United With God

[chansen]

Chansen, in my mind, sets up a strawman. I don't know very many people in my congregation who believe in a God that interveness in our day to day lives, or anyone who insists on a literal understanding of Jesus birth or resurrection.

I have spent most of this thread opposing what Dave Henderson is suggesting. The strawman you say I've set up has a name and insists on belief in a triune God. Whatever you think that is, because there are apparently lots of definitions.

I've suggested that room be made. Dave has suggested current accommodations for dissenting beliefs, even outside of Rev. Vosper, are too much. You guys are really quick to criticize my ideas, but I don't think you recognize the threat that people like Dave pose. Again, you freak out about the atheist in the room and his "strawman", when the strawman himself that you think is an exaggeration is standing right over there.

 

[paradox3]

@chansen,

What is the threat you feel Dave is posing?

 

[Tabitha]

Post #145 is from Dave Henderson.

 

[revsdd]

Post #145 is from Dave Henderson.

Uh. Yeah. If you're answering @paradox3 - so what? Shocking perhaps, but Dave's right. The United Church is a Christian church. How is that a threat?

The United Church always has been a Christian church and always will be. Or at least if it ever stops being a Christian church, I'm outta here. As I said earlier, I have no interest in being UU-lite.

 

[Tabitha]

I was answering P3

 

[Dave Henderson]

I have spent most of this thread opposing what Dave Henderson is suggesting. The strawman you say I've set up has a name and insists on belief in a triune God. Whatever you think that is, because there are apparently lots of definitions.

I've suggested that room be made. Dave has suggested current accommodations for dissenting beliefs, even outside of Rev. Vosper, are too much. You guys are really quick to criticize my ideas, but I don't think you recognize the threat that people like Dave pose. Again, you freak out about the atheist in the room and his "strawman", when the strawman himself that you think is an exaggeration is standing right over there.

Hi Chansen, Just to be clear, you have spent most of this thread opposing not me, but the United Church of Canada, a Christian faith community that proclaims God as its first and central cornerstone. Nothing I have introduced or put forward here is new or outside the United Church ethos. It is an affirmation and celebration of what we as a Christian faith community believe.

 

[Dave Henderson]

United With God, a national, grassroots campaign, joyfully proclaiming God in our lives, the world and the United Church of Canada. www.unitedwithgod.org On Facebook; United With God

 

[revsdd]

I was answering P3

Didn't know it was a private conversation. So sorry.

 

[Seeler]

In my post abovve I mentioned a fine balance.
I remember heaaring years ago in relation to animal rights activists that we need the extremes on both ends to balancee those in the middle.
I think that could be applied in most cases.
I see a line balanced on a fulcrum. Some on the left, some on the right. Move too far in either direction and you might faall off. In my mind I see Greta and her supporters teetering on the left end, hanging on by theeir fingertips and trying to move the fulcrum in their direction. I saw the same in the minister I've referred to who tried to move the church, or at least his congregation, in the opposite direction. Eventually he fell off and landed in a place that apparently suits him better.
I don't see Dave Henderson (at least not in his posts here) as being an extreme. I could be wrong. But I see him as someone on the opposite side of the fulcrum from me, but both of us somewhere on the ssme line aand agreeing that this is a good place to be.

 

[KayTheCurler]

How do/could/should churches react to people who respond spiritually to words like these from Howard Thurman? Do these words create a knowledge and belief in a triune god to you?

"One of these (Spiritual Practices) is the practice of silence, or quiet. As a child I was accustomed to spend many hours alone in my rowboat, fishing along the river, where there was no sound save the lapping of the waves against the boat. There were times when it seemed as if the earth and the river and the sky and I were one beat of the same pulse. There would come a moment when beyond the single pulse beat there was a sense of Presence which seemed always to speak to me. My response to the sense of Presence always had the quality of personal communion. There was no voice. There was no image. There was no vision. There was God."

 

[paradox3]

Post #145 is from Dave Henderson.

Thanks Tabitha,

I have been following this thread closely and don't see anything suggesting a "threat" in post #145.

 

[paradox3]

How do/could/should churches react to people who respond spiritually to words like these from Howard Thurman? Do these words create a knowledge and belief in a triune god to you?

The quote does not rule out belief in a triune God if that is what you are asking.

