xFamily

Read Topic
Reply

The Eight Points Of Progressive Christianity

xFamily
» General
» The Eight Points Of Progressive Christianity

Get Email Updates • Email this Topic • Print this Page

The Eight Points Of Progressive Christianity
St. Andrew's Mission Statement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Eight Points of Progressive Christianity

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

1. Have found an approach to God through the life and teachings of Jesus.

2. Recognize the faithfulness of other people who have other names for the way to God's realm, and acknowledge that their ways are true for them, as our ways are true for us.

3. Understand the sharing of bread and wine in Jesus's name to be a representation of an ancient vision of God's feast for all peoples

4. Invite all people to participate in our community and worship life without insisting that they become like us in order to be acceptable (including but not limited to):
believers and agnostics,
conventional Christians and questioning skeptics,
women and men,
those of all sexual orientations and gender identities,
those of all races and cultures,
those of all classes and abilities,
those who hope for a better world and those who have lost hope; without imposing on them the necessity of becoming like us.

5. Know that the way we behave toward one another and toward other people is the fullest expression of what we believe.

6. Find more grace in the search for understanding than we do in dogmatic certainty - more value in questioning than in absolutes.

7. Form ourselves into communities dedicated to equipping one another for the work we feel called to do: striving for peace and justice among all people, protecting and restoring the integrity of all God's creation, and bringing hope to those Jesus called the least of his sisters and brothers.

8. Recognize that being followers of Jesus is costly, and entails selfless love, conscientious resistance to evil, and renunciation of privilege.

http://www.staopen.com/mission.php

CB/BE
Thanks for sharing this, Piram. I consider myself a progressive Christian, and I didn't realize there was a website with resources.

Re: CB/BE

BlackELk wrote:

Thanks for sharing this, Piram. I consider myself a progressive Christian, and I didn't realize there was a website with resources.

My pleasure. I really like and respect Dr. Jim Rigby. HereÂ´s an article he wrote this year:

"Why we let an atheist join our church":
http://www.alternet.org/story/34268/

The only difficulty with "progressive Christianity" is that the Apostles of Jesus Christ did not advocate such, and neither did Jesus Christ Himself.

Quote:

The only difficulty with "progressive Christianity" is that the Apostles of Jesus Christ did not advocate such, and neither did Jesus Christ Himself.

This is a matter of opinion, and I don't agree with your conclusion about what Jesus or the apostles did or did not advocate. Please don't get into citing scriptures as proof that your opinion is correct while mine is wrong. I'm thinking particularly of Jn. 14:16 and Principle 2 of the eight points, which says nothing about objective truth.

Whatever you may object to about the 8 principles, please acknowledge the bias of your own understanding & beliefs. People who follow Jesus Christ interpret the gospel and apostolic teachings in many different ways, and I'm sick and tired of being told my convictions & values are less worthy than those of someone who claims to have a better understanding of "true" Christianity.

"The religion of Jesus is both spiritual and political. Jesus said in his first sermon that he had come to preach good news to the poor. He taught that love fulfills the law and the prophets, and spoke of a coming movement of God that would lift up the poor and oppressed. Jesus let a doubter like Thomas serve that cause long before the disciple could affirm any creed. Jesus said that people who blaspheme him or God would be forgiven, but those who blaspheme the Spirit (of love) would not be. Religion is not about groveling before a savior, it's joining in the work of saving our world."

- Jim Rigby

Quote:

but those who blaspheme the Spirit (of love) would not be.

The "(of love)" should be "[of love]", as it is simply the authors opinion that the Spirit refers to love.

I'd also like to know why Thomas is called a doubter. Thomas was "serving that cause" long before he doubted, and with only one instance of skepticism mentioned, the term "doubter" is unfair.

Finally, his interpretation of religion is dead wrong. Religion isn't in the slightest a work of saving the world. That is a possible consequence of religion.
Go look it up in a dictionary if you don't know what it means.

Re: The Eight Points Of Progressive Christianity
First of all, that's very interesting. I will not say that I am or am not a Christian, as I don't know what that word means.

I will present my opinion based upon what I noticed in this text.

Piram wrote:

2. Recognize the faithfulness of other people who have other names for the way to God's realm, and acknowledge that their ways are true for them, as our ways are true for us.

Didn't Jesus say that "no man cometh unto the Father by me?"

