What is Progressive Christianity?

For those deep thinkers out there.
Post Reply
User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 14072
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by tuttle » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:12 am

UncleBob wrote:
Rusty wrote:
tuttle wrote:
UncleBob wrote:I am not a moral relativist. I am closer to an ethical subjectivist--Ideal Observer Theory with a caveat. In general, this view is that what is right is determined by the attitudes that a hypothetical ideal observer--a being who is perfectly rational, imaginative and informed--would have (this is gross simplification, of course). The caveat is that the ideal, rational observer would understand scripture as it was intended and in the context in which it was heard, which is impossible to declare with certainty. So, I look for strong textual, historical, archaeological, and cultural evidence as the best means to inform that ideal observer--this is why I am sometimes identified as a religious skeptic. However, good evidence is essential--not fantasy or biased intuition. So, reality is what I rely on rather than imagined or metaphysical constructs--which is why I am sometimes called a Christian Existentialist. Reality is complex and amazing! Often, those constructs are bifurcations--a sure sign that it seldom reflects reality.

I have told you all this without the label. Why? Because as The Philosopher said: "Once you label me you negate me." Which is what tuttle and Del were most likely trying to do in the first place. However, reality is much more complex than the bifurcated relativist vs. absolutist. Even in this case.
Well ain't that somethin. Good on you Bob. I do believe we've broken some ground and this thread isn't all for naught.

I appreciate your explanation. It really does help. I'm not sure if you'd believe it but I do realize that reality is complex and relativist vs absolutist doesn't cover all things. But hey, you can't blame me for shooting and missing the mark a bit can you? What you described simply sounds like a more refined relativist to my ears. Having never heard of anyone subscribing to an "ethical subjectivist--Ideal Observer Theory with a caveat" worldview, I'd say if I were a pitcher it would've been just outside. A fan might have yelled at the ump even.

But in all seriousness, I wasn't trying to negate you. You'll just have to take my word on that I guess. I know people are more than a label.

One thing that is apparent, is that we're not on the same ground. I knew this, just called it wrong. But especially if you lean towards ethical subjectivism. Your statements seem to be more objective maybe then you realize, which I think leads many of us assuming exactly what you're not. But, hey, it's all out in the open now. Take a deep breath. It's new country. Think of all the topics we can avoid now!
I'm shocked by your post. The really big virtue of CPS is that we're out of reach. We can't hit, burn, kill, or stab each other. All we can do is share points of view. But I'm astonished that the you look for people with whom you share common beliefs so you can do what? Refine the topics that you will share? It's a strange way to behave on a discussion forum with such an incredible collection of odd views. I have to tell you truthfully that I'm astonished that you guys exist in the 21st century. But as long as you do I think the various points of view are fascinating. I wouldn't have you hold back anything.
I think you miss the point, Rusty. If I were labeled a relativist, then I could just be ignored as "that silly relativist". Now I have a label so people can just attack the label instead of what I write. tuttle says this isn't his intent but I am curious to see how this plays out with not only him, but the whole board.
I think your fear of the label is a bit unfounded. I've tried to go out of my way to make sure you know I'm not trying to pigeonhole you (as you've noted). There are maybe 3 or 4 rather apt labels that have been applied to me (via my comments or from my own admission) and I've yet to see anyone ignore me as 'that silly calvinist' or 'that silly creationist' or whathaveyou.

Or maybe I'm just not seeing folks do that to me. Sometimes I'm as clueless as a dog to some of the obvious around me. Ask my wife. Maybe I've been pigeonholed but just don't realize it. But I don't think that's the case. I have seen you throw a dinger or two (or twelve) at those with the label 'Catholic', so maybe the fear is that it will be heaped back upon you in vengeance? If so I'll try to stick up for you if I see it.

EDIT after reading ahead a bit: But lets please not play the victim card in this either. ala:
Of course, now that I have been catalogued and categorized...
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 37077
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by UncleBob » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:40 am

tuttle wrote: I think your fear of the label is a bit unfounded. I've tried to go out of my way to make sure you know I'm not trying to pigeonhole you (as you've noted). There are maybe 3 or 4 rather apt labels that have been applied to me (via my comments or from my own admission) and I've yet to see anyone ignore me as 'that silly calvinist' or 'that silly creationist' or whathaveyou.

Or maybe I'm just not seeing folks do that to me. Sometimes I'm as clueless as a dog to some of the obvious around me. Ask my wife. Maybe I've been pigeonholed but just don't realize it. But I don't think that's the case. I have seen you throw a dinger or two (or twelve) at those with the label 'Catholic', so maybe the fear is that it will be heaped back upon you in vengeance? If so I'll try to stick up for you if I see it.

EDIT after reading ahead a bit: But lets please not play the victim card in this either. ala:
Of course, now that I have been catalogued and categorized...
I just can't wait for the post that says, "Wait. You can't believe that. You are an X" or "Well, X don't believe that.." or "Say.. don't all you X believe that...". Del does this all the time where he tells you what you believe and then argues against that. Heck! He already did it in this thread!
Del wrote:I get it. You are definitely a relativist who believes that courts and laws and cultural conventions create and destroy reality, defining good and evil as we wish.

At least, this is so regarding matters of sex, marriage, and families.

You seem to be a moral absolutist with regard to the dignity of human life. I gather that you believe it is suitable to judge past cultures harshly for their slavery and criminal executions. It is suitable to condemn the present age for accepting abortion and the death penalty. Because there is an absolute moral law demanding us to respect the dignity of human life in every culture and every age.
With the label, it will be interesting to see how it plays out.
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
Del
Hot Legs
Hot Legs
Posts: 39098
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Del » Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:31 am

Rusty wrote:
UncleBob wrote:
Rusty wrote:
tuttle wrote:That's not in the same vein: "Do you believe there is such a thing as purple" would be on par. Or even closer: "Do you believe there is such a thing as color" since I'm not asking you to give me a specific moral absolute.

Relativists can believe in reality. See the definitions I gave above. Perhaps you and I have a different ideas about even the term 'reality'.

Humans must breathe air to live. That's a pretty easy example of an objective truth, no?
You'd be dead in a minute breathing the air on Mars. If you're a scuba diver and you do deep dives you'll suffer on surfacing if you're breathing ordinary air. You need a special mixture. So your truth is not a truth.

He has told you that every generation reinterprets and or refines the truths. And it's true in this case too. It's oxygen that we need but that wasn't known at the time when the bible was written.
(I didn't want to mention that, Rusty. I am not trying to trap him on anything, just trying to help him understand the difference between a relativist and ethical subjectivism).
These rules and even knowledge is cultural. They're not absolutes. The blockbuster story is about our origins and especially our sexual opportunism. We are hybrids and we mated with archaic humans as we encountered them and we inherited their disease and bacterial immunity. Plus they provided needed genetic variation in what were probably small bands of H. Sapiens that may have otherwise died out. The rules that Del articulates would not work in favour of our existence or our survival. The story is that different rules apply to different cultures in different situations.
The basic moral question remains: In the spectrum of human sexual behaviors, are there any red lines that should not be crossed?