 

[Dave Henderson]

In my post abovve I mentioned a fine balance.
I remember heaaring years ago in relation to animal rights activists that we need the extremes on both ends to balancee those in the middle.
I think that could be applied in most cases.
I see a line balanced on a fulcrum. Some on the left, some on the right. Move too far in either direction and you might faall off. In my mind I see Greta and her supporters teetering on the left end, hanging on by theeir fingertips and trying to move the fulcrum in their direction. I saw the same in the minister I've referred to who tried to move the church, or at least his congregation, in the opposite direction. Eventually he fell off and landed in a place that apparently suits him better.
I don't see Dave Henderson (at least not in his posts here) as being an extreme. I could be wrong. But I see him as someone on the opposite side of the fulcrum from me, but both of us somewhere on the ssme line aand agreeing that this is a good place to be.

Hi Seeler, I do not see myself as extreme either. I am in full agreement with almost all of what the United Church of Canada believes in and in essential agreement with the rest. I am not looking to do anything but lift up God, who the United Church proclaims to be a cornerstone of her faith.

 

[BetteTheRed]

You lose me at "who" - a person, a being, a deity...

For those who are not perfectly clear on this, both Unitarianism and Universalism arise from the Christian tradition. Unitarianism is perhaps, the earliest 'heresy'...and it's our trinitarian beliefs that partially keep us from closer communion with our Jewish and Muslim siblings, as they find the God-man and the Satan-god a stretch into polytheism.

 

[paradox3]

@Mendalla has talked about present day Unitarian Universalism many times. Interesting history as a denomination.

 

[paradox3]

You lose me at "who" - a person, a being, a deity...

Ahh the limitations of language. To get around the problematic "who" we could say:

Dave is not looking to do anything but lift up God, proclaimed by the United Church to be the cornerstone of her faith.

 

[chansen]

Hi Chansen, Just to be clear, you have spent most of this thread opposing not me, but the United Church of Canada, a Christian faith community that proclaims God as its first and central cornerstone. Nothing I have introduced or put forward here is new or outside the United Church ethos. It is an affirmation and celebration of what we as a Christian faith community believe.

From what I see, the United Church on their website is not the United Church in practice. The people of the United Church are more diverse than the statements of faith. You go defend words on a page. I'm suggesting the people who don't meet your vision of required beliefs have as much of a right to be there, and to be lead by like-minded people, as you do.

 

[Mendalla]

@Mendalla has talked about present day Unitarian Universalism many times. Interesting history as a denomination.

The short version: http://www.uua.org/beliefs/history/our-historic-faith

And, to be clear, there are still Christians in our midst, albeit very progressive/liberal ones. They have their own association within the UUA (UUCF - Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship). As you know, one of them (a former interim minister of my old fellowship) even jumped to the UCCan and still serves in, last I heard, Erin United Church. However, we don't define ourselves as a group as being Christian or by any metaphysical beliefs. Our fourth principle. a free and responsible search for truth and meaning, opens the door to many philosophies and theologies.

EDIT: Found out that the minister in question is in Erin so fixed.

 

[Mendalla]

I am in full agreement with almost all of what the United Church of Canada believes in and in essential agreement with the rest. I am not looking to do anything but lift up God, who the United Church proclaims to be a cornerstone of her faith.

So any version of "God" is okay, then? Process? Panentheism (other than process)? Pantheism? Are there limits on how "God" is to be understood in your view, or is it enough to "lift up God" in whatever form the person sees "God"? I think that's basically what @BetteTheRed is asking and it is germane to how I would fit in. You will not get me believing in a transcendant, supernatural, interventionist Creator nor will you get me taking the Trinity literally, but you could get me believing in a panentheist, unitarian God with the Trinity as a metaphorical understanding of how that God interacts in the world.

 

[paradox3]

From what I see, the United Church on their website is not the United Church in practice. The people of the United Church are more diverse than the statements of faith. You go defend words on a page. I'm suggesting the people who don't meet your vision of required beliefs have as much of a right to be there, and to be lead by like-minded people, as you do.

Agree that there is more diversity of belief in the United Church than you might imagine if you just looked at the website.

Are you going to explain to us why you think Dave is a threat? Upthread you told us:

You guys are really quick to criticize my ideas, but I don't think you recognize the threat that people like Dave pose. Again, you freak out about the atheist in the room and his "strawman", when the strawman himself that you think is an exaggeration is standing right over there.

What is the threat you think is not recognized?