Freethought & Rationalism Archive

godfry n. glad · 07-22-2003, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MollyMac
Surely the answer to this is that unitarians don't believe in the trinity - and are therefore not really xians at all.

Ahhh.... but to believe in the trinity is to subscribe to a dogma based upon tradition, authority and/or established belief, the antithesis of "freethought". I agree with you, but that was my point, that the Episcopalianism being described by R BAC was not Episcopalian at all...it wasn't even Christian, if there was no creedal confession of faith.

As an aside, my dictionary defines "freethinker" as: "a person who forms opinions about religion independently of tradition, authority, or established belief - SYN.atheist."

Thus my usage of freethinker or freethought excludes anyone who subscribes to a dogma like the historicity of Jesus and his bodily resurrection or the trinity...which I understood to be a basic tenet of Christianity and, by default, Episcopalianism.

Have I erred, or are you using a different dictionary?

Quote:

Members of the Anglican Church Synod in this country were freethinking enough to appoint an openly gay (though "no longer practising") bishop this year. Alas, he was forced out by pressure from the growing evangelical wing of the church. He said something about Leviticus being irrelevant and Paul just being a product of his time.

So... The episcopate has spoken and the freethinker was removed? The episcopate is sovereign in the Anglican Church, is it not? Also, I'd say that appointing a gay bishop was "tolerant" rather than "freethinking". It's a niggle, I know.

Quote:

I run a secular humanist ceremonies network and often have vicars phoning for advice because they've been asked to conduct non-religious funerals - a couple of vicars have applied to train as humanist funeral officiants (I turned them down).

Curious... Do you get such requests from UU types? Or, do they already have mastery of such? If you do, do you train them?

godfry n. glad

Rational BAC · 07-22-2003, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by godfry n. glad
....and give liberally to support the extension of the church and its dogmas.

I had a friend who grew up in the Episcopal Church (High Church, that is) and he described it as "Pomp and Circumstance - _With_ Divorce." Apt, I think.

Still... Do you ascribe to any of the creeds? You know, the Nicene, Apostolic or Athanasian? If not, how is it you can call yourself an Episcopalian (which is nothing other than the American term for "Anglican"). (Horny or not, Henry VIII still expected adherence to certain dogma and persecuted those which did not fulfill the requirements of attendance and tithing. He was the head of the church and expected appropriate obeisance. Freethinkers had no place in his system.)

If not, how does one distinguish what you call Episcopalianism from Univeralist Unitarianism? I see no difference from your descriptions.

godfry n. glad (and case-sensitive about it, too)

Henry VIII could demand anything he wanted to. "Aint it great to be King?" And Episcopalians can still can look at him as the egotistical misogynist that he was and be very skeptical about the Church he founded (along with all other churches)

I find that the Episcopal church is the best place for a free thinker--------as I stated before nobody pays all that much attention to dogma and differing opinions on all manner of subjects are well tolerated.

I don't have much trouble with the creeds. Give or take a few words, they do define my basic Christianity.

Actually I do have problems with the trinity (GASP-- I am suddenly not a Christian--NOT) Best I can say about the trinity to redeem myself is that the concept may be way over my head and I may actually understand such a strange concept someday.

I also have problems with original sin. I think the main reason Jesus was resurrected after death was to prove by His example that there was an afterlife. But, then again, I am open on this. If someone could give me a good case for original sin, I might buy it.

But, this whole thing is way off subject. Supposed to be discussing Catholic evangelism here. Sorry about that.

godfry n. glad · 07-22-2003, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rational BAC
I find that the Episcopal church is the best place for a free thinker--------as I stated before nobody pays all that much attention to dogma and differing opinions on all manner of subjects are well tolerated.

Well, I suppose if your looking for a warm place to sit out of the rain, it's probably okay. I think the public library would be more enlightening, but that's just me.

Quote:

I don't have much trouble with the creeds. Give or take a few words, they do define my basic Christianity.

As noted in prior post, any adherence to a creed suggests that you cannot call yourself a freethinker. To close the deal, I guess I'd have to ask why you would adhere to any "give or take a few words" creed?

Quote:

Actually I do have problems with the trinity (GASP-- I am suddenly not a Christian--NOT) Best I can say about the trinity to redeem myself is that the concept may be way over my head and I may actually understand such a strange concept someday.

Ah... As my friend the Russian Orthodox priest would say, "It's one of the mysteries of Christ."

Un-hhhuh....riiiiight.

Quote:

I also have problems with original sin. I think the main reason Jesus was resurrected after death was to prove by His example that there was an afterlife. But, then again, I am open on this. If someone could give me a good case for original sin, I might buy it.

So you believe in the resurrection of Jesus and an afterlife? Upon what basis?

Quote:

But, this whole thing is way off subject. Supposed to be discussing Catholic evangelism here. Sorry about that.

Catholicism...Episcopalianism...What's a litte divorce between sectaries?

pssst....(not much)

godfry n. glad

godfry n. glad · 07-22-2003, 05:05 PM

Here's a quick pop quiz sorta on the subject....

What do you get when you cross a Jehovah's Witness with a Universalist Unitarian?

gng

Rational BAC · 07-22-2003, 05:16 PM

Give or take a few words and I believe in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Drop "under God", change "indivisible" to "divisible", drop "the flag" part as at best superfluous and at worst iconic, and add "with liberty, justice and equality for all" and I have no problem with it at all.

The Nicene Creed and Apostles creed are much less troublesome in comparison.

Any type of creed of any value is supposed to be a personal one and not imposed from outside.

(Now we are WAY off subject). Sorry again.

godfry n. glad · 07-23-2003, 07:28 AM

Say, Rational BAC...

Why don't you answer the questions instead of erecting straw men and demonstrating your ignorance of the terminology?

You are an Episcopalian proselytizer in a secular discussion forum.
You are most emphatically NOT a "freethinker".

Creeds can be personal, but by and large, and in the context in which we are conversing, a creed is a statement of faith accepted by a church. It contains the basic tenets of belief for the particular church. Belief in those tenets is what makes one a Christian.

You have demonstrated already that you believe in the historicity of Jesus, his bodily resurrection and an afterlife. Please delineate for us all how you came to those positions.

godfry n. glad

P.S. - Pledging allegiance to a flag is a pointless waste of time.

Rational BAC · 07-23-2003, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by godfry n. glad
Say, Rational BAC...

Why don't you answer the questions instead of erecting straw men and demonstrating your ignorance of the terminology?

You are an Episcopalian proselytizer in a secular discussion forum.
You are most emphatically NOT a "freethinker".

Creeds can be personal, but by and large, and in the context in which we are conversing, a creed is a statement of faith accepted by a church. It contains the basic tenets of belief for the particular church. Belief in those tenets is what makes one a Christian.

You have demonstrated already that you believe in the historicity of Jesus, his bodily resurrection and an afterlife. Please delineate for us all how you came to those positions.

godfry n. glad

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

godfry------(finally spelled it right)

Don't know where to start here.

I believe in personal creeds. I have very little problem with either the Nicene or Apostles Creed. The parts that bother me, I figure I may understand better some day. So the Episcopal creeds are no real problem for me.

Belief in an outside imposed creed is what makes one a Christian? That is a laugher.

The only creed that makes one a Christian is his own personal Christian creed.----------------- Believe that Christ lived, was a semi-God, was crucified and resurrected.

The rest of it? The meaning of it all? These things are all up to the individual ---not up to some politically influenced committees from 1600 years ago. Why would anyone believe that ordinary men from 1600 years ago were any smarter or more divinely inspired than any of us Joe Blows of today is beyond me. Age and antiquity do not equal enlightenment.

Doesn't anyone remember that there were untold numbers of Christians that existed before the 4th century who were quite sincere in their Christian faith?--------when the canons of Christianity were completely unsettled? I consider myself to be a questioning 1st thru 3rd century Christian.

How I came to my beliefs? Simple answer. Simple faith.

P.S. - Pledging allegiance to a flag is a pointless waste of time.

godfry n. glad · 07-23-2003, 11:06 AM

Thanks, RatBAC....

Your repsonse has confirmed my suspicions.

Feel free to engage in whatever delusions make you feel better, but I'd recommend that you cease referring to yourself as a "freethinker Episcopalian", as it's an oxymoron and it makes you look like a moron when you use it. But, hey, it's your call. Sometimes things go much better when your conversants are clear on what it is they're dealing with.

You also might consider dropping the "Rational" from your handle, 'cause you're not. 'Course, I suppose it could be a reflection of a twisted sense of irony. Hey...Again, it's your call.

godfry n. glad

Rational BAC · 07-23-2003, 01:14 PM

Well Godfry--

You stated absolutely nothing there of any substance.

But that was your call.

MollyMac · 07-23-2003, 03:05 PM

Your last post was unnecessarily insulting, Godfrey.

I admit I was not using your dictionary's definition of 'freethinker' in my post. I was not using any dictionary - I was using the term in the way that its two compenent words suggest i.e. to mean people who do not slavishly follow the teachings of their church but who make up their own mind about certain things (and at the risk of condemnation and derision by their religious brethren)

Sorry, but I have met too many Anglicans who are more liberal and tolerant than many atheists and who are the antithesis of fundamentalist xians. I could criticise them for cherry picking or I could applaud them for their common sense and reason (at least in some things). I prefer to consider the possible wider consequences of both criticising them and applauding them and, on balance, I prefer to do the latter and I'm certainly not going to object if they describe themselves as free thinking.

On your question about UUs applying for training. I haven't had such an applicant and I've no idea if they already have mastery of such. I expect applicants to declare, in no uncertain terms, that they are atheists with a commitment to secular humanist values and I would refuse a training place to anyone who didn't.

07-22-2003, 05:05 PM	#34
godfry n. glad Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, oregon, usa Posts: 1,190	pop quiz Here's a quick pop quiz sorta on the subject.... What do you get when you cross a Jehovah's Witness with a Universalist Unitarian? gng

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-22-2003, 05:16 PM	#35
Rational BAC Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Tampa Bay area Posts: 3,471	Give or take a few words and I believe in the Pledge of Allegiance. Drop "under God", change "indivisible" to "divisible", drop "the flag" part as at best superfluous and at worst iconic, and add "with liberty, justice and equality for all" and I have no problem with it at all. The Nicene Creed and Apostles creed are much less troublesome in comparison. Any type of creed of any value is supposed to be a personal one and not imposed from outside. (Now we are WAY off subject). Sorry again.

07-23-2003, 07:28 AM	#36
godfry n. glad Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, oregon, usa Posts: 1,190	Say, Rational BAC... Why don't you answer the questions instead of erecting straw men and demonstrating your ignorance of the terminology? You are an Episcopalian proselytizer in a secular discussion forum. You are most emphatically NOT a "freethinker". Creeds can be personal, but by and large, and in the context in which we are conversing, a creed is a statement of faith accepted by a church. It contains the basic tenets of belief for the particular church. Belief in those tenets is what makes one a Christian. You have demonstrated already that you believe in the historicity of Jesus, his bodily resurrection and an afterlife. Please delineate for us all how you came to those positions. godfry n. glad P.S. - Pledging allegiance to a flag is a pointless waste of time.

07-23-2003, 11:06 AM	#38
godfry n. glad Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, oregon, usa Posts: 1,190	Thanks, RatBAC.... Your repsonse has confirmed my suspicions. Feel free to engage in whatever delusions make you feel better, but I'd recommend that you cease referring to yourself as a "freethinker Episcopalian", as it's an oxymoron and it makes you look like a moron when you use it. But, hey, it's your call. Sometimes things go much better when your conversants are clear on what it is they're dealing with. You also might consider dropping the "Rational" from your handle, 'cause you're not. 'Course, I suppose it could be a reflection of a twisted sense of irony. Hey...Again, it's your call. godfry n. glad

07-23-2003, 01:14 PM	#39
Rational BAC Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Tampa Bay area Posts: 3,471	Well Godfry-- You stated absolutely nothing there of any substance. But that was your call.

07-23-2003, 03:05 PM	#40
MollyMac Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: London, England Posts: 2,125	Your last post was unnecessarily insulting, Godfrey. I admit I was not using your dictionary's definition of 'freethinker' in my post. I was not using any dictionary - I was using the term in the way that its two compenent words suggest i.e. to mean people who do not slavishly follow the teachings of their church but who make up their own mind about certain things (and at the risk of condemnation and derision by their religious brethren) Sorry, but I have met too many Anglicans who are more liberal and tolerant than many atheists and who are the antithesis of fundamentalist xians. I could criticise them for cherry picking or I could applaud them for their common sense and reason (at least in some things). I prefer to consider the possible wider consequences of both criticising them and applauding them and, on balance, I prefer to do the latter and I'm certainly not going to object if they describe themselves as free thinking. On your question about UUs applying for training. I haven't had such an applicant and I've no idea if they already have mastery of such. I expect applicants to declare, in no uncertain terms, that they are atheists with a commitment to secular humanist values and I would refuse a training place to anyone who didn't.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.