Quote:

4. Invite all people to participate in our community and worship life without insisting that they become like us in order to be acceptable (including but not limited to):
believers and agnostics,
conventional Christians and questioning skeptics,
women and men,
those of all sexual orientations and gender identities,
those of all races and cultures,
those of all classes and abilities,
those who hope for a better world and those who have lost hope; without imposing on them the necessity of becoming like us.

How can one maintain the above and the following?

Quote:

8. Recognize that being followers of Jesus is costly, and entails selfless love, conscientious resistance to evil, and renunciation of privilege.

Some seem to forget that there are certain cultures that have inherently evil practices. Can we accept those practicing evil into our community and lives?

One reason I do not like TF is we are forced to live with perverts and those we we find contrary. I find no reason to force myself to do such a thing. It is not love to others or to myself.

Now I will ramble on:

Did not Jesus say to "love thy neighbour as thyself?" If we do not know how to love ourselves, how can we love others? It's not just emotion or sympathy. The first step in love is acceptance. Once we have accepted ourself, then we can begin to see more clearly what our needs are. To deny our own needs, would be like denying another of their needs. If I have a need for noise and action, I must respect anothers need for quiet. For to deny myself my need for noise and action, I will also deny another's need for quiet. The selfrighteous whip themselves. They end up whipping others too.

Other than that, on the practical side, I think there is a code of conduct that is good to follow. It is not dogma. Rather, if you do those things, you'll be happy. The 10 commandments and the 5 precepts sum them up I think. However, there may be a few more or less. I haven't investigated much.

Morals are like safe guards. I think without them, we end with TF doctrines and double speak.

evanman wrote:

The only difficulty with "progressive Christianity" is that the Apostles of Jesus Christ did not advocate such, and neither did Jesus Christ Himself.

The difficulty with you is that youâ€™re stuck in dim and distant past.
If I said aliens abducted me you would disagree!
As for me well I could not possibly comment since I am only at stage 1A of â€œThe Twelve Foundation Stonesâ€

winter said:
Didn't Jesus say that "no man cometh unto the Father by me?"

Yes, he did. However, to "acknowledge that their ways are true for them, as our ways are true for us", IMO, does not contradict this.

"How can one maintain the above and the following?"

When the relationship is not one of indoctrinator & oppressor to minion & oppressed, the situation is quite different. People who are looking for acceptance and love instead of condemnation will be able to find it. People who, on the other hand, are looking for dogma they can be arrogant and self-satisfied about will be disappointed and will look elsewhere.

"there are certain cultures that have inherently evil practices."

Evil practices are to be found in all peoples. If what you mean is that some people are inherently better than others, you may accept that, but IÂ´m afraid I canÂ´t . If you canÂ´t accept people that do evil things, you canÂ´t accept yourself.

"One reason I do not like TF is we are forced to live with perverts and those we we find contrary."

Those "perverts" you refer to imposed themselves on others because they were in a position to do so. However, in a community where dogma is not imposed, as it was and is in TF, this, IMO, is quite unlikely to happen.

Did not Jesus say to "love thy neighbour as thyself?"

Yes, and if you put the needs of others before your own, youÂ´re loving yourself, because what you sow you will reap. "Selfless love" does not mean self-flagellation. In the dictionary, a synonym of selfless is "unselfish".

************************************
m said:

"...his interpretation of religion is dead wrong. Religion isn't in the slightest a work of saving the world. That is a possible consequence of religion. Go look it up in a dictionary if you don't know what it means."

There are a number of definitions of the word "religion" to be found in the dictionary. Some are more specific, and others are more general. To say that this interpretation is "dead wrong" is something I may accept as someoneÂ´s opinion, but certainly not as a documented and unquestionable fact.

The only definative work we have on Christian doctrine and experience we have are the writings of the New Testament.

Problems always occur when people add to (such as Berg, Joseph Smith, Charlse Taize Russell, Ellen G. White, the Curia etc.) these teachings, or take away from these teachings (ie John Wimber, Gerald Coates amongst others).

evanman wrote:

The only definative work we have on Christian doctrine and experience we have are the writings of the New Testament.

Problems always occur when people add to (such as Berg, Joseph Smith, Charlse Taize Russell, Ellen G. White, the Curia etc.) these teachings, or take away from these teachings (ie John Wimber, Gerald Coates amongst others).

Oh pardon me I was under the impression that your writings were definitive!
Still I suppose they would be in the Old Testament or maybe just Old Writings.
Problems always occur when you start making comments!
I have never read such absurd nonsense and waffle.
There comes a time in the affairs of person when they must take the bull by the tail and face the situation! W.C.Fields.

Love & God Bless

Max

Piram wrote:

winter said:
Didn't Jesus say that "no man cometh unto the Father by me?"

Yes, he did. However, to "acknowledge that their ways are true for them, as our ways are true for us", IMO, does not contradict this.

Interesting opinion. If there is only one road to Rome, are there any other roads to Rome?

I am not stating the above. I am trying to show the logical falacy or contradiction of the two statements. One from "Progressive Chrisitanity" and the other from "The Bible."

When the relationship is not one of indoctrinator & oppressor to minion & oppressed, the situation is quite different. People who are looking for acceptance and love instead of condemnation will be able to find it. People who, on the other hand, are looking for dogma they can be arrogant and self-satisfied about will be disappointed and will look elsewhere.

Maybe you don't understand what I was trying to point out. If, as a Christian, you do not believe in human sacrifice, then you will try to show those people that it is wrong. Yes, you accept them. Do you accept their practices?

"there are certain cultures that have inherently evil practices."

Evil practices are to be found in all peoples. If what you mean is that some people are inherently better than others, you may accept that, but IÂ´m afraid I canÂ´t . If you canÂ´t accept people that do evil things, you canÂ´t accept yourself.

Are you joking? Please do not even suggest I said such a thing. I said what I said. It is rather clear. Who am I? Does it matter?

"One reason I do not like TF is we are forced to live with perverts and those we we find contrary."

Those "perverts" you refer to imposed themselves on others because they were in a position to do so. However, in a community where dogma is not imposed, as it was and is in TF, this, IMO, is quite unlikely to happen.

It's a practical issue. I hope you have lived in at least a few different, and I mean different, countries. Then you may understand why you do not want to mingle with everyone. Why, everyone may not want to mingle with you. To accept that about yourself is accepting that about them.

One of the requirements of a sinner is to repent. I think that is one thing that is lacking in that "Progressive Christianity" stuff.

"Everyone do as you will. It's all the same. You can worship the devil too if you want. It's alright." Does that sound like something Jesus would have said? There's nothing about loving God, the 10 commandments, and much else. Isn't that some of the things Jesus taught?

Yes, and if you put the needs of others before your own, youÂ´re loving yourself, because what you sow you will reap. "Selfless love" does not mean self-flagellation. In the dictionary, a synonym of selfless is "unselfish".

Yes, before your own, but not lacking your own. That is what I was trying to say - trying to balance out TF doctrine printed in my own mind.

winter wrote:

Piram wrote:
winter said:
Didn't Jesus say that "no man cometh unto the Father but by me?"

Yes, he did. However, to "acknowledge that their ways are true for them, as our ways are true for us", IMO, does not contradict this.

Interesting opinion. If there is only one road to Rome, are there any other roads to Rome?

I am not stating the above. I am trying to show the logical falacy or contradiction of the two statements. One from "Progressive Chrisitanity" and the other from "The Bible."

I am quite familiar with all the pertinent scriptural references. It should be clear by now that we do not all have the same interpretations of the same scriptures, and I might add, particularly when it comes to the letters of the apostles. Some of us may not even believe that all of the pages found in the KJV Bible, for example, were inspired by God (And using scripture to justify or "prove" scripture could well be seen as a sort of "tautology", donÂ´t you think?-- I say this because of certain scriptures used to "prove" that 100% of the Bible is of divine inspiration) Some of my favorite scriptures: Matthew 5:43-48

Much as Berg and TF used the business of "The Law of Love" to their own ends, I believe thatÂ´s what itÂ´s all about: Love, and you shall live. Kill, and you shall die. A self-inflicted death, no less. And I believe thatÂ´s what Jesus is. Not chanting, not groveling, not sobbing and theatrics. Just love. ThatÂ´s what I believe.

When the relationship is not one of indoctrinator & oppressor to minion & oppressed, the situation is quite different. People who are looking for acceptance and love instead of condemnation will be able to find it. People who, on the other hand, are looking for dogma they can be arrogant and self-satisfied about will be disappointed and will look elsewhere.

Maybe you don't understand what I was trying to point out. If, as a Christian, you do not believe in human sacrifice, then you will try to show those people that it is wrong. Yes, you accept them. Do you accept their practices?

I donÂ´t believe those Eight Points are saying "condone criminal activity" or "look the other way" Your example of silence in the face of human sacrifice, or of those who believe in it, is not one that could realistically come to pass in this context, as it is one which goes against the very principles of respect espoused by those believe in following those Eight Points. Tolerancy and respect can logically be extended to those who are willing to be tolerant and respectful of others and of the law, whether or not they agree with others or the law. Human sacrifice is a classic example of a basic lack of respect (for human life) Logically, such activities must be condemned for what they are -- crimes.

"there are certain cultures that have inherently evil practices."

Evil practices are to be found in all peoples. If what you mean is that some people are inherently better than others, you may accept that, but IÂ´m afraid I canÂ´t . If you canÂ´t accept people that do evil things, you canÂ´t accept yourself.

Are you joking? Please do not even suggest I said such a thing. I said what I said. It is rather clear. Who am I? Does it matter?

When you start using adjectives like "inherently", youÂ´re getting into delicate territory.

"One reason I do not like TF is we are forced to live with perverts and those we we find contrary."

Those "perverts" you refer to imposed themselves on others because they were in a position to do so. However, in a community where dogma is not imposed, as it was and is in TF, this, IMO, is quite unlikely to happen.

It's a practical issue. I hope you have lived in at least a few different, and I mean different, countries. Then you may understand why you do not want to mingle with everyone. Why, everyone may not want to mingle with you. To accept that about yourself is accepting that about them.

One of the requirements of a sinner is to repent. I think that is one thing that is lacking in that "Progressive Christianity" stuff.

"Everyone do as you will. It's all the same. You can worship the devil too if you want. It's alright." Does that sound like something Jesus would have said? There's nothing about loving God, the 10 commandments, and much else. Isn't that some of the things Jesus taught?

Sorry, I donÂ´t see what you say in the above paragraph as what the Eight Points are saying at all. If you think thereÂ´s "nothing about loving God", thatÂ´s your opinion, and I respect it, but I donÂ´t see it that way, and there are others like me, I can assure you.

Yes, and if you put the needs of others before your own, youÂ´re loving yourself, because what you sow you will reap. "Selfless love" does not mean self-flagellation. In the dictionary, a synonym of selfless is "unselfish".

Yes, before your own, but not lacking your own. That is what I was trying to say - trying to balance out TF doctrine printed in my own mind.

What TF leadership did, after all its criticism of the organized churches, in the final analysis, IMO, was replace one or several sets of dogmas with another set of dogmas. Dogmas canÂ´t save us. Only love can -- of that I am convinced.

I was thinking about the "selfless love." What kind of love is selfish? I have heard of such love. I would think that the very nature of love is not selfish. Therefore we need not say "unselfish love."

winter wrote:

I was thinking about the "selfless love." What kind of love is selfish? I have heard of such love. I would think that the very nature of love is not selfish. Therefore we need not say "unselfish love."

When youÂ´re talking about pure, unadulterated LOVE, I agree with you 100%. However, there do exist other meanings for "love"; such as loves (that donÂ´t seem exactly "unselfish") described in the Bible: "For the love of money is the root of all evil..." , "Love not sleep, lest thou come to poverty;..." , "He that loveth pleasure shall be a poor man" etc. :wink: -- These loves seem like obsessive, destructive loves to me.

I guess it's those words that get tricky. I guess that is one reason I was always careful with the phrase, "I love you." Meanwhile, the song, "Say I love you 100 times a day," was playing in the background.

evanman wrote:

The only difficulty with "progressive Christianity" is that the Apostles of Jesus Christ did not advocate such, and neither did Jesus Christ Himself.

Could that be because Christianity did not exist until after the death of Jesus? This is just a thought for sincere discussion.
I like that there are ministries which are open to others that are atheist, agnostic, regardless of gender or identity and without expectations to become as them. I can listen to them more than I can someone that is sure about their beliefs and who closes others off who don't meet their criteria of belief. Confused

xFamily
» General
» The Eight Points Of Progressive Christianity

Read Topic
Reply

xFamily

The Eight Points Of Progressive Christianity

Quick Links

My Account

able2know