Accepting Churches

The "we're sorry" thing is interesting. It shows how one's religion can be both a mechanism for shoring up bigotry and avoiding change, or an avenue toward personal growth. It can wrap you up into a tight little bundle, or loose the packaging and spring you from the confines of your social programming.

Christians with good and loving intentions should realize, though, that Jesus in his savour aspect, with his "dying to save us", and all that, doesn't necessarily make sense to everyone. If the intent is to be loving without regard to whether the object of that love comes around eventually to the Christian point of view, that's great. But if it's a means to an end, then I would caution that believer that their motives, and their "love" can pretty easily be seen to be self-serving and rhetorical at best.

Chris
 
China Cat, I don't think the point of InLove's posting those sites today is to proselytize in any way, shape or form.

I think her point might be that we've seen a lot of intolerance toward gays on the Christian forum here lately, a message that desperately needs counterbalancing with some welcoming and love.

So here, here InLove! Thank you for the reminder that there are many Christians who take Jesus seriously when he tells us to love one another and not judge.
 
lunamoth said:
China Cat, I don't think the point of InLove's posting those sites today is to proselytize in any way, shape or form.

I think her point might be that we've seen a lot of intolerance toward gays on the Christian forum here lately, a message that desperately needs counterbalancing with some welcoming and love.

So here, here InLove! Thank you for the reminder that there are many Christians who take Jesus seriously when he tells us to love one another and not judge.
Click to expand...

Oh no, I never thought that for a minute. I personally don't mind proselytizing, though. And I had the same perception of her good intent you do. The Christianity board has become pretty rabid lately hasn't it? I've withdrawn my participation. I'm just gonna let the fundies eat their own.

I just wanted to say, for myself, that I'm not put off by Christians one way or the other, I just don't understand the whole savour thing. It's not that I'm rebellious, or pissed off, it's just that I can't make it make sense.

Chris
 
There's a lot more welcoming churches than that Mark. Probably none from your denomination, but almost any Episcopal, and most Churches of Christ are welcoming.

Chris
 
Prober said:
I found it sad that there were so few churches on the list...
Click to expand...
I would think there are many churches that don't know the list exists...

And then again it is a list of those that publicly say they accept all persuasions....many don't have to say it, they just do it.

There are many denominations whose churches number more than the entire list...
 
China Cat Sunflower said:
Of the Blessed Virgin?
Click to expand...
:D
China Cat Sunflower said:
The "we're sorry" thing is interesting. It shows how one's religion can be both a mechanism for shoring up bigotry and avoiding change, or an avenue toward personal growth. It can wrap you up into a tight little bundle, or loose the packaging and spring you from the confines of your social programming.

Christians with good and loving intentions should realize, though, that Jesus in his savour aspect, with his "dying to save us", and all that, doesn't necessarily make sense to everyone. If the intent is to be loving without regard to whether the object of that love comes around eventually to the Christian point of view, that's great. But if it's a means to an end, then I would caution that believer that their motives, and their "love" can pretty easily be seen to be self-serving and rhetorical at best.
Click to expand...
I agree, Chris. I guess I just wanted to stand up and say something to anyone reading that there are Christians out there and here in CR who open their doors and hearts to everyone. What would have been more courageous of me would have been to post these links on the Christian board. But I felt that this would have been just as disruptive as what is already happening there. It is not my intent to disrupt--only to stand up. And I'm sorry it has taken me so long to find a way to do that.

You know, I didn't think about the fact that this could actually be taken as proselytizing when I posted it. But I guess it does, huh? Umm...I'm sorry?? :D ;)

I think there is a very fine line between proselytizing and welcoming. At this point, and in response to the prevailing commentary on the Christian board lately, I was moved to extend an invitation. And I must say, I was surprised and relieved at some of the churches I found listed there on that link. I also realize that some of them may prove disappointing when practically applied, but it did give me some hope. And I also do not think that it is an exhaustive list, by any means.

China Cat Sunflower said:
I just wanted to say, for myself, that I'm not put off by Christians one way or the other, I just don't understand the whole savour thing. It's not that I'm rebellious, or pissed off, it's just that I can't make it make sense.
Click to expand...

While I am being so welcoming, maybe I should go ahead and try to address this. Jesus said, "Follow me." He never said there was only one way to come to Him. I don't think that one must necessarily subscribe to any certain theology to find out where Jesus goes. He may take me one place in order to introduce me to Love, but what prevents you from following Him to another? And furthermore, I suspect there may be many paths to that narrow gate, as well. :)

I have so much more on my heart than what I have just said. But I think I will stop for now. I have had a bit of revelation in my life of late. And I am so happy and thankful for it. But I gotta find the voice, or better yet, just let it come....

