What is Progressive Christianity?

For those deep thinkers out there.
Post Reply
User avatar
Del
Hot Legs
Hot Legs
Posts: 39097
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Del » Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:06 pm

UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:59 am
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
UncleBob wrote:
What is universal about Progressive Christians and what they teach? Is this what all progressives teach or is it what some teach? Maybe this is just what some fundamentalists say they teach? I read Fred Phelps teachings once.. is that what all fundamentalists teach? Where is the universal standard of what progressives teach? The only standard I found is from this website: https://progressivechristianity.org/wha ... istianity/
I'm not saying that all progressive Christians are monolithic in their ideology. Of course there is going to be some variance. When I say that they hold a low view of scripture, that's deductive reasoning. They won't say "I hold a low view of scripture" but this is the logical result of the things that they say that they do believe. Earlier in this conversation I referenced their Axiom #2 from the page you linked to. You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life". That statement is entirely contradictory, and this is just low-hanging fruit that I'm plucking here. If you affirm the teachings of Jesus, then you must also affirm that it is only through Christ that man can be reconciled to God. Therefore, either they don't really affirm the teachings of Jesus, or they only affirm some of the teachings of Jesus, and they have not defined the standard by which they go about determining which of his teachings are worthwhile and which should be ignored. The logical conclusion here is that they do not believe that scripture is reliable. They hold a low view of scripture, without implicitly saying it.
Or, that they do believe that scripture is reliable but don't agree with your specific hermeneutic. Oh, and...
You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life".
...well, from the Philosophy Thread...
Del wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:59 pm
I am slowly reading Plato's Dialogues.

He is easy to read.

I have also opened the Summa of Thomas Aquinas. He is much denser.... still, easy enough for any lover of philosophy to enjoy. You'll get clobbered with great wisdom on every page of St. Thomas Aquinas. On page 1, we learn that it was possible to know God through Reason alone -- but 1) it was only known to a few very wise persons (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle), 2) after a very long time, and 3) with a great many errors mixed in. That is why God revealed Himself to us -- so that the whole world can know the truth.
No one here is going to call Del a progressive! Just sayin'. Plus, this was a common view held by the early Church--maybe there is room in The Church for views that do not follow the specific, narrow definition that you used; who knows! Maybe they could even be right!
If they are very wise, they might get it right.... a few of them, after a very long time, and with the admixture of many errors.

Which is why Jesus gave us a Church -- so that all might know the truth, rightly and easily.

Aristotle would have exploded with delight if he had had access to the knowledge that every peasant-wife of the Middle Ages held in the Apostles Creed.
"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
Del
Hot Legs
Hot Legs
Posts: 39097
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Del » Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:18 pm

Del wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:06 pm
UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:59 am
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
UncleBob wrote:
What is universal about Progressive Christians and what they teach? Is this what all progressives teach or is it what some teach? Maybe this is just what some fundamentalists say they teach? I read Fred Phelps teachings once.. is that what all fundamentalists teach? Where is the universal standard of what progressives teach? The only standard I found is from this website: https://progressivechristianity.org/wha ... istianity/
I'm not saying that all progressive Christians are monolithic in their ideology. Of course there is going to be some variance. When I say that they hold a low view of scripture, that's deductive reasoning. They won't say "I hold a low view of scripture" but this is the logical result of the things that they say that they do believe. Earlier in this conversation I referenced their Axiom #2 from the page you linked to. You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life". That statement is entirely contradictory, and this is just low-hanging fruit that I'm plucking here. If you affirm the teachings of Jesus, then you must also affirm that it is only through Christ that man can be reconciled to God. Therefore, either they don't really affirm the teachings of Jesus, or they only affirm some of the teachings of Jesus, and they have not defined the standard by which they go about determining which of his teachings are worthwhile and which should be ignored. The logical conclusion here is that they do not believe that scripture is reliable. They hold a low view of scripture, without implicitly saying it.
Or, that they do believe that scripture is reliable but don't agree with your specific hermeneutic. Oh, and...
You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life".
...well, from the Philosophy Thread...
Del wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:59 pm
I am slowly reading Plato's Dialogues.

He is easy to read.

I have also opened the Summa of Thomas Aquinas. He is much denser.... still, easy enough for any lover of philosophy to enjoy. You'll get clobbered with great wisdom on every page of St. Thomas Aquinas. On page 1, we learn that it was possible to know God through Reason alone -- but 1) it was only known to a few very wise persons (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle), 2) after a very long time, and 3) with a great many errors mixed in. That is why God revealed Himself to us -- so that the whole world can know the truth.
No one here is going to call Del a progressive! Just sayin'. Plus, this was a common view held by the early Church--maybe there is room in The Church for views that do not follow the specific, narrow definition that you used; who knows! Maybe they could even be right!
If they are very wise, they might get it right.... a few of them, after a very long time, and with the admixture of many errors.

Which is why Jesus gave us a Church -- so that all might know the truth, rightly and easily.

Aristotle would have exploded with delight if he had had access to the knowledge that every peasant-wife of the Middle Ages held in the Apostles Creed.

I'm not sure what you find "narrow" about any of this. The whole point of the Reformation Fathers is that they thought the Catholic* Church was much too broad. They lopped off many branches of thinking which they judged were not proper to their understanding of Christianity.

* Catholic means universal and all-inclusive.
"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
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19259
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by hugodrax » Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:50 pm

UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:24 pm
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:02 pm

Why even attempt to define progressive Christianity if every attempt to do so here is going to get shot down for reason of there being no unifying creed that progressive Christians ascribe to? Can we not look at what self-professed progressive Christians say that they think and believe on a case by case basis and draw conclusions from that? Especially when we see certain ideas repeated by different leaders and/or organizations. There may not be a cohesive, unifying document in the same vein as the Westminster Confession of Faith, but we can certainly draw conclusions from their own written and spoken words.
You can go case-by-case; that's cool. But are you a fundamentalist? Do you like being lumped in with Fred Phelps and so on? How would you react to, "All fundamentalists believe what Fred Phelps teaches"? We used to have some progressive Christians on here but, due to in no small part, these kinds of "All you progressives believe X" contributed to their departure. You wish to rail against "progressive Christians"? Why is that? There aren't even any here who identify as progressive Christians, I don't believe.
One thing I've noticed is that everybody rails against everybody.

Let's assume I have no desire to rail against anyone. I know you arent talking to me, but I'm just going to throw that out as a starting point to make it clear.

I think we have a problem defining terms that means this particular debate is not going to get off the ground.

It would seem to me, and I'm just spitballing, that there is an insurmountable difficulty at the very beginning. Reading that webpage, that version of progressive Christianity doesnt seem to have definable beliefs by design. How, then, does one argue for or against it?

In reading the basic info and 8 points, to me it looks like it's possible to be an agnostic or atheistic Progressive Christian. It might be possible to be an Arian Progressive Christian, or a Manichaean Progressive Christian, or perhaps to just believe that Christ was a real person and that's an end of it. If no belief controls, then attempting to debate or learn more about Progressive Christianity might be fruitless.

One of the terms I've grown to dislike is "fundamentalist" and I hope someday we can move past it, as its grown to a mere epithet. There are fundamental building blocks in any argument, any belief, any faith system. People believe or reject these as they wish, but all believe in something and that's the starting point of any debate.

What are the fundamental beliefs about Christ inherent in progressive Christianity? Does anybody know?
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 20347
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by wosbald » Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:58 pm

+JMJ+
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:02 pm
UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:59 am
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
I'm not saying that all progressive Christians are monolithic in their ideology. Of course there is going to be some variance. When I say that they hold a low view of scripture, that's deductive reasoning. They won't say "I hold a low view of scripture" but this is the logical result of the things that they say that they do believe. Earlier in this conversation I referenced their Axiom #2 from the page you linked to. You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life". That statement is entirely contradictory, and this is just low-hanging fruit that I'm plucking here. If you affirm the teachings of Jesus, then you must also affirm that it is only through Christ that man can be reconciled to God. Therefore, either they don't really affirm the teachings of Jesus, or they only affirm some of the teachings of Jesus, and they have not defined the standard by which they go about determining which of his teachings are worthwhile and which should be ignored. The logical conclusion here is that they do not believe that scripture is reliable. They hold a low view of scripture, without implicitly saying it.
Or, that they do believe that scripture is reliable but don't agree with your specific hermeneutic. Oh, and...
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life".
...well, from the Philosophy Thread...
Del wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:59 pm
I have also opened the Summa of Thomas Aquinas. He is much denser.... still, easy enough for any lover of philosophy to enjoy. You'll get clobbered with great wisdom on every page of St. Thomas Aquinas. On page 1, we learn that it was possible to know God through Reason alone Aquinas' opinion here cannot be defended using scripture, which would argue otherwise, but that's a whole 'nother discussion, and we digress.-- but 1) it was only known to a few very wise persons (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle), 2) after a very long time, and 3) with a great many errors mixed in. That is why God revealed Himself to us -- so that the whole world can know the truth.
Addressing Adam's highlighted interpolation …

Why would that be a digression? Wouldn’t Aquinas (and by extension, Catholicity), in affirming the prerogatives of Reason, be thusly holding the selfsame "low view of Scripture" which you ascribe to Progressives?

ImageImage

"[T]he emergency of irregular migration has to be met with justice, solidarity and mercy. Forms of collective expulsion, which do not allow for the suitable treatment of individual cases, are unacceptable."
— Pope Francis, Morocco

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 » Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:07 pm

hugodrax wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:50 pm
UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:24 pm
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:02 pm

Why even attempt to define progressive Christianity if every attempt to do so here is going to get shot down for reason of there being no unifying creed that progressive Christians ascribe to? Can we not look at what self-professed progressive Christians say that they think and believe on a case by case basis and draw conclusions from that? Especially when we see certain ideas repeated by different leaders and/or organizations. There may not be a cohesive, unifying document in the same vein as the Westminster Confession of Faith, but we can certainly draw conclusions from their own written and spoken words.
You can go case-by-case; that's cool. But are you a fundamentalist? Do you like being lumped in with Fred Phelps and so on? How would you react to, "All fundamentalists believe what Fred Phelps teaches"? We used to have some progressive Christians on here but, due to in no small part, these kinds of "All you progressives believe X" contributed to their departure. You wish to rail against "progressive Christians"? Why is that? There aren't even any here who identify as progressive Christians, I don't believe.
One thing I've noticed is that everybody rails against everybody.

Let's assume I have no desire to rail against anyone. I know you arent talking to me, but I'm just going to throw that out as a starting point to make it clear.

I think we have a problem defining terms that means this particular debate is not going to get off the ground.

It would seem to me, and I'm just spitballing, that there is an insurmountable difficulty at the very beginning. Reading that webpage, that version of progressive Christianity doesnt seem to have definable beliefs by design. How, then, does one argue for or against it?

In reading the basic info and 8 points, to me it looks like it's possible to be an agnostic or atheistic Progressive Christian. It might be possible to be an Arian Progressive Christian, or a Manichaean Progressive Christian, or perhaps to just believe that Christ was a real person and that's an end of it. If no belief controls, then attempting to debate or learn more about Progressive Christianity might be fruitless.

One of the terms I've grown to dislike is "fundamentalist" and I hope someday we can move past it, as its grown to a mere epithet. There are fundamental building blocks in any argument, any belief, any faith system. People believe or reject these as they wish, but all believe in something and that's the starting point of any debate.

What are the fundamental beliefs about Christ inherent in progressive Christianity? Does anybody know?
Don't know other than the 8 points.

For me, as you well know, I get railing against something but only if they are represented so they can defend themselves. That may be why some of my posts look biased; just how many Dems are on here nowadays?
"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
Adam Z
Jam Band Music Minister
Jam Band Music Minister
Posts: 1055
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 9:35 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Adam Z » Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:42 pm

wosbald wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:58 pm
+JMJ+
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:02 pm
UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:59 am
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
I'm not saying that all progressive Christians are monolithic in their ideology. Of course there is going to be some variance. When I say that they hold a low view of scripture, that's deductive reasoning. They won't say "I hold a low view of scripture" but this is the logical result of the things that they say that they do believe. Earlier in this conversation I referenced their Axiom #2 from the page you linked to. You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life". That statement is entirely contradictory, and this is just low-hanging fruit that I'm plucking here. If you affirm the teachings of Jesus, then you must also affirm that it is only through Christ that man can be reconciled to God. Therefore, either they don't really affirm the teachings of Jesus, or they only affirm some of the teachings of Jesus, and they have not defined the standard by which they go about determining which of his teachings are worthwhile and which should be ignored. The logical conclusion here is that they do not believe that scripture is reliable. They hold a low view of scripture, without implicitly saying it.
Or, that they do believe that scripture is reliable but don't agree with your specific hermeneutic. Oh, and...
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life".
...well, from the Philosophy Thread...
Del wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:59 pm
I have also opened the Summa of Thomas Aquinas. He is much denser.... still, easy enough for any lover of philosophy to enjoy. You'll get clobbered with great wisdom on every page of St. Thomas Aquinas. On page 1, we learn that it was possible to know God through Reason alone Aquinas' opinion here cannot be defended using scripture, which would argue otherwise, but that's a whole 'nother discussion, and we digress.-- but 1) it was only known to a few very wise persons (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle), 2) after a very long time, and 3) with a great many errors mixed in. That is why God revealed Himself to us -- so that the whole world can know the truth.
Addressing Adam's highlighted interpolation …

Why would that be a digression? Wouldn’t Aquinas (and by extension, Catholicity), in affirming the prerogatives of Reason, be thusly holding the selfsame "low view of Scripture" which you ascribe to Progressives?
Can you, Wosbald, using scripture, make a case for it being possible to be reconciled to God through man's cognitive reason alone, as Aquinas postulates? I can cite passages that suggest otherwise, but I don't think that there is any biblical support for this claim from Aquinas whatsoever.
I tend to find the doctrinal books often more helpful in devotion than the devotional books.... I believe that many who find that "nothing happens" when they sit down, or kneel down, to a book of devotion, would find that the heart sings unbidden while they are working their way through a rough bit of theology with a pipe in their teeth and a pencil in their hand.
- C.S. Lewis

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19259
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by hugodrax » Tue Dec 11, 2018 4:08 pm

UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:07 pm
hugodrax wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:50 pm
UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:24 pm
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:02 pm

Why even attempt to define progressive Christianity if every attempt to do so here is going to get shot down for reason of there being no unifying creed that progressive Christians ascribe to? Can we not look at what self-professed progressive Christians say that they think and believe on a case by case basis and draw conclusions from that? Especially when we see certain ideas repeated by different leaders and/or organizations. There may not be a cohesive, unifying document in the same vein as the Westminster Confession of Faith, but we can certainly draw conclusions from their own written and spoken words.
You can go case-by-case; that's cool. But are you a fundamentalist? Do you like being lumped in with Fred Phelps and so on? How would you react to, "All fundamentalists believe what Fred Phelps teaches"? We used to have some progressive Christians on here but, due to in no small part, these kinds of "All you progressives believe X" contributed to their departure. You wish to rail against "progressive Christians"? Why is that? There aren't even any here who identify as progressive Christians, I don't believe.
One thing I've noticed is that everybody rails against everybody.

Let's assume I have no desire to rail against anyone. I know you arent talking to me, but I'm just going to throw that out as a starting point to make it clear.

I think we have a problem defining terms that means this particular debate is not going to get off the ground.

