I predict a hard time for this lady at the hands of people who can't stretch their minds enough to imagine that a person can take the Bible seriously without taking it literally. Oh well...

NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!

Don't listen to this person. Love is not the way. Fight with each other. Argue over false idols like those monuments. Covet your neighbor's possessions. Break all the commandments. Do it now or I'll be powerless. I couldn't stand a world without war, poverty, and violence. Peace and love make me want to wretch. Uh oh.....here comes the Big Guy.......

Nooooooooooooooooooo!Nooooooooooooooooooo!Nooooooooooooooooooo!Nooooooooooooooooooo!Nooooooooooooooooooo!Nooooooooooooooooooo!

Okay, I've missed something (not too unusual though). Now we have satan responding to religious letters. Where is this blog going?

I really liked this letter Rev. Valentine. As Eric alluded to, it is refreshing to see a scholarly approach to the matter at hand instead of banging a bible in our faces. Too many in your profession fail to see beyond scripture or that it was written by men after centuries of oral tradition. We can not take the bible literally, but we need to use it as a guide in our life decisions. Thanks Rev. Valentine.

The thing that bothers me about this letter is that the Rev. Valentine expects us to take her interpretation of events in the Holy Bible (and others who agree with her) as fact.

Many people would disagree with her interpretation and even the fact that she proclaims herself a reverend.

Some things are worth fighting for.

As a member of a Presbyterian church, Ms. Valentine should be fully experienced in fighting for what she believes in.

Who are these "credible scholars"? Only those that agree with Rev. Valentine's opinion? I can bring out my "credible scholars" who have an opinion that is 180 degrees different on when the first five books of the OT were written. The important question is WHY do they believe the OT was written hundreds of years later and HOW they came to their conclusion.

WHY SHOULD I spend time making a difference in other people's lives? Shouldn't this notion also be considered in it's cultural and historical context and therefore may change tomorrow? Therefore, WHY SHOULD I obey Valentine's moral request? Based on whose authority?

Also, Valentine's citing of John Shelby Spong doesn't render her opinion as scholarly, but merely as liberal.

laurie writes, "Jesus exemplified this in his life and ministry. So have many other religious and spiritual leaders" and then quotes John Shelby Spong who's main objective was to secularize Christianity and to offer up Jesus as a condemned felon cast into a common grave. laurie seems to heap Jesus in with a bunch of other religious and spiritual leaders, which implies He was only equal with them. i like the response that "it is refreshing to see a scholarly approach" - for me the only way that one can balance the truth of the dissertation is to have some understanding of the subject matter. that understanding would come with study, research and the desire to reach truth. many like the scholarly approach because it rings true to what they want to believe. i also love the scholarly approach to scriptures, for it shows a desire to become informed, whereby one can make an 'individual' decision based upon personal discovery. anyone who has done any research into the 'literal' truths in scripture would find an abundance of scientific data that corroborates the written word.

Way to go Reverend! Eric agrees with you and he thinks the bible is a very nasty book...all about unjust punishment and slavery.

Moses did receive the 10 commandments. They were kept in the Arc of the Covenant. They are from God and therefore not subject to change with culture.

Jesus, whom you site, is the embodiment of the 10 commandments. He claimed to be God. And Jesus said he did not come to change the law, but to fullfill it. Either he was manic/or schizophrenic, a religious hoax or He is God. If Jesus was not God he and hundreds of others perpetrated a cruel hoax.

Amen......chip !! so you see..... those who have vested time in the subject matter can make scholarly and informed comments...well said chip !!

"Also, Valentine's citing of John Shelby Spong doesn't render her opinion as scholarly, but merely as liberal."

Oh NO! The liberals are speaking, so we must cork our ears and hide from their horrible, WRONG thoughts at all costs!! Arrrgh!!!

Quick, Robin! To the RIGHT-mobile!!!

We disagree with her and Spong, Eric. We do not cover our ears and close off debate. We speak with equal authority. We do not make fun of her liberal views.

Do not pout, Eric. Where is all this anger coming from?

