Posted on 12/16/2009 7:38:57 AM PST by PanzerKardinal
A "Progressive" Anglican church in Auckland New Zealand paid to have this billboard placed near their parish.
Here are some excerpts written by the Vicar, Archdeacon Glynn Cardy on the church's website touting what he did.
________________
To make the news at Christmas it seems a priest just needs to question the literalness of a virgin giving birth. Many in society mistakenly think that to challenge literalism is to challenge the norms of Christianity. What progressive interpretations try to do however is remove the supernatural obfuscation and delve into the deeper spiritual truth of this festival.
Christian fundamentalism believes a supernatural male God who lived above sent his sperm into the womb of the virgin Mary. Although there were a series of miraculous events surrounding Jesus’ birth – like wandering stars and angelic choirs – the real miracle was his death and literal resurrection 33 years later. The importance of this literal resurrection is the belief that it was a cosmic transaction whereby the male God embraced humanity only after being satiated by Jesus’ innocent blood.
Progressive Christianity is distinctive in that not only does it articulate a clear view it is also interested in engaging with those who differ. Its vision is one of robust engagement. If every Christian thought the same not only would life be deadly boring but also the fullness of God would be diminished. This is the consequence of its incarnational theology: God is among us; even among those we disagree with or dislike.
(Excerpt) Read more at stmatthews.org.nz ...
Why did you IGNORE #253 to respond to #255?
Would they not fall into the "Believe the OT" first?
I doubt that most of these Jews were ever raised with the Torah. Many were raised in liberal, secular families and their very first experience with G-d and the Bible was via chr*stianity. Orthodox Jews hardly ever are seduced by chr*stianity.
At any rate, the fact that Jews have apostasized does not negate the Torah. Jews have been apostasizing to false religions since before chr*stianity existed.
As I understand it, yes.
While Jewishness is passed down through the mother, everything else (priesthood, kingship, tribal identity, family, inheritance) is passed down through the father. This means the messiah must be the son of a male human being who is a descendant of David and Solomon.
At any rate, you are still assuming the truth of the "new testament" a priori and insisting on reading messianic fulfillment into it.
ROTFL! Every time I try to get out, they pull me back in! I thought I was done with this thread, and its strange devolution into disputes over baptism, Mariology, and Mormonism...
Elsie, I’ll admit your post is a lot more funny than the original billboard, but - I’m REALLY tired of hearing about sperm. No offense :)
Only meeting the exact criteria of the Torah and Prophets as they themselves describe them makes one the messiah.
I hope the EXACT requirments did not get messed up over the years with all of the re-telling and not writing down!
I'm sure you do. However, you seem to trust the Rabbis with preserving the vowels and punctuation of the Hebrew Bible (the Written Bible is nothing but a string of consonants). In fact, every Bible translation in the world, not matter how chr*stian, assumes the vowels and punctuation (which were handed down orally) are correct. If the Oral Tradition can be trusted with preserving the vowels and punctuation of the Bible, it can be trusted with its interpretation as well.
When a prophet or a "dreamer of dreams" comes along and tries to inaugurate a new religion or a new "gxd" and works supernatural miracles to prove his authority, it is merely a test. G-d Himself is performing the miracles to see if Israel will obey Him and stick with the Torah rather than the innovation.
Though I appreciate the back-up, it saddens me that you have lost your faith. I know better than to try to preach to you, but I hope that G-d guides you to where He wants you and that you will re-learn the faith you once had--wherever you find yourself.
Hope that didn't sound insulting.
Because the lds church does not make their financial statements public, one has to rely upon their other mouthpieces to glean the information. Jan. 2006 Deseret New reported “ “that since 1984, the LDS Church has donated nearly $750 million in cash and goods to people in need in more than 150 countries.” Now this adds up to a total of 1 billion over the course of 22 years - averaging about $37.5 million per year. Estimates for income for that period run between 4.5 and 6.5 billion per year. If we take the mid value - 5.5 billion/yr for 22 years = 121 billion. 750 million donated divided by 121 billion is about 0.6 percent given to poor and needy.
and what are the percentages from the Christian denominations which are doing such a great job?
The Salvation Army for 2005 approximately 83% went to direct program services (2.29 billion).
On a more direct comparison by membership size, Ostling (Mormon America http://www.amazon.com/Mormon-America-Promise-Richard-Ostling/dp/0060663723) compared the LDS to the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA). They had a similar number of reported members in 1997. Conclusion: In 1997 the ELCA raised 15.44 Million in cash donations for charity. In the 14 year period from 1984-1997 the LDS Church reported cash donations for non-Mormon charity at $30.7 Million, or an average of 2.19 Million per year. This translates to ELCA donating a little over 10% of its holdings in 1997 and the Mormon Church donating approximately .2% (point 2 percent).
I don't think that necessarily follows, ZC. Maybe you can explain why you think it does.
If the Oral Tradition can be trusted with preserving the vowels and punctuation of the Bible, it can be trusted with its interpretation as well
I don't think that necessarily follows, ZC. Maybe you can explain why you think it does.
The Torah Tradition not only preserves intact and correctly the vowels and punctuation (else we have nothing but a string of over three hundred thousand consonants) but also the precise rules and regulations for correctly copying out and writing the Biblical text. If the same Tradition doesn't know what the Bible means, then no one does.
And I didn't mean to imply you were an atheist, kosta. I just hope you either are at peace, or else find peace.
Here's the other factor not talked about: The commercial & ag holdings of the Lds church.
The Lds church hasn't let its vast $ just sit in banks; it's invested it. But it still amounts to where the church has poured $ into businesses for the sheer purpose of multiplying it...vs. investing it in people.
Now some of its relief programs for Lds families have been aided by fruit & crops grown on the vast amount of ag/orchard holdings it either owns or leases to farmers...from areas like Utah, Idaho, Washington state and Florida. But what people don't understand is that many retired Lds couples pay their way to come and live and work on these lands...basically slave labor...greatly reducing the overhead.
So the Lds church actually has more "profit margin" or less "loss absorbence" on these goods to "give away" -- and yet usually restricts such free-flowing food stuffs to other Lds families.
Now, if you think this is only a little farm here & a little farm there, think again. The fact is, the Lds church owns 1% of the entire state of Florida!!!
Church denominations like the ELCA don't hold vast corporate land/farm/orchard acreage, yet here it is outdoing the Lds charity contrast, 10% to .2%!
What I am saying, ZC, is that knowing orthography is one thing; interpreting words is an altogether different thing. We all read the Bible in English, yet many people interpret it differently. The rabbis appear to have preserved the correct way of identifying the words, but that doesn't mean the correct (theological) interpretation; just gramamtical.
If we drop the vowels in English Bibles, we could run into words with more than one possible meaning. For example "shp" can mean ship, shape, sheep, shop, etc.
Obviously the words preceding and following will determine what "shp" is supposed to be. That's not necessarily the same as correctly interpreting the theology of the text containing 'shp."
I didn't say you implied. I was just only making myself clear to you as regards the "loss of faith." I lost faith in the man-made God and I don't believe that God wrote directly or indirectly. That's all. I feel no enmity towards religion, or the faithful.
As for peace, I have peace just by knowing that the world is the way it is even if I don't understand it. It is not mine to understand lor judge any more than it is for your dog to know that the earth is round and that it is 1 AU distant from the sun. His brain will never comprehend it just as we will never comprehend the purpose of living in an endless space full of rocks traveling around in circles or smashing into each other for as long as time existed for all practical purposes..
If we drop the vowels in English Bibles, we could run into words with more than one possible meaning. For example "shp" can mean ship, shape, sheep, shop, etc.
Obviously the words preceding and following will determine what "shp" is supposed to be. That's not necessarily the same as correctly interpreting the theology of the text containing 'shp."
The theology is found not only in the words and sentences, but in the letters themselves. Every letter must be written in precisely the correct manner or the scroll will not be kosher and cannot be used in worship. These factors include the sizes and shapes of the letters, the "crowns" that appear on some of the letters, and even the spaces between the letters. The correct text, the mode of writing, and the interpretation of the text all have the same source--from G-d to Moses on Mt. Sinai. G-d gave Moses not only the Written Torah but the Oral as well, and the correct hermeneutic/exegetical method for "psaq"ing the text. In addition to this, the forty years in the Midbar (and I know you don't believe in them) were spent in the most arduous systematic study. Maimonides in one of his works (I think Mishneh Torah though it could be Moreh Nevukhim) explains the mode and method of this study.
Now of course I realize that all of this requires me to assume the truth and authenticity of the Rabbinic Tradition. If you are asking me why, after being in so merciless in my rationalistic rejection of the "new testament" I suddenly return to being a "fundie" with regard to these other things, I doubt I will ever be able to satisfy you. I could say that I have learned things about the history of the transmission of the text and of the secrets and mysteries hidden therein that (to my mind) confirm my assumptions, but that is still begging the question of where my "faith" comes from. I don't know where it comes from. I have never claimed to be able to convince an unbeliever of the truth of the Torah and all my arguments with chr*stians is based on the fact that they accept the Torah and acknowledge that it came first; therefore, given A (the Torah) B (chr*stianity) simply does not follow at all. But why do I believe in A in the first place? I can't tell you that.
The front of my Bible has always held a peculiar power over me. My defense of the early chapters of Genesis, which have somehow morphed into a "chr*stian" text that Jews "don't believe in anymore," follows from this same mysterious power. I can say in my defense that this Rabbinic Tradition is as close as we will ever come to the true meaning and that I adhere to it as the most trustworthy. But that still doesn't tell us where my "faith" comes from.
Why do any of us believe what we believe? My sister is a very conventional Southern Baptist, my mother is an "uneducated" (by the standards of the academic world) traditional cultural/folk fundamentalist who believes implicitly in the Bible and listens to the preachers but still thinks for herself when it comes to doctrine (though never with regard to G-d or the Bible themselves). And my later father is absolutely inexplicable--a man who grew up in the rural Bible Belt in the Twenties and Thirties who never let it touch him, who would say very little about his religious beliefs except that no one was really going to heaven (they weren't good enough) and who placed his faith in folk astrology (not the Hollywood type but the rural Southern variety) and superstitions (never burn a fingernail or hair, don't spin a chair on its leg, if you sit a rake or hoe on the front porch someone will die).
And then there is me. I can explain it no more than you can.
Thank you for explicating. I am glad you are at peace.
Resty just likes me better. :)
Every time I try to get out, they pull me back in!
- - - - - -
That is EXACTLY how some feel about trying to leave Mormonism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.