Post Reply
Page 4 of 9  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9 Next
5 years ago  ::  Feb 12, 2010 - 3:17PM #31
SeraphimR
Posts: 10,335

Feb 12, 2010 -- 1:16PM, bigbear6161 wrote:


If you think biological theories are as weakly supported as orthodox theological propositions then you are too far gone already.  Biological theories are strongly supported and not only that, they change to admit new learning.  Your theological positions are frozen and resist new learning.  And by the way, it is not my world view, it is our worldview, yourself included as you are a product of the 20th & 21st centuries just as I am.  Dave




Too far gone from what?  A 21st C. worldview.  I concur.


Too far gone for what?  A meaningful dialogue with a 21st C. worldview.  Again I concur.


You want to have the debate on your terms: a 21st C. worldview and epistomology.  In that case, we orthodox have already given away the candy store.  I won't accept dialogue on these terms, and you won't accept dialogue on my terms.  We are at loggerheads.  It is vital for you to understand this. 


Inside of orthodox Christians there is not a 21st C. man struggling to get out.  Really.  A 21st C. worldview (which we call phrenoma) is as welcome in my church as a turd in the punchbowl.  You personally are welcome to visit us so long as you respect where you are.  Who knows, maybe you'll change your mind (which we call metanoia).


We are changing our minds to fit our theology, not our theology to fit our minds.


So sorry, I won't drink the Kool-Aid you are peddling.


 


People can change their worldviews from the one they grew up with to one that makes more sense and explains the world better, ITHO.


Its really not all that hard, but it is not a quick process.  You just question all of your prejudices and preconceived notions.  I did it by tracing back all of these 21st C. worldview prejudices to their origins, the men who first invented the concepts.  Many of these guys (and they are all guys) are not very attractive characters and they held other opinions you would find loathesome, I would guess.


Once you have deconstructed the 21st C. worldview, you can put on another.


You might want to read Mountain of Silence to see an example of shifting worldviews.


Here is a google preview:Mountain of Silence

People with a mission to save the earth want the earth to seem worse than it is so their mission will look more important.


P.J. O'Rourke
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Feb 12, 2010 - 4:27PM #32
Ralph.m
Posts: 159

Feb 12, 2010 -- 12:31PM, Iwantamotto wrote:


dealing with dilemmas like the Problem of Evil
First of all, God supposedly is in charge of Evil as well, if a reader can break away from the whitewashing done elsewhere in the bible.  Second, "evil" is a label we assign to things we don't like.



I would say you still have a problem there, since it is not just a matter of labels. When it comes to great evil events, like genocides, I ask why your God is allowing evil, if he can stop it? In more recent times, as we have become aware of our own connection with nature, especially how close we are with other higher mammals, the problem of Natural Evil needs to be addressed by Christians and other theists who believe in personal, transcendent all-powerful gods. Which of course they do! That is the whole reason why systems of theodicy have been created.


Why would an intelligent creator, who could have allowed the world take any form imaginable, set in motion a system that is dependent on carnage and suffering in the animal world? In nature, animals don't get to live to old age, they either die from starvation, exposure, or are literally eaten alive! This is a strange model for a so called all loving God to have created, or allowed to develop. And just because predation is a natural evolutionary development is no excuse!


 


popular atheist writers like Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens etc. and tagged as the "New Atheists"
Oh ... THAT'S a New Atheist, LOL.




Yes it is. And because of their certainty of their beliefs, they are trying to set in place a naturalistic movement that is every bit as judgmental of outsiders who have differing beliefs as any religious fundamentalist system.  New Atheism is the secular doppleganger of religious fundamentalism, and the majority of atheists and humanists who don't share their certainty, or believe that religion is evil and everyone must be a naturalist etc., has to get to work challenging their bold assertions and unfounded claims. Otherwise, outsiders just assume that they represent the thinking of the majority of atheists.....which they do not, or their gatherings would attract a hundred times as many people, instead of the usual room full of cranks.

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Feb 12, 2010 - 4:44PM #33
Ralph.m
Posts: 159

Feb 12, 2010 -- 11:00AM, SeraphimR wrote:


The parables get a pass because they were spoken by the Man-God Jesus Christ.  They are reliable.



According to you! I can accept that Jesus was a trail-blazer and created great wisdom teachings, but the "Man-God" story didn't begin until several generations after his death; and it was likely created by later gentile followers to advance a claim that their saviour was just as divine as the Roman, Egyptian, Greek and Persian God-men.


When it comes to parables, other religions have their own parables. In India, there are Hindu fundamentalists who have been having a fit recently because the government wants to dredge the channel between India and the island of Sri Lanka. According to their biblical literalists, an underwater collection of rocks and outcroppings is what remains of a sacred bridge created so that Lord Rama could lead an army of monkeys to fight a demon army......so prove them wrong!


www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asi...

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Feb 12, 2010 - 6:39PM #34
bigbear6161
Posts: 4,352

I disagree with you Seraphim.  Perhaps we are at loggerheads.  But you can't rip yourself out of space and time, and that is what you are trying to do.  You are not a 12th century Orthodox anymore than I am a 12th century Catholic.  For you or me to try to be is absurd.  We can only be what we are and that is we are 21st century Christians.


Turd in a punch bowl.  I like that peculiar phrase.  It's the romantic in me.  I am not trying to disrespect your Orthodox Church.  I know there are Orthodox progressives too. 


Remember, you are the one who came onto this board and called Progressive Christians scam artists.  If anyone started the mud slinging it was you.  No harm done.  I am willing to call a truce.  You may have your traditionalist views.  Just let me have my Progressive views.  There is room in our once united Church (before the Great Schism) for both Traditionalists and Progressives, as there has always been diverse viewpoints there.


Dave

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Feb 12, 2010 - 8:10PM #35
SeraphimR
Posts: 10,335

Feb 12, 2010 -- 6:39PM, bigbear6161 wrote:


I disagree with you Seraphim.  Perhaps we are at loggerheads.  But you can't rip yourself out of space and time, and that is what you are trying to do.  You are not a 12th century Orthodox anymore than I am a 12th century Catholic.  For you or me to try to be is absurd.  We can only be what we are and that is we are 21st century Christians.


Maybe I am physically in the 21st C., but I can think and understand like an Orthodox Christian from the 12th C.  It is an interesting, even remarkable, phenomenon that you can read Orthodox Christian literature from  the 2nd C. and the 21st C. and they both say the same thing.  Similarly, Orthodox literature from Alexandria and Russia both say the same thing.  Orthodoxy transcends space and time.  I can participate in that worldview anywhere any time.


Turd in a punch bowl.  I like that peculiar phrase.  It's the romantic in me.  I am not trying to disrespect your Orthodox Church.  I know there are Orthodox progressives too. 


I've heard people make this claim before, but could never point one out to me.  Do you have a website or even a blog you could direct me to?  The most progressive attitude I'm run across IRL was the man who told me he didn't care whether the priest had a beard or not.  I find that I am pretty progressive for an Orthodox myself.  I will go to a church with a clean shaven priest, although it would be a bit strange.


Remember, you are the one who came onto this board and called Progressive Christians scam artists.  If anyone started the mud slinging it was you.  No harm done.  I am willing to call a truce.  You may have your traditionalist views.  Just let me have my Progressive views.  There is room in our once united Church (before the Great Schism) for both Traditionalists and Progressives, as there has always been diverse viewpoints there.


I see Progressive Christians tearing Protestant Churches apart.  When Tradition lapses it is gone forever.  I consider it my duty to, however humbly, preserve that Tradition for future generations.


How could the Orthodox Church ordain women and still be Orthodox?  And the same for the Catholics.  I say NO! to Progress.  Its just my thing


Dave





People with a mission to save the earth want the earth to seem worse than it is so their mission will look more important.


P.J. O'Rourke
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Feb 13, 2010 - 4:48PM #36
bigbear6161
Posts: 4,352

Seraphim, I like you and I see you have great respect for the traditions of the Orthodox Church, one of the earliest traditions in Christianity.  I enjoy reading the Desert Fathers, who seem like Christian Yogis to me.  I enjoy the richness of the iconography and the many saints from the Eastern Church.  I always felt it a shame that our two Churches split into latin and greek variants, and of course the slim theological differences that have kept us apart.  As a Catholic, I love reading the Latin Church Fathers, also the great theologians like Aquinas and mystics like John of the Cross.  I love all these things.  But it just seems to me that traditionalist formulations can not stand up to the challenge of our modern worldview, and that for me anyway a post-modern criticism makes a lot more sense.  I even think that it allows for the traditional narratives when understood as a set of narratives growing out of a particular time and place and a distinctive worldview.  I just believe that there are other narratives too, and other interpretations of the experiential spirituality within our Christian traditions, liturgies and doctrines.  That is why i identify myself as a Progressive Catholic Christian.  I believe the Church is a big enough tent to encompass both wings (and moderates too).  I hope we can exist side by side and not be adversaries.


Peace,


Dave

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Feb 13, 2010 - 8:56PM #37
SeraphimR
Posts: 10,335

Feb 13, 2010 -- 4:48PM, bigbear6161 wrote:


Seraphim, I like you and I see you have great respect for the traditions of the Orthodox Church, one of the earliest traditions in Christianity.  I enjoy reading the Desert Fathers, who seem like Christian Yogis to me.  I enjoy the richness of the iconography and the many saints from the Eastern Church.


Men just like the Desert Fathers can be found today at Mt. Athos.  There are men and women elsewhere, but they are harder to find, being dispersed in the wilderness.


  I always felt it a shame that our two Churches split into latin and greek variants, and of course the slim theological differences that have kept us apart.


I see no benefit in coming together.


  As a Catholic, I love reading the Latin Church Fathers, also the great theologians like Aquinas and mystics like John of the Cross.  I love all these things.  But it just seems to me that traditionalist formulations can not stand up to the challenge of our modern worldview, and that for me anyway a post-modern criticism makes a lot more sense.


I think it is the modern worldview which is defective, not the Tradition.  Personally, I rejected the modern worldview before I became Christian.  Hans Kung once wrote that one must make a choice between Nihilism and Christianity.  I choose Christianity.


 


  I even think that it allows for the traditional narratives when understood as a set of narratives growing out of a particular time and place and a distinctive worldview.  I just believe that there are other narratives too, and other interpretations of the experiential spirituality within our Christian traditions, liturgies and doctrines.  That is why i identify myself as a Progressive Catholic Christian.  I believe the Church is a big enough tent to encompass both wings (and moderates too).  I hope we can exist side by side and not be adversaries.


Other interpretations are erroneous.  Postmodernism is poison.


And simple observation of the chaos into which Progressive politics has thrown the Protestants argues very strongly against your "big tent theory".  (How's that for convoluted syntax?).


 


Peace,


Dave




By the way, you got any "Progressive Orthodox" for me?  I don't believe they exist.

People with a mission to save the earth want the earth to seem worse than it is so their mission will look more important.


P.J. O'Rourke
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Feb 13, 2010 - 10:07PM #38
bigbear6161
Posts: 4,352

Your syntax is convoluted but I understand.  I'm the one who is supposed to quote Hans Kung.  I have chosen Christianity over nihilism too.  I doubt there will be any formal joining of Eastern and Western Churches.  History is a hard force to break.  I don't believe post-modernism is poison.  I will check into progressive Orthodox folks.  I'll let  you know.


Dave

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Feb 13, 2010 - 10:16PM #39
bigbear6161
Posts: 4,352

Two Progressives in the Orthodox faith:  Lance Goldsberry and Juvenaly Repass.


Dave

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Feb 14, 2010 - 5:36PM #40
SeraphimR
Posts: 10,335

Feb 13, 2010 -- 10:07PM, bigbear6161 wrote:


Your syntax is convoluted but I understand.  I'm the one who is supposed to quote Hans Kung.  I have chosen Christianity over nihilism too.  I doubt there will be any formal joining of Eastern and Western Churches.  History is a hard force to break.  I don't believe post-modernism is poison.  I will check into progressive Orthodox folks.  I'll let  you know.


Dave




But postmodernism is nihilsim.


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


And if you had read what those two putative Progressive Orthodox had written, you would have known that they might be Progressive politically, but they are completely Traditional theologically.


Especially Hieromonk Juvenaly.  He is quite explicit about this.


A swing and a miss.  Care to try again?  Or you can take it from me, who has researched the topic, there are no Progressive (theologically) Christians in the Orthodox Church.  It is an oxymoron.


 

People with a mission to save the earth want the earth to seem worse than it is so their mission will look more important.


P.J. O'Rourke
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 4 of 9  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook