Re: Orthodoxy vs. orthopraxy

Subject:

Comments:
: : : I am not sure how to make this clear, but I am honestly going to try, so here goes: I believe in "God." I'll say it again to be clear: I believe in "God." Just to be sure there is no mistake, I'll say it a third time in all capitals: I BELIEVE IN "GOD." Does this need further clarification? Please ask if I can make this clearer. : : Yes Mark it does need further clarification because you have enclosed the word God in quotation marks thus indicating that you may be using the word "God" in a euphemistic sense or in some other sense that does not align with the dictionary definition of the word God. For all I know you could be talking about love or money or even just sex when you say you believe in "God"... It would be a lot clearer if you simply removed the quotation marks in which you enclose the word God so that it might align with standard definitions of the word which usually refer to the Supreme Being and Creator of the Universe etc. : Quotation marks are an accepted method in the English language of clarifying and making specific particular terms or phrases. If you have a problem understanding this, I suggest you take a basic English course or if you need it, an English as a second language course -- whatever works for you. : : : That having been said (hopefully in a clear, unambigious, and unmistakable way), : : Thanks to the quotation marks it was neither clear, nor unambigiguous, nor unmistakable... : See above comment about the use of quotation marks in the English language, and really seriously consider taking a basic English language course, or English as a second language course. I think you need it. : : :let me say that *some* people are at a stage in their theological and personal development where they sincerely and honestly "cannot help their disbelief." They are not being cocky, rebellious, or uncooperative. They just *can't* for whatever reason or reasons believe in "God." : : I don't think that the AUC has any problem with that. Such people would be most welcome as friends of the AUC if they are of good will. : Good. : : : Does that mean they are to be excluded from the AUC community of searchers if they come in good faith and in a sincere quest? : : Why do you assume that the AUC would "exclude" such people if they come in good faith and a sincere quest? I think it would be a mistake to have outright atheists as voting members of the AUC because that could lead to it being subverted by atheists just as the UU community has been so thoroughly subverted by atheists but nobody is suggesting that agnostics and atheists would be "excluded" from the AUC community. : When there has been discussion of "catechisms" what else am I to assume? : : : Why can't the AUC take people as they are, where they are and try to provide a nurturing environment? : : I could have sworn the AUC was doing just that. : Really? You question my conceptions of "God", and have the audacity to say that? Pathetic .... : : : Do you help people to believe in "God" (or anything else) by excluding them, and making them feel like outsiders? : : Just who is the AUC "excluding" and making them feel like outsiders? I thought such behavior was more characteristic of the UUA and many UU not so Welcoming Congregations... : You are exhibiting that behavior just fine. I can see now why you had problems in the UUA. Can you get along anywhere? : : : Where is the "Godliness" of such an approach? : : Where is that approach in the AUC at all? : Don't understand the question. : : : Cannot "God" be a stated part of the AUC without being a net which is used to exclude people who are sincere seekers? : : Where is the AUC "net" "which is used to exclude people who are sincere seekers"? Please produce your evidence Mark. : A "catechism" is all the evidence necessary. Where have you been in the course of this discussion, on Mars? : : : What is "God" anyway? Do you know? Do I? : : If you don't know what "God" is how can you possibly claim, not once but three times, to believe in "God"? You remind me a bit of Peter... I think most AUC members have a pretty good idea of what God is and we are not inclined to water down what God is by enclosing God in euphemistic quotation marks... : Ah, and you dare to say that there is not an exclusive or hypercritical attitude? Get off of the quotation marks kick, and learn the proper use of expression in the English language. : : : I know what I *think* (as of today at this moment) "God" is to *me*, but someone else might have exactly the same thoughts and conceptions as do I, yet not define those in terms of "God." I am not sure that the concept God is as simple as we are trying to make it. : : The meaning of the word God that we are talking about is found in most good dictionaries. I have said many times that AUC members are "dictionary definition Unitarians" because we fit the dictionary description of the word Unitarian. I think that it is fair to say that most of AUC members use the dictionary to define what the word God means. : So you are attempting to prescribe what "God should mean to me or someone else? Isn't that a part of the point I have been trying to make? And you say the AUC does not have an exclusionary attitude? Garbage. : : : That is one reason why I view religion as a search for "ultimates." God is the traditional "ultimate." : : Traditionally God is God as defined by the dictionary. : See above. : : : Yet, cannot "ultimate" values of worth to individuals and society be arrived at by means other than defining them in terms of "God?" : : Of course some ultimate values of worth to individuals and society be arrived at by means other than defining them in terms of "God" just ask any atheist, agnostic, or Buddhist but that is quite beside the point. The AUC is a God believing Unitarian religious organization. Those people who seek ultimate values of worth to individuals and society arrived at by means other than defining them in terms of "God" are most welcome to join other non-theistic organizations such as the American Humanist Association, or a Buddhist temple, or even the Communist Party. In any case some of the "ultimate values" of AUC members are not defined in terms of God. Plenty of my own "ultimate values" are defined in terms of "humanity" but I happen to believe in God without the quotation marks. In fact I know from direct personal experience that there is a God without quotation marks... : You say the AUC does not exclude, and now you say people who do not fit your "dictionary" mold should go somewhere else in their search. This is precisely my point. : : : Accepting people where they are as they are if they come in good faith; they