I think everyone would agree that this is so. We universally condemn rape, for example. Even though a rapist has a procreative advantage over the monogamous husband.

Since we condemn rape as a violation of human dignity, it is odd that we don't condemn abortion with the same force.

In both cases, the powerful person seeks a small advantage and the weaker person pays a tremendous price for it.

These are simple cases, because we only have to consider the rights of individuals. It becomes more difficult when the rights and duties of society are measured.

For example, a society has to decide whether it will permit things like prostitution and promote homosexual relationships -- or if it will suppress such things. The society has a duty to ask itself whether these things are good for families, children, and society as a whole.... or if such things should be suppressed because of the ill that they cause. There are reasons why a society that protects families is stronger than a society that permits rapists to roam.

This is pragmatic social morality. Historically, societies have permitted a spectrum of behaviors, so we could simply look at the empirical results.

However, there are also social systems that seek to understand the principles underlying the behaviors. Why is prostitution linked with slavery? Why is homosexuality linked with child sexual abuse? Is there a right way for a human society to set its norms for social behaviors?

The question that you all are dancing around.... and we would really like to hear a direct answer:

Along that spectrum of social-sexual behaviors, the spectrum that different cultures have made different choices at different times -- Are there any bright lines that indicate the normal regions of healthy human social-sexual acceptance, in which a society can thrive? Are there regions of extreme license or extreme restriction which are disordered, indicating a society that is miserable with itself?
========================
Our society is miserable, miserable inspire of being the richest society in human history and having the greatest sexual license since the dawn of the Christian era. And we are miserable because we are living on the disordered side of the line.

Our culture is so rich, yet we avoid having children like we are living on the edge of starvation.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 14072
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by tuttle » Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:33 am

UncleBob wrote:
tuttle wrote: I think your fear of the label is a bit unfounded. I've tried to go out of my way to make sure you know I'm not trying to pigeonhole you (as you've noted). There are maybe 3 or 4 rather apt labels that have been applied to me (via my comments or from my own admission) and I've yet to see anyone ignore me as 'that silly calvinist' or 'that silly creationist' or whathaveyou.

Or maybe I'm just not seeing folks do that to me. Sometimes I'm as clueless as a dog to some of the obvious around me. Ask my wife. Maybe I've been pigeonholed but just don't realize it. But I don't think that's the case. I have seen you throw a dinger or two (or twelve) at those with the label 'Catholic', so maybe the fear is that it will be heaped back upon you in vengeance? If so I'll try to stick up for you if I see it.

EDIT after reading ahead a bit: But lets please not play the victim card in this either. ala:
Of course, now that I have been catalogued and categorized...
I just can't wait for the post that says, "Wait. You can't believe that. You are an X" or "Well, X don't believe that.." or "Say.. don't all you X believe that...". Del does this all the time where he tells you what you believe and then argues against that. Heck! He already did it in this thread!
Del wrote:I get it. You are definitely a relativist who believes that courts and laws and cultural conventions create and destroy reality, defining good and evil as we wish.

At least, this is so regarding matters of sex, marriage, and families.

You seem to be a moral absolutist with regard to the dignity of human life. I gather that you believe it is suitable to judge past cultures harshly for their slavery and criminal executions. It is suitable to condemn the present age for accepting abortion and the death penalty. Because there is an absolute moral law demanding us to respect the dignity of human life in every culture and every age.
With the label, it will be interesting to see how it plays out.
I don't know. Sounds to me like you're already convinced regardless. Sounds like yer hackles are up. I wouldn't fear folks questioning you. Something tells me you can handle Del. I questioned you nearly every second 'pre-label' in order to understand your side. I'll likely ask questions in the future, depending on the topic, that touches upon what you've shared. Dude, that's life. It's what happens when relationships grow. When I find out my new friend is a police officer, there's going to be discussions about it. When I find out my friend Sam wrote a book, I'm asking questions, and suddenly assuming he is or isn't going to like/dislike something I bring up. On the other hand I'll assume he knows more about Topic X than I do. I'll maybe ask him in particular, his take on something. All because he's let the cat out of the bag and done labeled himself an author. This is the same vein I'm looking at with you. Took the same route when Thunk jumped ship. We all had questions and he was gracious. And for FredS's sake you've 'outed' yourself as something I'll bet 0.05 out of 10 people even understand. I had to google it and still don't have a grasp on it.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
Rusty
In Memoriam
Posts: 25059
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Beelzebub's Rare Tobacco Emporium

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Rusty » Thu Feb 04, 2016 12:32 pm

Del wrote:
Rusty wrote:
UncleBob wrote:
Rusty wrote:
tuttle wrote:That's not in the same vein: "Do you believe there is such a thing as purple" would be on par. Or even closer: "Do you believe there is such a thing as color" since I'm not asking you to give me a specific moral absolute.

Relativists can believe in reality. See the definitions I gave above. Perhaps you and I have a different ideas about even the term 'reality'.

Humans must breathe air to live. That's a pretty easy example of an objective truth, no?
You'd be dead in a minute breathing the air on Mars. If you're a scuba diver and you do deep dives you'll suffer on surfacing if you're breathing ordinary air. You need a special mixture. So your truth is not a truth.

He has told you that every generation reinterprets and or refines the truths. And it's true in this case too. It's oxygen that we need but that wasn't known at the time when the bible was written.
(I didn't want to mention that, Rusty. I am not trying to trap him on anything, just trying to help him understand the difference between a relativist and ethical subjectivism).
These rules and even knowledge is cultural. They're not absolutes. The blockbuster story is about our origins and especially our sexual opportunism. We are hybrids and we mated with archaic humans as we encountered them and we inherited their disease and bacterial immunity. Plus they provided needed genetic variation in what were probably small bands of H. Sapiens that may have otherwise died out. The rules that Del articulates would not work in favour of our existence or our survival. The story is that different rules apply to different cultures in different situations.
The basic moral question remains: In the spectrum of human sexual behaviors, are there any red lines that should not be crossed?
Why are you addressing my post? It has nothing to do with my post. Ok...
Consenting adults can do whatever they want. Neither the State nor Del nor any Church has any place in the bedrooms of the nation. Try and remember this. The state doesn't care if they're married or not nor the particulars of their beliefs. That is all up to them. The Gov does want to equip people who do NOT want children with the tools and knowledge to prevent that outcome. People who want children should have them.
Del wrote:I think everyone would agree that this is so. We universally condemn rape, for example. Even though a rapist has a procreative advantage over the monogamous husband.

Since we condemn rape as a violation of human dignity, it is odd that we don't condemn abortion with the same force.

In both cases, the powerful person seeks a small advantage and the weaker person pays a tremendous price for it.

These are simple cases, because we only have to consider the rights of individuals. It becomes more difficult when the rights and duties of society are measured.

For example, a society has to decide whether it will permit things like prostitution and promote homosexual relationships -- or if it will suppress such things. The society has a duty to ask itself whether these things are good for families, children, and society as a whole.... or if such things should be suppressed because of the ill that they cause. There are reasons why a society that protects families is stronger than a society that permits rapists to roam.
Are you concerned about the prostitutes or the homosexuals being raped?
There is no need at all to suppress homosexuality. Down boy. You lost that one.
Del wrote:This is pragmatic social morality. Historically, societies have permitted a spectrum of behaviors, so we could simply look at the empirical results.

However, there are also social systems that seek to understand the principles underlying the behaviors. Why is prostitution linked with slavery? Why is homosexuality linked with child sexual abuse? Is there a right way for a human society to set its norms for social behaviors?
Homosexuality is not linked to child sexual abuse. You persist in claiming this but it's a mistake. You've been corrected many times. This is another. These are different. Go and do a little research; start with the American Psychology Assoc.
Del wrote:The question that you all are dancing around.... and we would really like to hear a direct answer:

Along that spectrum of social-sexual behaviors, the spectrum that different cultures have made different choices at different times -- Are there any bright lines that indicate the normal regions of healthy human social-sexual acceptance, in which a society can thrive? Are there regions of extreme license or extreme restriction which are disordered, indicating a society that is miserable with itself?
========================
Our society is miserable, miserable inspire of being the richest society in human history and having the greatest sexual license since the dawn of the Christian era. And we are miserable because we are living on the disordered side of the line.

Our culture is so rich, yet we avoid having children like we are living on the edge of starvation.
No there are no bright lines. Your misery is a mystery. Canadians are happier than you Americans. Maybe you should investigate and not presume an answer before looking. Your obsession with sex is getting tiring.

It looks like material wealth is associated with delaying and reducing fertility ie having children. It may also be associated with loss of religiosity. So the wealth works against your desire. This is a research topic. There are many nations that exhibit the phenomena. It's an interesting question. It appears that Catholicism is not a remedy, which is interesting. However, interrupting electrical power for days results in a baby boom. No toys even for short periods of time results in more babies. Hint, hint. Don't you have somewhere to be? Like maybe taking down transmission towers?
You're out of the woods
You're out of the dark
You're out of the night
Step into the sun
Step into the light

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 37077
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by UncleBob » Thu Feb 04, 2016 1:28 pm

tuttle wrote: I don't know. Sounds to me like you're already convinced regardless. Sounds like yer hackles are up. I wouldn't fear folks questioning you. Something tells me you can handle Del. I questioned you nearly every second 'pre-label' in order to understand your side. I'll likely ask questions in the future, depending on the topic, that touches upon what you've shared. Dude, that's life. It's what happens when relationships grow. When I find out my new friend is a police officer, there's going to be discussions about it. When I find out my friend Sam wrote a book, I'm asking questions, and suddenly assuming he is or isn't going to like/dislike something I bring up. On the other hand I'll assume he knows more about Topic X than I do. I'll maybe ask him in particular, his take on something. All because he's let the cat out of the bag and done labeled himself an author. This is the same vein I'm looking at with you. Took the same route when Thunk jumped ship. We all had questions and he was gracious. And for FredS's sake you've 'outed' yourself as something I'll bet 0.05 out of 10 people even understand. I had to google it and still don't have a grasp on it.
No, no, no, no! This is to illustrate the whole thread! Consider how this thread went.

1. What is a progressive Christian? (BTW--didn't want to start the thread because everyone but UB already "knows") We know they aren't Christians, because "progressive" is bad.
2. Why not do some research into what they believe?
3. Not necessary. They are "progressive".
4. Say.. look what they say about themselves.
5. See? Not Christian.
6. Why not?
7. We already know how they are. We don't need to research. BTW--they believe abortion.
8. There is nothing to suggest that Progressive Christian = Pro-choice.
9. (Unstated premise) Progressive Christian must be pro-choice because progressive is code for Democrat. BTW--you are a relativist.
etc.

and so on. See how labels played in this thread? We went through how many posts where you try to label me a relativist and yet I am something else that you never heard of before. Doesn't that concern anyone here? Think about that: the thread was born in error, struggled against actually researching it, and resists evidence to the contrary all because of label bias.

Does this not concern anyone else?

Perhaps I miss the whole point of CPS. I thought it is a place where we can come and learn about pipes, tobacco, theology, and life in general. Plus we get to make friends! Is it really a forum to come and confirm our biases and b**** about those "bad" people?
Last edited by UncleBob on Thu Feb 04, 2016 1:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
Rusty
In Memoriam
Posts: 25059
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Beelzebub's Rare Tobacco Emporium

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Rusty » Thu Feb 04, 2016 1:40 pm

UncleBob wrote:
tuttle wrote: I don't know. Sounds to me like you're already convinced regardless. Sounds like yer hackles are up. I wouldn't fear folks questioning you. Something tells me you can handle Del. I questioned you nearly every second 'pre-label' in order to understand your side. I'll likely ask questions in the future, depending on the topic, that touches upon what you've shared. Dude, that's life. It's what happens when relationships grow. When I find out my new friend is a police officer, there's going to be discussions about it. When I find out my friend Sam wrote a book, I'm asking questions, and suddenly assuming he is or isn't going to like/dislike something I bring up. On the other hand I'll assume he knows more about Topic X than I do. I'll maybe ask him in particular, his take on something. All because he's let the cat out of the bag and done labeled himself an author. This is the same vein I'm looking at with you. Took the same route when Thunk jumped ship. We all had questions and he was gracious. And for FredS's sake you've 'outed' yourself as something I'll bet 0.05 out of 10 people even understand. I had to google it and still don't have a grasp on it.
No, no, no, no! This is to illustrate the whole thread! Consider how this thread went.

1. What is a progressive Christian? (BTW--didn't want to start the thread because everyone but UB already "knows") We know they aren't Christians, because "progressive" is bad.
2. Why not do some research into what they believe?
3. Not necessary. They are "progressive".
4. Say.. look what they say about themselves.
5. See? Not Christian.
6. Why not?
7. We already know how they are. We don't need to research. BTW--they believe abortion.
8. There is nothing to suggest that Progressive Christian = Pro-choice.
9. (Unstated premise) Progressive Christian must be pro-choice because progressive is code for Democrat. BTW--you are a relativist.
etc.

and so on. See how labels played in this thread? We went through how many posts where you try to label me a relativist and yet I am something else that you never heard of before. Doesn't that concern anyone here? Think about that: the thread was born in error, struggled against actually researching it, and resists evidence to the contrary all because of label bias.

Does this not concern anyone else?

Perhaps I miss the whole point of CPS. I thought it is a place where we can come and learn about pipes, tobacco, theology, and life in general. Plus we get to make friends! Is it really a forum to come a confirm our biases and b**** about those "bad" people?
That's a very handy summary. I can see that being a wallet sized card. Yes, the atheists are mildly concerned but not surprised. It's more of the same. Now that you've exited the Progressive Christianity Closet are we going to have conservative vs. progressive wars? You need more progressives.
You're out of the woods
You're out of the dark
You're out of the night
Step into the sun
Step into the light

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 37077
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by UncleBob » Thu Feb 04, 2016 1:42 pm

Rusty wrote:
UncleBob wrote:
tuttle wrote: I don't know. Sounds to me like you're already convinced regardless. Sounds like yer hackles are up. I wouldn't fear folks questioning you. Something tells me you can handle Del. I questioned you nearly every second 'pre-label' in order to understand your side. I'll likely ask questions in the future, depending on the topic, that touches upon what you've shared. Dude, that's life. It's what happens when relationships grow. When I find out my new friend is a police officer, there's going to be discussions about it. When I find out my friend Sam wrote a book, I'm asking questions, and suddenly assuming he is or isn't going to like/dislike something I bring up. On the other hand I'll assume he knows more about Topic X than I do. I'll maybe ask him in particular, his take on something. All because he's let the cat out of the bag and done labeled himself an author. This is the same vein I'm looking at with you. Took the same route when Thunk jumped ship. We all had questions and he was gracious. And for FredS's sake you've 'outed' yourself as something I'll bet 0.05 out of 10 people even understand. I had to google it and still don't have a grasp on it.
No, no, no, no! This is to illustrate the whole thread! Consider how this thread went.

1. What is a progressive Christian? (BTW--didn't want to start the thread because everyone but UB already "knows") We know they aren't Christians, because "progressive" is bad.
2. Why not do some research into what they believe?
3. Not necessary. They are "progressive".
4. Say.. look what they say about themselves.
5. See? Not Christian.
6. Why not?
7. We already know how they are. We don't need to research. BTW--they believe abortion.
8. There is nothing to suggest that Progressive Christian = Pro-choice.
9. (Unstated premise) Progressive Christian must be pro-choice because progressive is code for Democrat. BTW--you are a relativist.
etc.

and so on. See how labels played in this thread? We went through how many posts where you try to label me a relativist and yet I am something else that you never heard of before. Doesn't that concern anyone here? Think about that: the thread was born in error, struggled against actually researching it, and resists evidence to the contrary all because of label bias.

Does this not concern anyone else?

Perhaps I miss the whole point of CPS. I thought it is a place where we can come and learn about pipes, tobacco, theology, and life in general. Plus we get to make friends! Is it really a forum to come a confirm our biases and b**** about those "bad" people?
That's a very handy summary. I can see that being a wallet sized card. Yes, the atheists are mildly concerned but not surprised. It's more of the same. Now that you've exited the Progressive Christianity Closet are we going to have conservative vs. progressive wars? You need more progressives.
Um, I am not a Progressive Christian.

(See? More label bias!)
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
Rusty
In Memoriam
Posts: 25059
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Beelzebub's Rare Tobacco Emporium

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Rusty » Thu Feb 04, 2016 1:57 pm

UncleBob wrote:
Rusty wrote:
UncleBob wrote:
tuttle wrote: I don't know. Sounds to me like you're already convinced regardless. Sounds like yer hackles are up. I wouldn't fear folks questioning you. Something tells me you can handle Del. I questioned you nearly every second 'pre-label' in order to understand your side. I'll likely ask questions in the future, depending on the topic, that touches upon what you've shared. Dude, that's life. It's what happens when relationships grow. When I find out my new friend is a police officer, there's going to be discussions about it. When I find out my friend Sam wrote a book, I'm asking questions, and suddenly assuming he is or isn't going to like/dislike something I bring up. On the other hand I'll assume he knows more about Topic X than I do. I'll maybe ask him in particular, his take on something. All because he's let the cat out of the bag and done labeled himself an author. This is the same vein I'm looking at with you. Took the same route when Thunk jumped ship. We all had questions and he was gracious. And for FredS's sake you've 'outed' yourself as something I'll bet 0.05 out of 10 people even understand. I had to google it and still don't have a grasp on it.
No, no, no, no! This is to illustrate the whole thread! Consider how this thread went.

1. What is a progressive Christian? (BTW--didn't want to start the thread because everyone but UB already "knows") We know they aren't Christians, because "progressive" is bad.
2. Why not do some research into what they believe?
3. Not necessary. They are "progressive".
4. Say.. look what they say about themselves.
5. See? Not Christian.
6. Why not?
7. We already know how they are. We don't need to research. BTW--they believe abortion.
8. There is nothing to suggest that Progressive Christian = Pro-choice.
9. (Unstated premise) Progressive Christian must be pro-choice because progressive is code for Democrat. BTW--you are a relativist.
etc.

and so on. See how labels played in this thread? We went through how many posts where you try to label me a relativist and yet I am something else that you never heard of before. Doesn't that concern anyone here? Think about that: the thread was born in error, struggled against actually researching it, and resists evidence to the contrary all because of label bias.

Does this not concern anyone else?

Perhaps I miss the whole point of CPS. I thought it is a place where we can come and learn about pipes, tobacco, theology, and life in general. Plus we get to make friends! Is it really a forum to come a confirm our biases and b**** about those "bad" people?
That's a very handy summary. I can see that being a wallet sized card. Yes, the atheists are mildly concerned but not surprised. It's more of the same. Now that you've exited the Progressive Christianity Closet are we going to have conservative vs. progressive wars? You need more progressives.
Um, I am not a Progressive Christian.

(See? More label bias!)
You know that's what *THEY* concluded. C'mon. This isn't latex. All that interesting commentary about your beliefs was interpreted as *PROGRESSIVE*. Do we need a poll? They've been scratching their heads for a long time. Look at the evidence... Years of assaulting their dearest beliefs with questionable news items. Correcting them on the history of Christians. Calling them out on the various egregious argument violations. You even shot down their Obi-Wan argument... "UB, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." Do you realize that progressive Christians read all that and cheer? And you're inviting them in.
You're out of the woods
You're out of the dark
You're out of the night
Step into the sun
Step into the light

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 14072
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by tuttle » Thu Feb 04, 2016 1:57 pm

UncleBob wrote:
tuttle wrote: I don't know. Sounds to me like you're already convinced regardless. Sounds like yer hackles are up. I wouldn't fear folks questioning you. Something tells me you can handle Del. I questioned you nearly every second 'pre-label' in order to understand your side. I'll likely ask questions in the future, depending on the topic, that touches upon what you've shared. Dude, that's life. It's what happens when relationships grow. When I find out my new friend is a police officer, there's going to be discussions about it. When I find out my friend Sam wrote a book, I'm asking questions, and suddenly assuming he is or isn't going to like/dislike something I bring up. On the other hand I'll assume he knows more about Topic X than I do. I'll maybe ask him in particular, his take on something. All because he's let the cat out of the bag and done labeled himself an author. This is the same vein I'm looking at with you. Took the same route when Thunk jumped ship. We all had questions and he was gracious. And for FredS's sake you've 'outed' yourself as something I'll bet 0.05 out of 10 people even understand. I had to google it and still don't have a grasp on it.
No, no, no, no! This is to illustrate the whole thread! Consider how this thread went.

1. What is a progressive Christian? We know they aren't Christians, because "progressive" is bad.
2. Why not do some research into what they believe?
3. Not necessary. They are "progressive".
4. Say.. look what they say about themselves.
5. See? Not Christian.
6. Why not?
7. We already know how they are. We don't need to research. BTW--they believe abortion.
8. There is nothing to suggest that Progressive Christian = Pro-choice.
9. (Unstated premise) Progressive Christian must be pro-choice because progressive is code for Democrat. BTW--you are a relativist.
etc.

and so on. See how labels played in this thread? We went through how many posts where you try to label me a relativist and yet I am something else that you never heard of before. Doesn't that concern anyone here? Think about that: the thread was born in error, struggled against actually researching it, and resists evidence to the contrary all because of label bias.

Does this not concern anyone else?

Perhaps I miss the whole point of CPS. I thought it is a place where we can come and learn about pipes, tobacco, theology, and life in general. Plus we get to make friends! Is it really a forum to come a confirm our biases and b**** about those "bad" people?
The very reason this thread exists in the first place was because I was trying to understand where you were coming from. I wanted your take. I wanted to understand your take.

You're free to summarize this thread in that way, but you avoid the parts where I straight up said that I believe that self-professed Progressives can be Christians. Only you rejected the foundation I stand upon to say such things. My stances were being twisted into something I wasn't saying and my interpretation of your stance wasn't something you were saying. Which is why, for the life of me I tried to figure out where you were coming from.

You may think relativist and "ethical subjectivist--Ideal Observer Theory with a caveat" are miles apart, but still saw similarities regardless. You distinguished them for me, and I'm grateful. But I was informing you that I'd be interpreting you as a relativist because that was the only place that made sense to me. You left it up to me after I asked point blank questions. You were being murky and dodgy so I walked through the door I saw best to fit. The only reason was for clarity. The only reason I even told you I thought you were being a relativist was to be fair to you. To show you that this is where I am. I was being honest with you (as I always have been) in regards to how I thought your positions sounded. So...how is that bitching about bad people? That's not trying to pidgenhole you or trying to put you in a position to look down upon you; that's simply an effort, a path that I didn't need to even walk down, in order to know you better. To understand you. I don't like dumb dwindling arguments that lead to nowhere. It's frustrating for the both of us and for folks who read it. I didn't have to keep getting my hand slapped away.

Tell you what. I have no idea if any of that convinces you, but on my end it's true. So I guess you can take it or leave it. I thought it was a real breakthrough and something that was good, it seems you think the opposite. Like I said before, I'll still get your back if someone is demonizing you, but if I have to go to this length just to convince you that I'm not demonizing you, then maybe you'd rather not have my help. I don't know. You're a weird cat to understand even with your new label.

I think I'll retire from this thread. I expect we'll butt heads again, not because I'm trying to oppress the guy with a label, but because our worldviews conflict. I think next time though I'll have a better understanding as to why (at least to a degree) they conflict and I think that will lead to a better experience of CPS for the both of us.

EDIT: and if "LABEL BIAS!" becomes a thing I can most assuredly say that it will greatly diminish our CPS experience. I guess what I'm trying to say is that where I see this opening up to new vistas of better conversations, you see a roadblock with squinty eyed fundamentalists aiming at you. I find that telling.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 37077
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by UncleBob » Thu Feb 04, 2016 2:08 pm

Rusty wrote:
UncleBob wrote:
Rusty wrote:
UncleBob wrote:
tuttle wrote: I don't know. Sounds to me like you're already convinced regardless. Sounds like yer hackles are up. I wouldn't fear folks questioning you. Something tells me you can handle Del. I questioned you nearly every second 'pre-label' in order to understand your side. I'll likely ask questions in the future, depending on the topic, that touches upon what you've shared. Dude, that's life. It's what happens when relationships grow. When I find out my new friend is a police officer, there's going to be discussions about it. When I find out my friend Sam wrote a book, I'm asking questions, and suddenly assuming he is or isn't going to like/dislike something I bring up. On the other hand I'll assume he knows more about Topic X than I do. I'll maybe ask him in particular, his take on something. All because he's let the cat out of the bag and done labeled himself an author. This is the same vein I'm looking at with you. Took the same route when Thunk jumped ship. We all had questions and he was gracious. And for FredS's sake you've 'outed' yourself as something I'll bet 0.05 out of 10 people even understand. I had to google it and still don't have a grasp on it.
No, no, no, no! This is to illustrate the whole thread! Consider how this thread went.

1. What is a progressive Christian? (BTW--didn't want to start the thread because everyone but UB already "knows") We know they aren't Christians, because "progressive" is bad.
2. Why not do some research into what they believe?
3. Not necessary. They are "progressive".
4. Say.. look what they say about themselves.
5. See? Not Christian.
6. Why not?
7. We already know how they are. We don't need to research. BTW--they believe abortion.
8. There is nothing to suggest that Progressive Christian = Pro-choice.
9. (Unstated premise) Progressive Christian must be pro-choice because progressive is code for Democrat. BTW--you are a relativist.
etc.

and so on. See how labels played in this thread? We went through how many posts where you try to label me a relativist and yet I am something else that you never heard of before. Doesn't that concern anyone here? Think about that: the thread was born in error, struggled against actually researching it, and resists evidence to the contrary all because of label bias.

Does this not concern anyone else?

Perhaps I miss the whole point of CPS. I thought it is a place where we can come and learn about pipes, tobacco, theology, and life in general. Plus we get to make friends! Is it really a forum to come a confirm our biases and b**** about those "bad" people?
That's a very handy summary. I can see that being a wallet sized card. Yes, the atheists are mildly concerned but not surprised. It's more of the same. Now that you've exited the Progressive Christianity Closet are we going to have conservative vs. progressive wars? You need more progressives.
Um, I am not a Progressive Christian.

(See? More label bias!)
You know that's what *THEY* concluded. C'mon. This isn't latex. All that interesting commentary about your beliefs was interpreted as *PROGRESSIVE*. Do we need a poll? They've been scratching their heads for a long time. Look at the evidence... Years of assaulting their dearest beliefs with questionable news items. Correcting them on the history of Christians. Calling them out on the various egregious argument violations. You even shot down their Obi-Wan argument... "UB, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." Do you realize that progressive Christians read all that and cheer? And you're inviting them in.
I hope that many Progressive Christians visit CPS and join in. I hope they get a better reception than pilgrim did.
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 37077
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by UncleBob » Thu Feb 04, 2016 2:11 pm

tuttle wrote:
UncleBob wrote:
tuttle wrote: I don't know. Sounds to me like you're already convinced regardless. Sounds like yer hackles are up. I wouldn't fear folks questioning you. Something tells me you can handle Del. I questioned you nearly every second 'pre-label' in order to understand your side. I'll likely ask questions in the future, depending on the topic, that touches upon what you've shared. Dude, that's life. It's what happens when relationships grow. When I find out my new friend is a police officer, there's going to be discussions about it. When I find out my friend Sam wrote a book, I'm asking questions, and suddenly assuming he is or isn't going to like/dislike something I bring up. On the other hand I'll assume he knows more about Topic X than I do. I'll maybe ask him in particular, his take on something. All because he's let the cat out of the bag and done labeled himself an author. This is the same vein I'm looking at with you. Took the same route when Thunk jumped ship. We all had questions and he was gracious. And for FredS's sake you've 'outed' yourself as something I'll bet 0.05 out of 10 people even understand. I had to google it and still don't have a grasp on it.
No, no, no, no! This is to illustrate the whole thread! Consider how this thread went.

1. What is a progressive Christian? We know they aren't Christians, because "progressive" is bad.
2. Why not do some research into what they believe?
3. Not necessary. They are "progressive".
4. Say.. look what they say about themselves.
5. See? Not Christian.
6. Why not?
7. We already know how they are. We don't need to research. BTW--they believe abortion.
8. There is nothing to suggest that Progressive Christian = Pro-choice.
9. (Unstated premise) Progressive Christian must be pro-choice because progressive is code for Democrat. BTW--you are a relativist.
etc.

and so on. See how labels played in this thread? We went through how many posts where you try to label me a relativist and yet I am something else that you never heard of before. Doesn't that concern anyone here? Think about that: the thread was born in error, struggled against actually researching it, and resists evidence to the contrary all because of label bias.

Does this not concern anyone else?

Perhaps I miss the whole point of CPS. I thought it is a place where we can come and learn about pipes, tobacco, theology, and life in general. Plus we get to make friends! Is it really a forum to come a confirm our biases and b**** about those "bad" people?
The very reason this thread exists in the first place was because I was trying to understand where you were coming from. I wanted your take. I wanted to understand your take.

You're free to summarize this thread in that way, but you avoid the parts where I straight up said that I believe that self-professed Progressives can be Christians. Only you rejected the foundation I stand upon to say such things. My stances were being twisted into something I wasn't saying and my interpretation of your stance wasn't something you were saying. Which is why, for the life of me I tried to figure out where you were coming from.

You may think relativist and "ethical subjectivist--Ideal Observer Theory with a caveat" are miles apart, but still saw similarities regardless. You distinguished them for me, and I'm grateful. But I was informing you that I'd be interpreting you as a relativist because that was the only place that made sense to me. You left it up to me after I asked point blank questions. You were being murky and dodgy so I walked through the door I saw best to fit. The only reason was for clarity. The only reason I even told you I thought you were being a relativist was to be fair to you. To show you that this is where I am. I was being honest with you (as I always have been) in regards to how I thought your positions sounded. So...how is that bitching about bad people? That's not trying to pidgenhole you or trying to put you in a position to look down upon you; that's simply an effort, a path that I didn't need to even walk down, in order to know you better. To understand you. I don't like dumb dwindling arguments that lead to nowhere. It's frustrating for the both of us and for folks who read it. I didn't have to keep getting my hand slapped away.

Tell you what. I have no idea if any of that convinces you, but on my end it's true. So I guess you can take it or leave it. I thought it was a real breakthrough and something that was good, it seems you think the opposite. Like I said before, I'll still get your back if someone is demonizing you, but if I have to go to this length just to convince you that I'm not demonizing you, then maybe you'd rather not have my help. I don't know. You're a weird cat to understand even with your new label.

I think I'll retire from this thread. I expect we'll butt heads again, not because I'm trying to oppress the guy with a label, but because our worldviews conflict. I think next time though I'll have a better understanding as to why (at least to a degree) they conflict and I think that will lead to a better experience of CPS for the both of us.

EDIT: and if "LABEL BIAS!" becomes a thing I can most assuredly say that it will greatly diminish our CPS experience. I guess what I'm trying to say is that where I see this opening up to new vistas of better conversations, you see a roadblock with squinty eyed fundamentalists aiming at you. I find that telling.
Before you go, do you believe the same about Progressive Christians now that you did at the start of the thread?
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 14072
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by tuttle » Thu Feb 04, 2016 2:38 pm

UncleBob wrote:
tuttle wrote:
UncleBob wrote:
tuttle wrote: I don't know. Sounds to me like you're already convinced regardless. Sounds like yer hackles are up. I wouldn't fear folks questioning you. Something tells me you can handle Del. I questioned you nearly every second 'pre-label' in order to understand your side. I'll likely ask questions in the future, depending on the topic, that touches upon what you've shared. Dude, that's life. It's what happens when relationships grow. When I find out my new friend is a police officer, there's going to be discussions about it. When I find out my friend Sam wrote a book, I'm asking questions, and suddenly assuming he is or isn't going to like/dislike something I bring up. On the other hand I'll assume he knows more about Topic X than I do. I'll maybe ask him in particular, his take on something. All because he's let the cat out of the bag and done labeled himself an author. This is the same vein I'm looking at with you. Took the same route when Thunk jumped ship. We all had questions and he was gracious. And for FredS's sake you've 'outed' yourself as something I'll bet 0.05 out of 10 people even understand. I had to google it and still don't have a grasp on it.
No, no, no, no! This is to illustrate the whole thread! Consider how this thread went.

1. What is a progressive Christian? We know they aren't Christians, because "progressive" is bad.
2. Why not do some research into what they believe?
3. Not necessary. They are "progressive".
4. Say.. look what they say about themselves.
5. See? Not Christian.
6. Why not?
7. We already know how they are. We don't need to research. BTW--they believe abortion.
8. There is nothing to suggest that Progressive Christian = Pro-choice.
9. (Unstated premise) Progressive Christian must be pro-choice because progressive is code for Democrat. BTW--you are a relativist.
etc.

and so on. See how labels played in this thread? We went through how many posts where you try to label me a relativist and yet I am something else that you never heard of before. Doesn't that concern anyone here? Think about that: the thread was born in error, struggled against actually researching it, and resists evidence to the contrary all because of label bias.

Does this not concern anyone else?

Perhaps I miss the whole point of CPS. I thought it is a place where we can come and learn about pipes, tobacco, theology, and life in general. Plus we get to make friends! Is it really a forum to come a confirm our biases and b**** about those "bad" people?
The very reason this thread exists in the first place was because I was trying to understand where you were coming from. I wanted your take. I wanted to understand your take.

You're free to summarize this thread in that way, but you avoid the parts where I straight up said that I believe that self-professed Progressives can be Christians. Only you rejected the foundation I stand upon to say such things. My stances were being twisted into something I wasn't saying and my interpretation of your stance wasn't something you were saying. Which is why, for the life of me I tried to figure out where you were coming from.

You may think relativist and "ethical subjectivist--Ideal Observer Theory with a caveat" are miles apart, but still saw similarities regardless. You distinguished them for me, and I'm grateful. But I was informing you that I'd be interpreting you as a relativist because that was the only place that made sense to me. You left it up to me after I asked point blank questions. You were being murky and dodgy so I walked through the door I saw best to fit. The only reason was for clarity. The only reason I even told you I thought you were being a relativist was to be fair to you. To show you that this is where I am. I was being honest with you (as I always have been) in regards to how I thought your positions sounded. So...how is that bitching about bad people? That's not trying to pidgenhole you or trying to put you in a position to look down upon you; that's simply an effort, a path that I didn't need to even walk down, in order to know you better. To understand you. I don't like dumb dwindling arguments that lead to nowhere. It's frustrating for the both of us and for folks who read it. I didn't have to keep getting my hand slapped away.

Tell you what. I have no idea if any of that convinces you, but on my end it's true. So I guess you can take it or leave it. I thought it was a real breakthrough and something that was good, it seems you think the opposite. Like I said before, I'll still get your back if someone is demonizing you, but if I have to go to this length just to convince you that I'm not demonizing you, then maybe you'd rather not have my help. I don't know. You're a weird cat to understand even with your new label.

I think I'll retire from this thread. I expect we'll butt heads again, not because I'm trying to oppress the guy with a label, but because our worldviews conflict. I think next time though I'll have a better understanding as to why (at least to a degree) they conflict and I think that will lead to a better experience of CPS for the both of us.

EDIT: and if "LABEL BIAS!" becomes a thing I can most assuredly say that it will greatly diminish our CPS experience. I guess what I'm trying to say is that where I see this opening up to new vistas of better conversations, you see a roadblock with squinty eyed fundamentalists aiming at you. I find that telling.
Before you go, do you believe the same about Progressive Christians now that you did at the start of the thread?
That's fair.

Um. Yes. And No.

Before this thread I was unaware of any actual organized endeavors that embraced the name Progressive Christianity. My experience with progressives has been (as I said) a drifting from truth within traditional contexts. So someone grew up in a Baptist/Presbyterian/Catholic church and over time the man realized certain theological/doctrinal/sociological views he holds are now a few steps away from what he grew up with. Most of the time these views are formed via how one views social issues. That is to say their view on social issues transforms or determines their theology, rather than their theology transforming or determining their view on social issues. In my experience you see it start from within and distance itself. This happens with individuals and churches and even denominations. There is a drifting away (from my angle). That, more or less, has been my experience with "progressive" Christians. I'm not surprised to see an organized/formal Progressive Christian Movement, but is new to me (and probably explains why I constantly used the term 'self-professed progressive'...because people/churches/institutions that were progressive weren't organized to the point of using a specific name for any kind of movement. "Progressive Christianity" was a generic name, probably used by both 'progressives' and 'orthodox' to indicate this trend.

So in some ways nothing has really changed for me. I still think of Progressive Christianity as a moving (organized or not) away from the truth, whose theology is formed on the basis of social issues. I've always realized that there are different 'levels' of progressives. Some move away from the idea of Biblical Authority while some affirm it but are admittedly squishy about it while some affirm it and stand firm on it but (from my angle) come away with the opposite understanding of what orthodox Christianity would teach. Obviously, not every progressive is in agreement about which social issues are the most important and all don't line up firmly with one another, but trends do exist it seems.

Beyond that, the new thing I've learned is that there is now an organized 'movement' of self-proclaimed Progressives. In some ways it strikes me as being anti-Progressive to have a formal organized movement, but maybe that just applies to the hard-cores. That they admit that their 8 points will change every few years though probably makes up for it. Their power is in loosy-goosness. Something I've already known, but didn't realize was something that could be accomplished via an organization.

So maybe this: I believe the same, but I've learned more about them. Nothing I've learned about them has really changed what it is I've believed about them, in fact, it has kind of reinforced it. That said, we should put a pin in this and bring it back up in say, 5-10 years and re-address the 'updated' 8 points. Maybe by then something will up-end my thoughts.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
FredS
Patriarch of All Shirkdom
Patriarch of All Shirkdom
Posts: 22511
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by FredS » Thu Feb 04, 2016 6:42 pm

Rusty wrote:You know that's what *THEY* concluded. . .
Please stop using 'they" when you mean tuttle.
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19262
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by hugodrax » Thu Feb 04, 2016 8:08 pm

UncleBob wrote:
tuttle wrote: I don't know. Sounds to me like you're already convinced regardless. Sounds like yer hackles are up. I wouldn't fear folks questioning you. Something tells me you can handle Del. I questioned you nearly every second 'pre-label' in order to understand your side. I'll likely ask questions in the future, depending on the topic, that touches upon what you've shared. Dude, that's life. It's what happens when relationships grow. When I find out my new friend is a police officer, there's going to be discussions about it. When I find out my friend Sam wrote a book, I'm asking questions, and suddenly assuming he is or isn't going to like/dislike something I bring up. On the other hand I'll assume he knows more about Topic X than I do. I'll maybe ask him in particular, his take on something. All because he's let the cat out of the bag and done labeled himself an author. This is the same vein I'm looking at with you. Took the same route when Thunk jumped ship. We all had questions and he was gracious. And for FredS's sake you've 'outed' yourself as something I'll bet 0.05 out of 10 people even understand. I had to google it and still don't have a grasp on it.
No, no, no, no! This is to illustrate the whole thread! Consider how this thread went.

1. What is a progressive Christian? (BTW--didn't want to start the thread because everyone but UB already "knows") We know they aren't Christians, because "progressive" is bad.
2. Why not do some research into what they believe?
3. Not necessary. They are "progressive".
4. Say.. look what they say about themselves.
5. See? Not Christian.
6. Why not?
7. We already know how they are. We don't need to research. BTW--they believe abortion.
8. There is nothing to suggest that Progressive Christian = Pro-choice.
9. (Unstated premise) Progressive Christian must be pro-choice because progressive is code for Democrat. BTW--you are a relativist.
etc.

and so on. See how labels played in this thread? We went through how many posts where you try to label me a relativist and yet I am something else that you never heard of before. Doesn't that concern anyone here? Think about that: the thread was born in error, struggled against actually researching it, and resists evidence to the contrary all because of label bias.

Does this not concern anyone else?

Perhaps I miss the whole point of CPS. I thought it is a place where we can come and learn about pipes, tobacco, theology, and life in general. Plus we get to make friends! Is it really a forum to come and confirm our biases and b**** about those "bad" people?
No, Bob, it doesn't really concern me. You're my friend and that's good enough. Besides, as a Catholic, I am plenty used to people telling me what I believe without asking and without researching and without believing me when I tell them they're wrong. And that's just you and Del....

I often shake my head about what I read around here, often when rereading my own posts. But don't get twisted about the place because of an unfair thread. I feel closest to you, Coco, Fred, Thunk, the oddly named Irish Dane, Joe, Skip, JudgeRusty, Rusty, and Onyx. I don't say that to leave anyone out, I've made many more friends, but to illustrate that of those I feel think most like me, only one shares my denomination. Two, maybe three, aren't Christian at all.
Yet we don't sit around kvetching at each other all the time. I say this not to be a jerk, but in a spirit of helpfulness: lighten up. Or rage quit. Your decision.
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 37077
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by UncleBob » Thu Feb 04, 2016 9:44 pm

hugodrax wrote: No, Bob, it doesn't really concern me. You're my friend and that's good enough. Besides, as a Catholic, I am plenty used to people telling me what I believe without asking and without researching and without believing me when I tell them they're wrong. And that's just you and Del....

I often shake my head about what I read around here, often when rereading my own posts. But don't get twisted about the place because of an unfair thread. I feel closest to you, Coco, Fred, Thunk, the oddly named Irish Dane, Joe, Skip, JudgeRusty, Rusty, and Onyx. I don't say that to leave anyone out, I've made many more friends, but to illustrate that of those I feel think most like me, only one shares my denomination. Two, maybe three, aren't Christian at all.
Yet we don't sit around kvetching at each other all the time. I say this not to be a jerk, but in a spirit of helpfulness: lighten up. Or rage quit. Your decision.
Rage quit? Are you hanging out with TNLP again?

I will not lighten up because foolishness is way to rampant in our society to be enabled. You want to fight against something? That's cool. However, we need to have an idea about what they are instead of just thundering from the gut. We might as well be "dowsers for Jesus" if that's the case.
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
Skip
Everything in Moderatoration
Everything in Moderatoration
Posts: 24182
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:00 pm
Location: Slightly East of Pepik
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Skip » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:02 pm

"Innocent until proven guilty?" This thread seemed like "heretics until proven infidels."
2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 Winner of the CPS Award: "Most Likely to be Found Without Pants at Any Given Moment"

2017 Curmudgeon of the Year

"No man is peer to Skip, peasant." -A_Morley

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 37077
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by UncleBob » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:13 pm

Skip wrote:"Innocent until proven guilty?" This thread seemed like "heretics until proven infidels."
Yes. This.
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19262
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by hugodrax » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:39 pm

UncleBob wrote:
hugodrax wrote: No, Bob, it doesn't really concern me. You're my friend and that's good enough. Besides, as a Catholic, I am plenty used to people telling me what I believe without asking and without researching and without believing me when I tell them they're wrong. And that's just you and Del....

I often shake my head about what I read around here, often when rereading my own posts. But don't get twisted about the place because of an unfair thread. I feel closest to you, Coco, Fred, Thunk, the oddly named Irish Dane, Joe, Skip, JudgeRusty, Rusty, and Onyx. I don't say that to leave anyone out, I've made many more friends, but to illustrate that of those I feel think most like me, only one shares my denomination. Two, maybe three, aren't Christian at all.
Yet we don't sit around kvetching at each other all the time. I say this not to be a jerk, but in a spirit of helpfulness: lighten up. Or rage quit. Your decision.
Rage quit? Are you hanging out with TNLP again?

I will not lighten up because foolishness is way to rampant in our society to be enabled. You want to fight against something? That's cool. However, we need to have an idea about what they are instead of just thundering from the gut. We might as well be "dowsers for Jesus" if that's the case.
Lighten up means stop howling when you get hurt stirring up the hornets nest. You've labeled enough people here that you shouldn't be terribly surprised to be labeled yourself. Don't be surprised by the injustice of it all. Besides, this place isn't real. For all I know, you are Tuttle and you've been talking to yourself. I'm a figment of Dels imagination. :mrgreen: I
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 37077
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by UncleBob » Thu Feb 04, 2016 10:46 pm

hugodrax wrote:
UncleBob wrote:
hugodrax wrote: No, Bob, it doesn't really concern me. You're my friend and that's good enough. Besides, as a Catholic, I am plenty used to people telling me what I believe without asking and without researching and without believing me when I tell them they're wrong. And that's just you and Del....

I often shake my head about what I read around here, often when rereading my own posts. But don't get twisted about the place because of an unfair thread. I feel closest to you, Coco, Fred, Thunk, the oddly named Irish Dane, Joe, Skip, JudgeRusty, Rusty, and Onyx. I don't say that to leave anyone out, I've made many more friends, but to illustrate that of those I feel think most like me, only one shares my denomination. Two, maybe three, aren't Christian at all.
Yet we don't sit around kvetching at each other all the time. I say this not to be a jerk, but in a spirit of helpfulness: lighten up. Or rage quit. Your decision.
Rage quit? Are you hanging out with TNLP again?

I will not lighten up because foolishness is way to rampant in our society to be enabled. You want to fight against something? That's cool. However, we need to have an idea about what they are instead of just thundering from the gut. We might as well be "dowsers for Jesus" if that's the case.
Lighten up means stop howling when you get hurt stirring up the hornets nest. You've labeled enough people here that you shouldn't be terribly surprised to be labeled yourself. Don't be surprised by the injustice of it all. Besides, this place isn't real. For all I know, you are Tuttle and you've been talking to yourself. I'm a figment of Dels imagination. :mrgreen: I
Are you hogleg's sock puppet?
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

Post Reply