Protestantism

» redback - Moral Impulse

In response to Moral Impulse posted by BrianTubbs:

I recall BrotherJones suggesting CS Lewis, too. I haven't done anywhere near the focused reading all you guys have done on this...incl CSL. But then, I haven't brought all the reading I've done to here...except indirectly.

I too like it that someone else has articulated an idea far better than me. Tis another reason why I visit.

-- posted by redback

» redback - What Society Could Be

When you ask yourself "Just how far have we come as a global society?", are you mainly happy, excited or worried?

I can't put my 10-year old brain back into my age-ing head but I reckon I'm mainly happy and a tad underwhelmed. Underwhelmed in the sense I have no great global expectation of a global yet dis-united society. We all clumsily aim to do the right thing...remotely possibly to probably maybe truism...and somebody tells us there is 'climate change' and no, we really aren't doing the right thing. Thousands of positive examples too, I guess.

Now you tell me our society is probably influenced by the USA AND France so you can well imagine what that does to my shaky confidence. ABC Seriously, this dumbing down by whatever measure, may be exponentially worsening. What Mackay seems to suggest is a society in transition, so may only be temporary.

And like the brief teaser Brian gave re CS Lewis, this reference to Mackay relates to a fella who can pack a whole range of considerations far more effectively & concisely than I can. If one had CS Lewis, Mackay, Brian on the one hand...and me on the other, I know who I'd believe.

"Is it what society is or should be or is it what society could be?"

The 'could be' could be "worse" to some and "better" for others? But our expectations DO flavour the 'facts' in front of us...at least in the Southern Hemisphere.

I'm outa here for a few days. Off to the Royal National Park for a family reunion on my late mum's side. Long lost rellies etc..

-- posted by redback

» pink101 - What Society Could Be

In response to What Society Could Be posted by redback:

.
Enjoy.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - Naming Names

In response to What Society Could Be posted by redback:
.
I'm sure you had your tongue in your cheek when you wrote, Now you tell me our society is probably influenced by the USA AND France so you can well imagine what that does to my shaky confidence. ABC .
.

.
Here's some names to name; Thomas Jefferson, Robespierre, Rousseau, Durkheim, Emerson, Thoreau, Sanders-Pierce, James Madison, too many to list them all. Before them there were several others; but, these are some of the ones I meant to identify--highly intellectual men each of whom has had great influence on our thinking today. I didn't mean to exclude any thinkers from Australia, Briton, Germany or other nations. Each has made some contribution. My point was that we are, most obviously, ignoring the lessons we learned in the past as we follow this neo-conservative movement that is taking us down.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brother_Jones - <i>The Soul of Christianity</i>

The new book by Huston Smith by the above title was sorta a quick read for me. Maybe I should have lingered longer, especially in preparation for the discussion about Noah and the Ark. Of course Huston Smith comes in the tradition of Marcus Borg and Brain McLaren. And that should provide some clues to his posture. He does mention some interesting stuff about the personal life of Joseph Campbell who he knew as a friend, but I don't wish to give away the entire plot of this book.

In fact, Huston Smith is more widely read at the university level than both of the other gentlemen, Borg and McLaren, with his reference classic, The World's Religions. There are perspectives in that read that are not found easily in any other library because Huston Smith walked into various religious houses of worship around the world and lived them for long extended periods in his life. Or at least he tried to live them. He enjoyed Buddhism alot more than Islam. lol.

So now comes his work at 87 yrs of age in 2004-2005, when he wrote this little treatise about the heart of Christianity and what should make it tick. He contends that we have lost our awe and respect for God because we have rejected the Symbols of religion and God. We have become too close to the associates of Christianity, the far left and far right that we have totally forgotten how to bend our knees to give anything of value in the religious world and to give any real type of reverence to the worlds unknown, according to Smith. We need to blame secular Science for over promoting itself, the religious far left and far right for the same, according to Smith.

I love Huston Smith's writing style and he reasons pretty well. I read his book on World Religions about once a month. But, mostly he is wrong though in his new book. I'm unconvinced that people pay that much attention to the far right or far left. It is not because men reject religious symbols that has caused the turmoil in Christianity. I'm not doing his book very much justice in one post. But I think his book serves as a very good backdrop to the story of Noah. That good men,..and some very good men cannot see the problem that we face in life. And when they do finally see it, they not only bend their kness, but they also stand with Noah on the top of the Ark and raise their arms in gratitude for being saved from themselves.

i'm just an oldtimer for the Lord.

-- posted by Brother_Jones

» Brother_Jones - <i>The Soul of Christianity</i>

In response to The Soul of Christianity posted by Brother_Jones:

The new book by Huston Smith by the above title was sorta a quick read for me. Maybe I should have lingered longer, especially in preparation for the discussion about Noah and the Ark. Of course Huston Smith comes in the tradition of Marcus Borg and Brain McLaren. And that should provide some clues to his posture. He does mention some interesting stuff about the personal life of Joseph Campbell who he knew as a friend, but I don't wish to give away the entire plot of this book.
In fact, Huston Smith is more widely read at the university level than both of the other gentlemen, Borg and McLaren, with his reference classic, The World's Religions. There are perspectives in that read that are not found easily in any other library because Huston Smith walked into various religious houses of worship around the world and lived them for long extended periods in his life. Or at least he tried to live them. He enjoyed Buddhism alot more than Islam. lol.

So now comes his work at 87 yrs of age in 2004-2005, when he wrote this little treatise about the heart of Christianity and what should make it tick. He contends that we have lost our awe and respect for God because we have rejected the Symbols of religion and God. We have become too close to the associates of Christianity, the far left and far right that we have totally forgotten how to bend our knees to give anything of value in the religious world and to give any real type of reverence to the worlds unknown, according to Smith. We need to blame secular Science for over promoting itself, the religious far left and far right for the same, according to Smith.

I love Huston Smith's writing style and he reasons pretty well. I read his book on World Religions about once a month. But, mostly he is wrong though in his new book. I'm unconvinced that people pay that much attention to the far right or far left. It is not because men reject religious symbols that has caused the turmoil in Christianity. I'm not doing his book very much justice in one post. But I think his book serves as a very good backdrop to the story of Noah. That good men,..and some very good men cannot see the problem that we face in life. And when they do finally see it, they not only bend their kness, but they also stand with Noah on the top of the Ark and raise their arms in gratitude for being saved from themselves.

i'm just an oldtimer for the Lord.

-- posted by Brother_Jones

» pink101 - <i>The Soul of Christianity</i>

In response to The Soul of Christianity posted by Brother_Jones:
.
I'm unconvinced that people pay that much attention to the far right or far left. It is not because men reject religious symbols that has caused the turmoil in Christianity.
.
When we get outside of our self, we generally can see that we run in certain circles of influence. I'm sure your comment that I've quoted here is correct for you in the circles in which you find yourself; but, there's a whole big world out there that you seem to be ignoring. The fact is that the extreme right of Christianity not only is a force with which we reckon within our faith ideologies; but, it has taken a great hold of our society in general through its political activity--a strong gravitational pull to the right that Christians tend to agree with. See Wendell's statement about.his giving his support for a Brother in the Lord to get a sense of how Religionism gets its way in organized Christianity.
.
Christianity HAS changed drastically in the last one hundred years in a knee jerk reaction to the laughable failures of the nut cases that flaunted their bully pulpits in the nineteenth century--those celebrated War Horses of God that brought us the formalized doctrines of the Infallibility of the Revealed Word of God--the Holy Bible.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brother_Jones - <i>The Soul of Christianity</i>

In response to The Soul of Christianity posted by pink101:

but, there's a whole big world out there that you seem to be ignoring. The fact is that the extreme right of Christianity not only is a force with which we reckon within our faith ideologies; but, it has taken a great hold of our society in general

Are you interested in any way in what somebody might have to say about the religious left in a critical way? Huston has some good insights! I am trying to prepare my self to share some of it. lol.

the oldtimer.

-- posted by Brother_Jones

» pink101 - The Soul of Christianity

In response to The Soul of Christianity posted by Brother_Jones:
.
Are you interested in any way in what somebody might have to say about the religious left in a critical way?
.
Shoot.
.
My sense of the religious left is that it is pretty much laid back by its own choice, ie., non-aggressive.
.
And, the very idea that there is a "Religious Left" would seem to designate some sort of an organization. I don't see it.
.
But, if you know of and are will show any critique, I will pay attention.
.
BTW, I don't see myself as belonging to a so-called left of anything. In fact, I think I am quite a conservative person; although, I am very progressive in my thoughts. Some of each?

I would get a humorous kick out of people who call themselves patriotic and conservative when they give their support to such a corporacratic stooge as George W. Bush if it weren't such a threat to American Democracy. I wonder how they square reality up with their personal morality. Got any ideas on that?
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brother_Jones - The Soul of Christianity

In response to The Soul of Christianity posted by pink101:

I'm not sure if anyone here is familar with Hutson Smith or any of his writings. So the examples of his criticisms might not carry much effect if your aren't familar with his writings or the impact he has made on seminary students and bible majors.

Are you familar with Hutson Smith?

the oldtimer.

-- posted by Brother_Jones