may believe in "God", or they may not. : : I think that the AUC is very accepting of people who do not believe in God. I haven't seen any atheists or agnostics being shown the door by the AUC. The fact remains that the AUC was formed because the UUA does a poor job of genuinely accepting God believing people and God believing Unitarians wanted a genuine monotheistic Unitarian religious community. We are hardly about to just hand control over the AUC to outright atheists are we? If so we might as well just pack it in and join the UUA again. N'est-ce pas? : Who is talking about handing over "control"? I was talking about mere acceptance, which in one paragraph you say the AUC does, and in the next you say it should not. Make up your mind. : : : As aforestated, I do (BUT, *my* "God" may not be *your* "God."). : : It would appear that your "God" is no God at all. The AUC affirms that "God's presence is made known in a myriad of ways." Thus your experience and understanding of God may well differ considerably from all other AUC members' experience and understanding of God but we are talking about God not "God" in quotation marks. : So you say that *my* "God" is no God at all. If that is representative of the AUC attitude (and since you are one of its more prominent spokespeople, I take it that it is), then the AUC is not Unitarian, it is an amalgamation doctrinaire idiocy. : : : Can someone please explain to me why the AUC cannot have a stated acceptance of "God" while accepting people of good faith in its ranks who do not have such a belief? : : Can you please explain why you think that the AUC does not accept people who do not believe in God in its ranks? In my view it would be a mistake to have outright atheists as voting members of the AUC because that could quickly lead to the demise of the AUC as a monotheistic Unitarian religious community but I don't see anyone giving atheists the cold shoulder if they come in "good faith" as it were. I repeat that when an AUC member had a loss of faith several months ago and openly stated in this forum that he no longer believed in God nobody asked him to leave (to my knowledge) and I and other AUC members welcomed him to stick around as a friend of the AUC. : You have just questioned my conception of "God" saying my God is no God at all; that people who do not believe in God can go to humanist organizations; and then you say the AUC is "accepting" of people who do not believe in God? You can't have it both ways -- make up your mind. Do you have any clue what you are talking about? : : : My own conception of God is a cross between understanding God through the unity nature as seen via the laws of science, and occasional meditation. : : That is not quite the God that we are talking about although God is most certainly responsible for, and revealed in, the unity nature and the laws of science... Quite frankly an outright atheist could say what you said with the word : : "God" in quotation marks... : Not the "God" *we" are talking about? So the AUC does have a required conception of God? I sort of thought as much -- you are clarifying what I have suspected all along. One either sees "God" the AUC way, or not at all. And this is "tolerant" Unitarianism? Bull, this is narrow minded intolerant trash. : : : I am a Rosicrucian "beyond the 9th degree" (as they say), and have found occasionally tapping into the essence of all that is to be a sublime experience. : : It can also be a rather terrifying experience... : Yes, Robin, I think you have experienced a lot of terror and it has warped you. : : : No doubt that will draw the fire of some here. : : Actually there is plenty of doubt that your saying that will draw the fire here. Feel free to share this with your Rosicrucian friends - : No doubt at all -- you have spent quite a lengthy post directing fire at me. Nope, no doubt at all ----- : : http://wingedsundisksymbol.homestead.com : : I am willing to bet that almost no one here has any serious problems with your affiliation with the Rosicrucians. : It is nice that you do not have a problem with something. : : : Be that as it may, the gnosticism of Rosicrucianism has been a significant part of my process of discovery. I could not have been a successful gnostic explorer had I not been able to be free in my thought (i.e., a "free thinker"). : : And nobody here is restricting your thought. I am willing to bet that the same cannot be said about you sharing such thoughts in some "humanist" dominated UU congregations where the word God is unwelcome even if it is contained within quotation marks and where Rosicrucians are quite possibly as much of a target for ridicule than Christians... : You suggest that my conception of "God" is "no God at all" and that it does not comport with the "dictionary" definition of God as held by the AUC, and then you say no one is restricting my thought? Make up your mind. This is some of the most judgmental nonsense I have ever heard. : : : I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I just can't hold with the "little old man sitting on a throne in a place called heaven" conception of "God." : : Bravo. It's been said before, but I'll say it again: nobody here holds with the "little old man sitting on a throne in a place called heaven" conception of "God." In fact few contemporary Christians, Jews or Muslims etc. hold to that outmoded concept of God which even the ancients probably took more metaphorically than literally... : Nice that we agree on something, but somehow I doubt that will last either. : : : : : To be broad in scope, the AUC must be willing to reach out. : : The AUC does reach out to anyone who agrees with it's stated principles which are broad in scope... : Just as *you* have reached out to me and my "God" that is "no God at all"? How broad in scope is that? : : : By the way, can anyone tell me how many registered members the AUC has as of today (i.e., 12/21/02)? *just curious* : : No you're not. You're using snide innuendo to try to belittle and malign the AUC by pointing to the fact that it is still a small fledging religious community. Let's face it the AUC is only about two years old and has limited resources how many members would you expect any fledgling religious group to have in the first few years of its existence? How many registered members did Christianity have when Jesus began his ministry? : Yes I am. Didn't get an answer though did I? As for snide innuendo, your total post has consisted of that. If I have exhibited snide innuendo, then for you to say so is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. (Is that analogy too complicated or abstract for you?)

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: