWhig]." Which is rather question-begging. I can't deny what I honestly believe, and call it being honest. We've had this discussion before. You appear to think that, deep down, we all really secretly agree with you, but we pretend that we believe in a personal God, and that the man Jesus Christ was God incarnate, and that God is capable of doing what are normally referred to as miracles, and so on and so forth. You appear to think that "being honest" would be for us to give up these "mythological wrappers." But we really do believe them, and being honest for us is to admit that and deal with it. It would be dishonest for me to say I am a RadicalWhigian, because I am not. Let's just be honest -- we disagree.
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
I wish Spong was more honest and not use the term 'Christianity'.
There it is in a nutshell.
I rather think the first part of the post answers the second.
If we're really honest, Mousethief, orfeo and ianjmatt are the only true Christians on this thread. They have the correct definitions of God.
Their way is the only way. Everybody else is destined for hell.
Fundys are so irrational.....
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
Speaking as someone who appreciates some of Spong's earlier work -- seating your belief system on what you DON'T believe isn't particularly appealing to me. To paraphrase Gertrude Stein, there doesn't seem to be a lot of "there" there.
The Nicene Creed came out of what we are not. It came out of opposition.
[ 29. July 2010, 01:12: Message edited by: Evensong ]
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
But "Let's just be honest about that" from you means "Let's just agree with me [RadicalWhig]." Which is rather question-begging. I can't deny what I honestly believe, and call it being honest. We've had this discussion before. You appear to think that, deep down, we all really secretly agree with you, but we pretend that we believe in a personal God, and that the man Jesus Christ was God incarnate, and that God is capable of doing what are normally referred to as miracles, and so on and so forth. You appear to think that "being honest" would be for us to give up these "mythological wrappers." But we really do believe them, and being honest for us is to admit that and deal with it. It would be dishonest for me to say I am a RadicalWhigian, because I am not. Let's just be honest -- we disagree.
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
I wish Spong was more honest and not use the term 'Christianity'.
There it is in a nutshell.
I rather think the first part of the post answers the second.
If we're really honest, Mousethief, orfeo and ianjmatt are the only true Christians on this thread. They have the correct definitions of God.
Their way is the only way. Everybody else is destined for hell.
Fundys are so irrational.....
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
Speaking as someone who appreciates some of Spong's earlier work -- seating your belief system on what you DON'T believe isn't particularly appealing to me. To paraphrase Gertrude Stein, there doesn't seem to be a lot of "there" there.
The Nicene Creed came out of what we are not. It came out of opposition.
I'm sure Orfeo, Mousethief and Ianjmatt are amused that they are called fundamentalist.
To claim that the opposite of Spong's theology can only be fundamentalism is to claim that if you oppose fascism, you must be a Marxist Communist. Or that if you oppose sexism, you must be a raging feminist separatist.
I'm critical of Spong, but then again I'm not a huge fan of most theologians in general. Until the whole controversy over homosexuality in the Anglican Communion, the only theologian who would most reflect my own personal theology would be Rowan Williams+. Most people would not classify Williams+ as a fundamentalist, either on the left or on the right.
There is a world of grey beyond black and white thinking.
[ 29. July 2010, 01:19: Message edited by: Anglican_Brat ]
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
There is a world of grey beyond black and white thinking.
Apparently, not when it comes to being a Christian.
![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
Spong is also a fundamentalist. He's just got a different set of operative fundamentals. That's one reason people find him annoying. He claims that he's all about being open minded as long as you're not a small-o orthodox Christian.
But if you're a small-o orthodox Christian, you must be one of those dreaded fundamentalists we're all so eager to get rid of. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Besides, the Bible quite clearly says that not everyone who calls Jesus 'Lord' will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
p.s. Thank God for that.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Christianity has a diversity of expressions that are identifiably Christian. Still, at some point, a religious expression stops being Christian or else the word Christian means anything anybody wants it to mean. I'm sure some people want exactly that. Others of us don't want the term Christian to be virtually meaningless. If that makes us fundamentalist bigots in the opinion of those who want the term to mean anything anybody wants it to mean, then I for am will just have to be a fundamentalist bigot in their eyes.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
If we're really honest, Mousethief, orfeo and ianjmatt are the only true Christians on this thread. They have the correct definitions of God.
Maybe there can be more than one definition of God, but there can be only one Christian definition. God is omnipotent. God is omniscient. God is perfectly benevolent. That God is Jesus Christ.
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
There is a world of grey beyond black and white thinking.
Apparently, not when it comes to being a Christian.
Once again, I find it incredibly puzzling that you think 'grey on some things' automatically has to lead to 'grey on all things'. Or that 'black and white on certain things' is the same as 'black and white on all things'. It's simply illogical.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
What gets me about Christian bigots is doctrine becomes more important than people.
The sabbath was made for man. Man was not made for the sabbath.
Sometimes I'm so ashamed to be a Christian......
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
How does Spong make people important?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
What gets me about Christian bigots is doctrine becomes more important than people.
The sabbath was made for man. Man was not made for the sabbath.
Sometimes I'm so ashamed to be a Christian......
I don't think anyone is saying that doctrine is more important than people.
I think all they're saying is that doctrine is important.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
What gets me about Christian bigots is doctrine becomes more important than people.
The sabbath was made for man. Man was not made for the sabbath.
What a strange analogy. "The sabbath was made for man" is not the same statement as "Ignore the sabbath completely because I think it's silly."
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
The more I think about this, the more I wonder what people's attitudes are to non-religious contexts. To club, associations or professions.
I have this mental image of a person who dresses in a police uniform, who tells people that they're a policeman. And then the other police realise that this person hanging around the station was never sworn in as a police officer. They have no legal authority to perform the duties of a police officer. They read a bunch of magazines on policing, they're dead keen on the whole idea of policing, but they failed the entrance exam or were told during training that they weren't going to obtain the qualification at the end of this.
And when they're told that the other police do not, in fact, consider them to be a police officer, they storm off talking about how the police force is in dire need of reform.
Just because we're talking about religion here, I see no reason why questions of mutual recognition and acceptance that the person fits the label should be thrown away.
It's got nothing to do with the subject matter. And yes, before there are any snide remarks about me being police I could have picked doctor, or teacher, or plumber. Or alleged member of the local garden society who doesn't actually pay the annual membership fee and feels free to totally ignore whatever is written in the society's consitution, but still insists on telling everyone they are in fact on the society's board.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Forgive me for thinking the word "Christian" ought to have content and not just be an empty symbol. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
Yes, the creed came out of a situation of ruling out heresies. But it actually SAYS something. It makes claims. It says what we believe in. You can list multiple things we believe from it.
If you take Spong's list of points as posited in the OP, what positive claims does it make? It doesn't just come out of a context of ruling things out; that's virtually all it does. What actual beliefs can you determine he has from those points? The creed says many many things that we believe.
In other words, apples and oranges. A cheap attempt to score debating points.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
My analogy was more apt than I realised. It just occurred to me what the word 'profession' MEANS.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Now I know how Luther felt.
Come to think of it, that's the analogy used in the title of Spong's autobiography.
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Forgive me for thinking the word "Christian" ought to have content and not just be an empty symbol.
The arrogance of this statement is astounding.
Alot of you obviously missed the Sunday School lessons on humility.
Its in the bible ya know.
Or wait.....you all probably wouldn't be terribly interested. More about tradition isn't it?
Luther indeed.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Forgive me for thinking the word "Christian" ought to have content and not just be an empty symbol.
The arrogance of this statement is astounding.
Is it? That's easy to say isn't it? Are dictionary-makers arrogant? Shouldn't words have meaning?
Or wait you mean that THIS word shouldn't have meaning? Or wait, it shouldn't have the meaning that it's had for 2000 years, but should have some other meaning? or ...
I give up. What do you mean?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Now I know how Luther felt.
Come to think of it, that's the analogy used in the title of Spong's autobiography.
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Forgive me for thinking the word "Christian" ought to have content and not just be an empty symbol.
The arrogance of this statement is astounding.
Alot of you obviously missed the Sunday School lessons on humility.
Its in the bible ya know.
Or wait.....you all probably wouldn't be terribly interested. More about tradition isn't it?
Luther indeed.
Luther staunchly believed in returning to the primacy of Scripture as the rule of faith. He would be amazed and shocked to learn that Spong would compare himself to him. His understanding of the priesthood of the individual believer should not be interpreted as a radical individualism. He believed that believers were subject to the authority of Scripture interpreted within the believing community.
He wholeheartedly accepted the Creeds as grounded in Scripture and authoritative.
To interpret Luther as some kind of wild-eyed radical is to misread his theology.
[ 29. July 2010, 05:18: Message edited by: Anglican_Brat ]
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I give up. What do you mean?
You are saying Spong's Christianity is empty. God might surprise you in the places she dwells these days.
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
To interpret Luther as some kind of wild-eyed radical is to misread his theology.
Yeah. He was such a conservative. That's why they kept trying to kill him.
Nothing like rocking the status quo to get into trouble.
The modern version is shouted at Spong "Crucify him! Crucify him!"
He receives death threats from Christians all the time.
Such a loving people.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Forgive me for thinking the word "Christian" ought to have content and not just be an empty symbol.
The arrogance of this statement is astounding.
Is it? That's easy to say isn't it? Are dictionary-makers arrogant? Shouldn't words have meaning?
Or wait you mean that THIS word shouldn't have meaning? Or wait, it shouldn't have the meaning that it's had for 2000 years, but should have some other meaning? or ...
I give up. What do you mean?
Now wait...that was actually a helpful post. We are supposed to be humble. It says that somewhere in the Bible and where it says it is a part we are supposed to keep. So, we got love and humility. Still, not sure why we are supposed love and be humble.
Humility apparently does not preclude you from comparing yourself to one of the most important figures in Christian history because you've read some books by a third rate theologian, posted some stuff on a message board, and people disagree with the third rate theologian and your defense of him.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I give up. What do you mean?
You are saying Spong's Christianity is empty. God might surprise you in the places she dwells these days.
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
To interpret Luther as some kind of wild-eyed radical is to misread his theology.
Yeah. He was such a conservative. That's why they kept trying to kill him.
Nothing like rocking the status quo to get into trouble.
The modern version is shouted at Spong "Crucify him! Crucify him!"
He receives death threats from Christians all the time.
Such a loving people.
I condemn any death threats or violence targeted at anyone, including people who I disagree with. I don't think anyone deserves any violence, either physical, emotional or spiritual, whether they are liberal, conservative, gay, straight, white, or black, etc.
At the same time, vigorous disagreement and criticism of one's ideas is not the same thing as violence. Theologians, like other academics, understand that when they publish their ideas, they will be subject to criticism. Everyone is free to express their ideas, but no one's ideas is immune from criticism or challenge.
I disagree with John Spong on some issues. I also disagree with Peter Jensen, NT Wright, and plenty of other conservatives. I like Marcus Borg, John Dominic Crossan, who are considered liberal. I also like CS Lewis, Flannery O'Connor, and Dorthy Sayers who might be considered conservative. I don't believe in liking liberals simply because they are liberal or disliking conservatives simply because they are conservative. A good idea deserves praise and a bad idea deserves to be criticised.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bullfrog.:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
What gets me about Christian bigots is doctrine becomes more important than people.
The sabbath was made for man. Man was not made for the sabbath.
Sometimes I'm so ashamed to be a Christian......
I don't think anyone is saying that doctrine is more important than people.
I think all they're saying is that doctrine is important.
People here may not be saying it,but I think Evensong was thinking wider than this thread/board. I have been called heretic and apostate elsewhere by people who do not agree with my beliefs, just as Evensong said. I certainly would be ashamed to bring seekers to hear what some of them would say.
--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner
Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The more I think about this, the more I wonder what people's attitudes are to non-religious contexts. To club, associations or professions.
I have this mental image of a person who dresses in a police uniform, who tells people that they're a policeman. And then the other police realise that this person hanging around the station was never sworn in as a police officer. They have no legal authority to perform the duties of a police officer. They read a bunch of magazines on policing, they're dead keen on the whole idea of policing, but they failed the entrance exam or were told during training that they weren't going to obtain the qualification at the end of this.
And when they're told that the other police do not, in fact, consider them to be a police officer, they storm off talking about how the police force is in dire need of reform.
Jesus was out of line in not accepting the authority of the Scribes and Pharisees. He set a vary dangerous precedent.
--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner
Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Latchkey Kid:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The more I think about this, the more I wonder what people's attitudes are to non-religious contexts. To club, associations or professions.
I have this mental image of a person who dresses in a police uniform, who tells people that they're a policeman. And then the other police realise that this person hanging around the station was never sworn in as a police officer. They have no legal authority to perform the duties of a police officer. They read a bunch of magazines on policing, they're dead keen on the whole idea of policing, but they failed the entrance exam or were told during training that they weren't going to obtain the qualification at the end of this.
And when they're told that the other police do not, in fact, consider them to be a police officer, they storm off talking about how the police force is in dire need of reform.
Jesus was out of line in not accepting the authority of the Scribes and Pharisees. He set a vary dangerous precedent.
YES. AND WE DON'T CALL OURSELVES JEWS, DO WE?
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