Love You All--

InPeace,
InLove
 
China Cat Sunflower said:
The "we're sorry" thing is interesting. It shows how one's religion can be both a mechanism for shoring up bigotry and avoiding change, or an avenue toward personal growth. It can wrap you up into a tight little bundle, or loose the packaging and spring you from the confines of your social programming.

Christians with good and loving intentions should realize, though, that Jesus in his savour aspect, with his "dying to save us", and all that, doesn't necessarily make sense to everyone. If the intent is to be loving without regard to whether the object of that love comes around eventually to the Christian point of view, that's great. But if it's a means to an end, then I would caution that believer that their motives, and their "love" can pretty easily be seen to be self-serving and rhetorical at best.

Chris
Click to expand...

yes Chris, I agree and tried in a clumsy way to introduce this very idea in the Christian forum but it got buried quickly. I think many persons are confused on this point even if they are drawn to the teachings of Christ they turn back upon meeting up with this idea. A Schizophrenic God sets up a legal system that no one can satisfy regardless of intent. Then this God sends his beloved Son into the world and Kills him because of that law that says the wages of sin are death. After which the price has been paid as if the law is now a thing not even a loving God can control??? Or that the Cosmic Sadist is now satisfied because in the form of his Son he has in effect killed himself and anyone who believes the story is saved. Sure I can see why anyone would be confused!
But what if there is a real truth buried inside the myth? What if the story that was written about by the gospel writers means something very different from the juridical interpretation? It is this very thing I have gone in search of because something told me there is more than a cursory examination reveals here and something in my heart tells me that the mystery of salvation is real but in a way I had not considered.
Perhaps Christs sacrifice was to show us something, to get a message across to us that couldn't happen any other way. To say that his sacrifice saved us from sin may have a poetic meaning that is difficult at best to grasp and for many centuries had to be understood and taught in a pedogogical way, thereby the confusion.

Peace
Mark
 
I never thought you were proselytizing IL! Laurie thought that I thought that you thought...but I never thought that.

Chris
 
Paladin said:
yes Chris, I agree and tried in a clumsy way to introduce this very idea in the Christian forum but it got buried quickly. I think many persons are confused on this point even if they are drawn to the teachings of Christ they turn back upon meeting up with this idea. A Schizophrenic God sets up a legal system that no one can satisfy regardless of intent. Then this God sends his beloved Son into the world and Kills him because of that law that says the wages of sin are death. After which the price has been paid as if the law is now a thing not even a loving God can control??? Or that the Cosmic Sadist is now satisfied because in the form of his Son he has in effect killed himself and anyone who believes the story is saved. Sure I can see why anyone would be confused!
But what if there is a real truth buried inside the myth? What if the story that was written about by the gospel writers means something very different from the juridical interpretation? It is this very thing I have gone in search of because something told me there is more than a cursory examination reveals here and something in my heart tells me that the mystery of salvation is real but in a way I had not considered.
Perhaps Christs sacrifice was to show us something, to get a message across to us that couldn't happen any other way. To say that his sacrifice saved us from sin may have a poetic meaning that is difficult at best to grasp and for many centuries had to be understood and taught in a pedogogical way, thereby the confusion.

Peace
Mark
Click to expand...

Let me know if you figure it out, man! I sure would like to know what the real skinny is.

Chris
 
Chris

I never thought that you thought I was proselytizing. I think that Laurie thought that in case you thought that, she thought she might clear that thought up. I thought that was a nice thought. I thought maybe someone might think that, but I never thought you thought it. :)

Deb
 
InLove said:
Chris

I never thought that you thought I was proselytizing. I think that Laurie thought that in case you thought that, she thought she might clear that thought up. I thought that was a nice thought. I thought maybe someone might think that, but I never thought you thought it. :)

Deb
Click to expand...

Yikes! I did not mean to cause consternation!

I thought that Chris thought that InLove was...well, nevermind. :eek:

Apologies. luna :)
 
Nothing at all to apologize about, luna! I appreciated both of your comments very much. There are lots of readers out there! You and China Cat know me pretty well, but someone who doesn't might have gotten the wrong idea.

It all works together....;)

InPeace,
InLove,
Deb
 
In Love,

What a wonderful thread, thank you for having such an expansive spirit and loving heart! :)


I thought there was no prosletyising originally then I thought that luna thought that chris thought about you thinking that luna might have thought but there the thought turned out to be thinking about the thought you might have been thinking but then I thought about it and...uh..then I..ummm where was I??? :D

Peace

Mark
 
Careful Guys...if one thinks too much in today's world, you're automatically labelled a terrorist. It's a double speak, double think world out there/in here, and we didn't make it that way. It just seems to be happening before our eyes.

Also let's be careful with the "Christian" label when we refer to message boards. Technically we are all still one in communion, but that is being sorely tested right now, especially within the Anglican/Episcopal Community. How sad !

flow....:(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top