Progressive Christian theology

Actually, Paul described Jesus as God's "only unique son" (monogenes) which was mistranslated as "begotten". Some translations of John 3:16, this error is repeated. “Most modern translations do not say"begotten", but simply say ‘only Son’ or ‘one and only Son.’ The Meaning of Monogenes: Is Jesus God’s “Only Begotten” Son? A good illustration of how a mistranslated word can make a big theological difference. And to give you Borg's take: "entral to the Christian story is Jesus. Jesus is one of us. A human being. If he is not, he is of no earthly good to us. He shows us our capacity as human beings and our need and capacity for God. The heart of Jesus’s teaching I suggest is to love our neighbor as we love ourselves (How are we doing at that?). And how we love our neighbor and ourselves is how we love God. Might it be said that there is something inextricably bound between the human being and the nature and character of God? And what is at stake is nothing less than humanity’s future, and God’s as well?" Christianity for now and the future - A progressive Christianity approach

 

Or it could be seen as gleaning seminal universal truths from bronze-age mythologies distorted by a couple of intervening millennia of internecine conflict and poor translation.

Like the bee gathers nectar from multiple flowers without harming them, so the sage gathers wisdom.

 

Or it could mean selecting a few passages that contradict what seems to be the main pattern. That's what I meant by it. The Jesus Seminar rejected the authenticity of those passages for that very reason. Presenting the atypical as typical is the gist of what I meant.

 

Yesterday, I came across an eloquent saying of Adyashanti (Steven Gray) which seemed to rhyme with the theme of this thread...

I think Christ during his time was doing what Adyashanti mentioned above, to the old structures of Judaism then, that could have been confining spirit and constricting spiritual growth.

And Christs, not christians, are needed today to rejuvenate christianity and actualise its potential, imho.

 

As this thread is on 'Progressive Christianity', "Lord" is used as the psalmist intended; as a euphemism for God.
Others might call it the Universal Buddha, the creative life force of the universe, or a host of other names.

 

Who is talking about "standard" Christianity? I thought we were talking about Progressive Christianity. Standard Christianity is virgin births and rising from the dead.

 

I add the Christian to give credit to the person I regard as the source of the ideas: unconditional love for society's rejects and least advantaged. I don't know of anyone whose life and teachings do it as well. I don't think there's much reasonable doubt that he existed or that the text was corrupted. And I regard the "standard" Christians as out to lunch: adhering to creeds and formulas that are simply fantastic.

 

And here's the rest of my post, excluded by the @#$%^&U ten minute rule. I don't think the Buddha preached quite the same gospel in quite the same way. His followers tend to believe in karma, which I regard as dubious and problematic. But since his teachings didn't include god, I see no problem in believing in Buddhism as well, especially the idea that Taṇhā is the root of dukkha. Gandhi was influenced by Jesus. MLK was a great man, but also a plagiarist, adulterer and a womanizer, who was heavily influenced by Gandhi who was influenced by Jesus. Epicurus was simply a philosopher who was mainly concerned with helping individuals achieve a happy, tranquil life. I don't think that was Jesus' main concern, no is it mine. The present Dalai Lama is an inspiring leader. I don't know about the "many" others. Most importantly, it is necessary to distinguish my Christian beliefs from those of the religious right, the Latter Day Pharisees, who are inclined to take over the title Christian. The religious right is wrong, and it's important to resist them.

 

It needn't. Westboro Baptist Church is no more representative of Christianity as a whole than the Taliban are representative of Islam. However, both make great salacious clickbait for media conglomerates whose only interest is selling advertising,

 

Absolutely not. I'm implying that He is the one I know about who hung out regularly with sinners, publicans, prostitutes, and other low lifes while preaching such a message and stressing the need to care for the poor and society's rejects. And the only on I know to challenge the hypocrisy of the Pharisees.

 

In reality, karma is understood as payback and is connected with reincarnation. That's how it seems to be understood by most Buddhists in Asia. To my knowledge, Jesus didn't believe in reincarnation. Yes, that's what karma yoga is understood to be. But as we know, karma generally has a more metaphysical meaning.
Karma Doctrine in Hinduism and Buddhism
The Buddhist Understanding of Karma: An Introduction
karma doctrine in buddhism - Yahoo Search Results

In the absence of evidence, all assumptions would be risky. I assume that the historical Jesus was a real human with real faults, but we don't know what those were. I would also assume He was influenced by plenty of people. But He preached a gospel that I find distinctive, in the context of first century Judaism. We know Gandhi was influenced by Jesus (he says so) and MLK was influenced by Gandhi.How many prostitutes and tax collectors did the Buddha hang out with?

Regardless of whether or not His meand religious reformer in the tradition of the Hebrew prophets. He wasn't crucified by the Romans for being a philosopher.

If the word "Christian" has negative connotations to you, that's a problem, but not necessarily ours. I think Progressive Christianity is much closer to the teachings and example of Jesus encountered in the gospels than the twisted version preached by the televangelists or beaten into you by the nuns with rulers. Most of the atheists I know had bad experiences with toxic religion as kids and can't see Christianity or religion in general in any other way. How unfortunate. Quakers will be Quakers, Methodists will be Methodists, First Christians will be First Christians, and many in their ranks will be Progressive Christians, regardless of who else likes it or doesn't.

 

So the next to last paragraph should read: " Regardless of whether or not his message contained philosophical elements, he was essentially a social activist and religious reformer in the tradition of the Hebrew prophets. He wasn't crucified by the Romans for being a philosopher.

 

One point that deserves further comment concerns Jesus' status as a philosopher and the comparison between him and Epicurus. Ordinarily, I think of philosophers as primarily "left-brained" intellectual types, who enjoy ideas and are primarily secular in their orientation. Epicurus would be an excellent example. He was concerned with human happiness, which he equated with peace of mind.(yes that has something in common with the peace Jesus preached, but is not quite the same). He, in contrast to Jesus, thought that anxiety arose mainly from fear of the gods and the afterlife. He offered as a corrective two basic ideas: (1) the gods don't concern themselves with our doings; and (2) humans are entirely material, and when we die there no longer is an "us". Do you detect a difference? The peace taught by Jesus was that which comes the love of God and our fellow humans. True, there were philosophers who were also religious leaders, Pythagoras being a good example. He believed that the rhythm of the cosmos could be understood by numbers and that the divine reason had become entrapped in human bodies ("the body is the tomb for the soul) requiring liberation through ascetic practices. This belief is similar to Christian Gnosticism, and I suspect that is more than a coincidence. Progressive Christianity is, likewise, more than a mere set of ideas. It involves some passion--a sense of a divine purpose to our existence and of the numinous quality emphasized by Rudolph Otto, in addition to other elements which tend to be associated with religion: creed, code, cultus (common rituals), and community. These are all important to the Christian groups I hang with.

[

 

Show me some others, and I'll be glad to consider them.