It would seem to me, and I'm just spitballing, that there is an insurmountable difficulty at the very beginning. Reading that webpage, that version of progressive Christianity doesnt seem to have definable beliefs by design. How, then, does one argue for or against it?

In reading the basic info and 8 points, to me it looks like it's possible to be an agnostic or atheistic Progressive Christian. It might be possible to be an Arian Progressive Christian, or a Manichaean Progressive Christian, or perhaps to just believe that Christ was a real person and that's an end of it. If no belief controls, then attempting to debate or learn more about Progressive Christianity might be fruitless.

One of the terms I've grown to dislike is "fundamentalist" and I hope someday we can move past it, as its grown to a mere epithet. There are fundamental building blocks in any argument, any belief, any faith system. People believe or reject these as they wish, but all believe in something and that's the starting point of any debate.

What are the fundamental beliefs about Christ inherent in progressive Christianity? Does anybody know?
Don't know other than the 8 points.

For me, as you well know, I get railing against something but only if they are represented so they can defend themselves. That may be why some of my posts look biased; just how many Dems are on here nowadays?
Yeah, believe it or not, I get it. Although in a land of bearded white guys professing the twin cultural sins of Christian belief and tobacco consumption in a particularly archaic form...I mean, you saw the warning signs, didn't you?
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 20347
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by wosbald » Tue Dec 11, 2018 4:25 pm

+JMJ+
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:42 pm
wosbald wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:58 pm
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:02 pm
UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:59 am
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
I'm not saying that all progressive Christians are monolithic in their ideology. Of course there is going to be some variance. When I say that they hold a low view of scripture, that's deductive reasoning. They won't say "I hold a low view of scripture" but this is the logical result of the things that they say that they do believe. Earlier in this conversation I referenced their Axiom #2 from the page you linked to. You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life". That statement is entirely contradictory, and this is just low-hanging fruit that I'm plucking here. If you affirm the teachings of Jesus, then you must also affirm that it is only through Christ that man can be reconciled to God. Therefore, either they don't really affirm the teachings of Jesus, or they only affirm some of the teachings of Jesus, and they have not defined the standard by which they go about determining which of his teachings are worthwhile and which should be ignored. The logical conclusion here is that they do not believe that scripture is reliable. They hold a low view of scripture, without implicitly saying it.
Or, that they do believe that scripture is reliable but don't agree with your specific hermeneutic. Oh, and...
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life".
...well, from the Philosophy Thread...
Del wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:59 pm
I have also opened the Summa of Thomas Aquinas. He is much denser.... still, easy enough for any lover of philosophy to enjoy. You'll get clobbered with great wisdom on every page of St. Thomas Aquinas. On page 1, we learn that it was possible to know God through Reason alone Aquinas' opinion here cannot be defended using scripture, which would argue otherwise, but that's a whole 'nother discussion, and we digress.-- but 1) it was only known to a few very wise persons (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle), 2) after a very long time, and 3) with a great many errors mixed in. That is why God revealed Himself to us -- so that the whole world can know the truth.
Addressing Adam's highlighted interpolation …

Why would that be a digression? Wouldn’t Aquinas (and by extension, Catholicity), in affirming the prerogatives of Reason, be thusly holding the selfsame "low view of Scripture" which you ascribe to Progressives?
Can you, Wosbald, using scripture, make a case for it being possible to be reconciled to God through man's cognitive reason alone, as Aquinas postulates? I can cite passages that suggest otherwise, but I don't think that there is any biblical support for this claim from Aquinas whatsoever.
Irrespective of whether you’re accurately representing Aquinas’ views, my question was simply regarding whether or not you’re prepared to put Catholicity in the same box as Progressivism.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re the one who claimed that it’s a "whole 'nother subject", and yet … Aquinas/Catholicity seemingly professes precisely the same shortcoming (i.e. "a low view of Scripture") that you hold as being a Progressive mark-o’-distinction.

ImageImage

"[T]he emergency of irregular migration has to be met with justice, solidarity and mercy. Forms of collective expulsion, which do not allow for the suitable treatment of individual cases, are unacceptable."
— Pope Francis, Morocco

User avatar
Adam Z
Jam Band Music Minister
Jam Band Music Minister
Posts: 1055
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 9:35 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Adam Z » Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:04 pm

wosbald wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 4:25 pm
+JMJ+
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:42 pm
wosbald wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:58 pm
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:02 pm
UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:59 am
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
I'm not saying that all progressive Christians are monolithic in their ideology. Of course there is going to be some variance. When I say that they hold a low view of scripture, that's deductive reasoning. They won't say "I hold a low view of scripture" but this is the logical result of the things that they say that they do believe. Earlier in this conversation I referenced their Axiom #2 from the page you linked to. You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life". That statement is entirely contradictory, and this is just low-hanging fruit that I'm plucking here. If you affirm the teachings of Jesus, then you must also affirm that it is only through Christ that man can be reconciled to God. Therefore, either they don't really affirm the teachings of Jesus, or they only affirm some of the teachings of Jesus, and they have not defined the standard by which they go about determining which of his teachings are worthwhile and which should be ignored. The logical conclusion here is that they do not believe that scripture is reliable. They hold a low view of scripture, without implicitly saying it.
Or, that they do believe that scripture is reliable but don't agree with your specific hermeneutic. Oh, and...
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life".
...well, from the Philosophy Thread...
Del wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:59 pm
I have also opened the Summa of Thomas Aquinas. He is much denser.... still, easy enough for any lover of philosophy to enjoy. You'll get clobbered with great wisdom on every page of St. Thomas Aquinas. On page 1, we learn that it was possible to know God through Reason alone Aquinas' opinion here cannot be defended using scripture, which would argue otherwise, but that's a whole 'nother discussion, and we digress.-- but 1) it was only known to a few very wise persons (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle), 2) after a very long time, and 3) with a great many errors mixed in. That is why God revealed Himself to us -- so that the whole world can know the truth.
Addressing Adam's highlighted interpolation …

Why would that be a digression? Wouldn’t Aquinas (and by extension, Catholicity), in affirming the prerogatives of Reason, be thusly holding the selfsame "low view of Scripture" which you ascribe to Progressives?
Can you, Wosbald, using scripture, make a case for it being possible to be reconciled to God through man's cognitive reason alone, as Aquinas postulates? I can cite passages that suggest otherwise, but I don't think that there is any biblical support for this claim from Aquinas whatsoever.
Irrespective of whether you’re accurately representing Aquinas’ views, my question was simply regarding whether or not you’re prepared to put Catholicity in the same box as Progressivism.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re the one who claimed that it’s a "whole 'nother subject", and yet … Aquinas/Catholicity seemingly professes precisely the same shortcoming (i.e. "a low view of Scripture") that you hold as being a Progressive mark-o’-distinction.
I do not know that I'm accurately representing Aquinas' views. I've never read or studied Aquinas at length. I'm going on the assumption that Del was accurately representing Aquinas' position when he wrote the post that was quoted.

Not meaning to be evasive, but I don't think I ever brought Catholicism into this... As a Presbyterian, there will, of course, be a laundry list of doctrinal points that I would disagree with the Roman Catholic Church on. Does the RCC also teach that it is possible to know God through reason alone? If they teach that, then yes, I would disagree with the RCC on this point as well. Who said it or teaches it doesn't change whether I think it to be correct or not.
I tend to find the doctrinal books often more helpful in devotion than the devotional books.... I believe that many who find that "nothing happens" when they sit down, or kneel down, to a book of devotion, would find that the heart sings unbidden while they are working their way through a rough bit of theology with a pipe in their teeth and a pencil in their hand.
- C.S. Lewis

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19259
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by hugodrax » Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:08 pm

Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:04 pm
wosbald wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 4:25 pm
+JMJ+
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 3:42 pm
wosbald wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:58 pm
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:02 pm
UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:59 am
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
I'm not saying that all progressive Christians are monolithic in their ideology. Of course there is going to be some variance. When I say that they hold a low view of scripture, that's deductive reasoning. They won't say "I hold a low view of scripture" but this is the logical result of the things that they say that they do believe. Earlier in this conversation I referenced their Axiom #2 from the page you linked to. You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life". That statement is entirely contradictory, and this is just low-hanging fruit that I'm plucking here. If you affirm the teachings of Jesus, then you must also affirm that it is only through Christ that man can be reconciled to God. Therefore, either they don't really affirm the teachings of Jesus, or they only affirm some of the teachings of Jesus, and they have not defined the standard by which they go about determining which of his teachings are worthwhile and which should be ignored. The logical conclusion here is that they do not believe that scripture is reliable. They hold a low view of scripture, without implicitly saying it.
Or, that they do believe that scripture is reliable but don't agree with your specific hermeneutic. Oh, and...
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:44 am
You cannot both affirm the teachings of Jesus AND say that his teachings "provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life".
...well, from the Philosophy Thread...
Del wrote:
Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:59 pm
I have also opened the Summa of Thomas Aquinas. He is much denser.... still, easy enough for any lover of philosophy to enjoy. You'll get clobbered with great wisdom on every page of St. Thomas Aquinas. On page 1, we learn that it was possible to know God through Reason alone Aquinas' opinion here cannot be defended using scripture, which would argue otherwise, but that's a whole 'nother discussion, and we digress.-- but 1) it was only known to a few very wise persons (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle), 2) after a very long time, and 3) with a great many errors mixed in. That is why God revealed Himself to us -- so that the whole world can know the truth.
Addressing Adam's highlighted interpolation …

Why would that be a digression? Wouldn’t Aquinas (and by extension, Catholicity), in affirming the prerogatives of Reason, be thusly holding the selfsame "low view of Scripture" which you ascribe to Progressives?
Can you, Wosbald, using scripture, make a case for it being possible to be reconciled to God through man's cognitive reason alone, as Aquinas postulates? I can cite passages that suggest otherwise, but I don't think that there is any biblical support for this claim from Aquinas whatsoever.
Irrespective of whether you’re accurately representing Aquinas’ views, my question was simply regarding whether or not you’re prepared to put Catholicity in the same box as Progressivism.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re the one who claimed that it’s a "whole 'nother subject", and yet … Aquinas/Catholicity seemingly professes precisely the same shortcoming (i.e. "a low view of Scripture") that you hold as being a Progressive mark-o’-distinction.
I do not know that I'm accurately representing Aquinas' views. I've never read or studied Aquinas at length. I'm going on the assumption that Del was accurately representing Aquinas' position when he wrote the post that was quoted.

Not meaning to be evasive, but I don't think I ever brought Catholicism into this... As a Presbyterian, there will, of course, be a laundry list of doctrinal points that I would disagree with the Roman Catholic Church on. Does the RCC also teach that it is possible to know God through reason alone? If they teach that, then yes, I would disagree with the RCC on this point as well. Who said it or teaches it doesn't change whether I think it to be correct or not.
Lol. Most excellent use of quibbling to evade the point at hand. Unfortunately, the vote is closed. :mermaid:
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
Adam Z
Jam Band Music Minister
Jam Band Music Minister
Posts: 1055
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 9:35 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Adam Z » Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:24 pm

hugodrax wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:08 pm

Lol. Most excellent use of quibbling to evade the point at hand. Unfortunately, the vote is closed. :mermaid:
Sometimes it is prudent to agree to disagree on some matters, and I'm trying my damnedest to stay on the original subject & not start a war with the Catholics of CPS. Of course I'm not going to see eye to eye with them, but by the same token I'm also not one of those protestants who treats Catholicism as though it were a cult, saying that it is not possible for a Catholic to be saved (I know of some who hold this view).

As for the vote - there's always next year :lol:
I tend to find the doctrinal books often more helpful in devotion than the devotional books.... I believe that many who find that "nothing happens" when they sit down, or kneel down, to a book of devotion, would find that the heart sings unbidden while they are working their way through a rough bit of theology with a pipe in their teeth and a pencil in their hand.
- C.S. Lewis

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19259
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by hugodrax » Tue Dec 11, 2018 6:55 pm

Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:24 pm
hugodrax wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:08 pm

Lol. Most excellent use of quibbling to evade the point at hand. Unfortunately, the vote is closed. :mermaid:
Sometimes it is prudent to agree to disagree on some matters, and I'm trying my damnedest to stay on the original subject & not start a war with the Catholics of CPS. Of course I'm not going to see eye to eye with them, but by the same token I'm also not one of those protestants who treats Catholicism as though it were a cult, saying that it is not possible for a Catholic to be saved (I know of some who hold this view).

As for the vote - there's always next year :lol:
I know it, brother. Theres a reason I dubbed it most excellent. You demurred to avoid giving offence. There should be an award for that. :taco:
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
Goose55
Bartleby the Scrivener
Bartleby the Scrivener
Posts: 9390
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 6:44 pm
Location: Southern Arizona, U.S.A.

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Goose55 » Tue Dec 11, 2018 7:04 pm

hugodrax wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 6:55 pm
Adam Z wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:24 pm
hugodrax wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:08 pm

Lol. Most excellent use of quibbling to evade the point at hand. Unfortunately, the vote is closed. :mermaid:
Sometimes it is prudent to agree to disagree on some matters, and I'm trying my damnedest to stay on the original subject & not start a war with the Catholics of CPS. Of course I'm not going to see eye to eye with them, but by the same token I'm also not one of those protestants who treats Catholicism as though it were a cult, saying that it is not possible for a Catholic to be saved (I know of some who hold this view).

As for the vote - there's always next year :lol:
I know it, brother. Theres a reason I dubbed it most excellent. You demurred to avoid giving offence. There should be an award for that. :taco:
This is good because I've run out of popcorn.
"At present we're on the wrong side of the door. But all the pages of the New Testament are rustling with the rumor that it will not always be so." ~ C.S. Lewis

User avatar
Nature of a Man
Usher
Usher
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 12:14 am

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Nature of a Man » Tue Dec 11, 2018 7:15 pm

Jester wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 9:25 am
UncleBob wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 9:19 am
LOL!

It is truly amazing how few people here, when opining on some subject, fail to ask themselves this question: "I wonder how those folks define themselves?" Of course, Skip's Axiom is in play, I suppose.

https://progressivechristianity.org/the-8-points/
Progressive Christianity is Buddhism?
Its not even Buddhism, maybe something akin to a watered down version of Buddhism or Eastern religion, as much of the "New Age Spirituality" also seems to be.

Buddhism and Eastern religion isn't tolerant of homosexuality or fabricated "sexual orientations", and the Eastern religions do have their counterpart to hell, or suffering for the wicked, however they don't view it as a location, but as indefinite reincarnation cycles of suffering until the evil have atoned for their bad karma.

It's really just "Christianity" done postmodern style if anything at all.

User avatar
hugodrax
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
UncleHugo the Tobbaconist
Posts: 19259
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:00 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by hugodrax » Tue Dec 11, 2018 8:06 pm

Nature of a Man wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 7:15 pm
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sZa26_esLBE

That’s what I got out of it.
Notre Dame de Paris, priez pour nous y comprise les Jesuites.

User avatar
Nature of a Man
Usher
Usher
Posts: 468
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 12:14 am

Re: What is Progressive Christianity?

Post by Nature of a Man » Tue Dec 11, 2018 8:34 pm

hugodrax wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 8:06 pm
Nature of a Man wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 7:15 pm
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sZa26_esLBE

That’s what I got out of it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDR9_pMWDIw

Post Reply