You don't agree with her either. You say the bible is nasty....

eric,
i believe 'liberal' may be to soft a term. spong is a self confessed atheist. in my opinion anyone citing him as scholarly may well be the same (or perhaps are ignorant of his teachings). for an informative look into his (spong's) head take a look at spong's 12 theses @ http://www.starcourse.org/spong/

according to spong...paul was gay, Jesus could not have possibly resurrected, virgin birth was impossible, yata, yata, yata ! the bible is only a good novel unless you have the Holy Spirit teaching you..... only then can we rightly divide the truth.

Buz, when did Spong ever say he is an atheist? I must have missed that. Or are you saying that someone who defines "God" differently from the traditional meaning is an atheist?

You said that he mentions guidance from the Holy Spirit, which is not exactly what your average atheist would say.

BTW, buz, thanks for the link. Most interesting reading.

Cheers!

Eric has a site where he promotes athiesm. He calls himself an athiest, to quote him, "I suppose you could say that I am an atheist, humanist, Rationalist, Freethinker, ex-Christian and Materialist. Add in smatterings of Epicurian and Stoic philosophies, and you come fairly close."

I don't mind arguing with people about most things- in fact I relish it. I just do not like people who claim to know how I think. Eric takes offense at labels seems to beleive (rightly) you, me and others think Spong is liberal. He also seems to think (wrongly) we don't listen or read things we dissagree with, therefore, we see dissenting views as something to be feared.

eric,
i apologize, i reread my post and can see where you thought i was attributing spong to saying
"unless you have the Holy Spirit teaching you"...that was my thought and belief not his , sorry. when i said self confessed atheist, perhaps i misspoke. i guess when one reads his works which seem to contradict scripture itself, in essence i believe that is kinda self confessed in the general term. i stand corrected. while i believe the scripture is cryptic by design, i do not believe all are excluded from its truth(s). there is scripture (imo) that can be taken at face value, which we need not contort ourselves into understanding.....but for myself i believe i have the indwelling Holy Spirit to guide me. sorry for any confusion i caused.

I am wondering why any of you care how the other feels about any of the issues discussed above. Do you really believe you're going to change anyone's mind? Do you really think your rationale is going to woo another to your way of thinking? It's like watching kids argue on the playground.

Wondering,

I know how you feel. Religion and politics, right? They are both very personal things. And you're right, it is almost IMPOSSIBLE to change an adult's mind once they've made it up.

But all thing's are possible with God.

I don't think that Eric and Buz are necessarily trying to change each other's minds as they are engaging in a discussion of their own beliefs. I haven't heard Buz or Eric say "you must believe as I do" and I don't think I will.

I find the discussion (not attacks) to be interesting and thought provoking.

I believe in the divinity of Christ, but I still like to hear what other's think.

Buz, thanks for the clarification. I know Spong is pretty far afield from most things one usually hears regarding the Christian religion. I would think if you really needed to classify his view, they would be pretty close to those of Bruno or Spinoza.

It just sounded like more of the stuff I've seen too often, people saying "Oh, it's Spong. His thoughts aren't worth listening to." That sort of thing gets under my skin...

Oh, my. Truth must have been on Mt. Sinai and given divine perception into how others feel. I sense, not know, a degree of I'm right and you're wrong in the exchanges. That is why I wonder why.

Truth, I agree with you that it's very stimulating to discuss differences of opinion in religion and philosophy, so long as the dicussion can stay civil. This venue isn't the best for delving deeper than a sound byte, but you can encounter a few things worth reading.

Which is always fun.

Wondering, I can only give you my take on this. I simply enjoy the exchange of ideas with most folks. I like looking for new ways of seeing things, and (I hope) giving others new things to think about. Being an atheist in such a devout place as this (Greensboro, I mean), my thoughts are quite often new to many folks.

That's one reason I like going to church with my wife. I have many fun, stimulating conversations with the pastor. We understand that we see things differently, but that doesn't affect our respect for each other. Sure, we each believe we're right in our theological views, but that's not a stumbling block. And I truly appreciate it when I can find others that can handle that sort of thing.

I hope that helps answer your question a bit.

eric and truth,
i am onboard with civil conversation that stimulates thought ! 'truth' i believe that your comment was insightful. 'chip' writes that 'eric' is an atheist. that fact alone would not preclude any conversation(s) with me.'wondering' i am not in the business of changing anyones mind ( not my job ). i do however believe it is my job to share my belief(s) and then it's your choice to believe or not. personally i like being challenged, because it forces me to research and study, which may cause to to either reinforce my belief or possibly reevaluate my opinion/belief....either way it is a win situation for me.

Eric, Do you have theological views as an athiest? I am not chiding you. I think it great you like to argue. However, the pastor who wrote this letter has written as a Christian. Yet almost every thought in her letter directly contradicts the basic tenants of Christianity and the Presbyterian Church(USA).

She cited Spong as a scholar and defender of the Presbyterian faith. He is clearly not.

She states the 10 Commandments "were never intended to be moral proclamations for all time and history." They were God's commandments, not Moses' laws. And there are very few "scholars" who would call themselves Christians who would agree the 10 commandments were never meant to be moral proclamations.

The fact you have no beleif in God should not prevent you from seeing how contradicting her arguments are.

Wondering- Is it wrong to beleive you are right and others are wrong? Are we going to change each other's minds? Absolutely! It is a way to learn. I don't mind fair and honest debate with people who beleive they are right.

I am not trying to open a can of worms but there are quiet a number of disagreements among Christians about what the scriptures mean. For example, I am participating in a Bible study group that uses four different interpretations of the Bible. We read from each and discuss the different interpretations.

What I have garnered from the study thus far is, although God is an absolute, the interpretation of His word is not. All the differences cannot be the one "truth". The truth that is my truth, formed by my relationship with God, may be different than others' truths because their relationship with God may be different than mine.

To judge or question someone else's relationship with God and what their truth is in regards to God is not what God intends for me to do.

Just a note,
Some of the most knowledgeable biblical scholars I've known have been atheists. Almost all atheists I know can tell you more about the Bible than the Christians that proclaim to live it. Sad for the Christians, but oh so true!

I am glad on one hand that my article today has provoked so much discussion, and saddened on the other hand that the discussion seems to have degenerated into argument. The whole point of what I wrote was to say that we argue over things that just don't really matter. After e-mailing my letter last week, I realized that there are many other things I could have said, but you can only say so much in 400 words. It doesn't really matter to me whether or not Moses really stood on Mt. Sinai and received tablets from God. What I connect with is the people behind the story - people who struggled to survive and to define themselves and their faith in light of the world around them. Jesus indeed did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. To me, that means he redirected people to look beyond the letter of the law to the ways in which the law can be life-giving. I quoted Spong not because I agree with everything he says, but because at the heart of what he does say is his belief (to paraphase the Gospel of John) that Jesus came to give people life and give it abundantly. Living out the spirit of the 10 commandments can make a difference in people's lives because they are ultimately about being in relationship with others. All the arguments about whether or not to post the commandments in public places are emotionally detached actions that ignore the reality of people's lives. Jesus entered into relationship with people. He met them where they were and called them children of God. He did not go around pointing fingers at people and "thumping" the Torah at them. We should not do that either.
I welcome further comments.

yvonne,
to clarify something first, did you mean 'translations' instead of interpretations? assuming you meant translations, i would like to comment. i am involved in several study groups myself and i believe translations such as nasb,nlt,nkjv,niv are all good tools. i do stop short of saying they are good for study.....b/c so much of the flavor trying to be conveyed is lost with these translations. going back to the kjv presents more flavor and then add in the study of greek words begins to add color to the story. study of the customs of the new testament times adds the advantage of placing yourself in their culture. here is an example, the story in lk.11:5-8 - is a story about a man who went to his friends house after everyone was in bed, he asked his friend for three loaves of bread and the friend says, man the doors are shut and my children are with me in bed, i can't get up and give you bread ! with some study of the times, one comes to know, that in that day most bedrooms were really just a loft residing above the ground floor where their cattle, sheep, goats, etc. stayed, that's right the animals stayed in the house. now knowing this, you can put yourself in the friends position....picture this, all the children have 'finally' gone to sleep, the animals below have settled in for the night and you have fallen into a well deserved sleep....all of a sudden, awakened out of your sleep you hear...hey! hey! wake up, i need three loaves of bread. your first thought is probably, what idiot is out at this time of night and disturbing my whole household...man he better have a really good reason...only to find out he only wants some bread. can you see the flavor and color of this story come alive ? it becomes alive b/c of study, research and a desire to know God's heart.
truth is universal when speaking of the revealed word of God. you make me believe by your post that God may tell 'you' a different truth than 'me'. i fully believe that God does 'expand' his word as we grow more mature, for some need milk while others need meat. but for me God's truth is always the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. thanks for letting me share. and yvonne, opening a can of worms is a good thing !!

Very nice letter,Laurie.

buz, You are correct in assuming I meant translations rather than interpretations. My mistake. But I am glad you shared your story. It really is interesting to see things through the eyes of others.

What I meant by my "truths" comment is what you eluded to by stating peoples needs may be different in relation to where they are in their spiritual journey. While God's truth does not change, our interpretations can because we are human. I believe we often do not recognize what the truth is when we are fledglings. If I don't "know" God that well, how am I to know it is He who is leading me to His truth? A person who has a longer, more mature relationship with God knows because He said it will be revealed to us and we have developed faith. Because of a longstanding relationship with God, we recognize the true word of God.

It is not up to me to decide where an individual is in their spiritual journey so I cannot say they are wrong to believe different than me. That is what I was trying to say. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify what I meant.

yvonne,
much thanks for the clarification..have a blessed day !!

Wondering,

You asked a question. I tried my best to answer it. I don't have a crystal ball and I'm not clairevoyant (i'm sure I mispelled that word). I can only go on my perception. I've had discussions with Eric, Buz, Yvonne, Brian and others for some time now. That helps me in understanding their beliefs. Of course I think my beliefs are right. Right for me, anyway. But what might work for me may not work for you or the other people here.

Like I said, some things are worth fighting for. What you've said about my response to your question isn't one of them. Not to me, anyway.

The beauty of this is that we don't have to agree. We don't have to think the same way. I believe that is part of the wonder and beauty of God's creation. Eric may believe it is just part of humanity. I don't know. That's why I read what he says, to find out.

Brian Harper has a point. I have also had friends who were atheist who knew the Bible better than a lot of believers I know (including me). Sometimes I wonder why they push themselves so hard to understand something they don't believe in. But then again, I come here to listen to how nonbelievers feel when I don't believe as they do. I guess it is my thirst for knowledge. Not all Christians bury their heads in the sand and close their ears to anything different than their beliefs, just like not all Atheists hang upside down crosses in their yards and wear black all the time.

Stereotypes, while often true, are another form of close-mindedness.

and you misspelled misspell, but you're a busy man and an absolute genius!

truth,
then again, "what works for you" may also work for others....as we know...there is only 'one' way...and not because 'we' have chosen it so, but b/c it was designed as such !

Steve, takes one to know one. Good thing I didn't try to make a 7 letter word out of mispell huh?

Not that you would have ever left me an 's' I could play a word on anyway. :)

ms.valentine,
don't be overly proud of yourself for your post evoking sentiment. many are as passionate as you about their beliefs. you may recall that the 12 men (disciples)who followed Jesus around for those 3 some odd years, often bickered amongst themselves who was the greatest. if these 12 men, who shared personally in Jesus' life and ministry, couldn't get beyond petty infighting, why would you think we are any better ? forgive me but i cannot seem to get past the fact that you place high value on spong who readily admits God doesn't answer prayer, Jesus didn't resurrect, that the work on the cross should be viewed as barbaric and on and on he goes. i personally aspire to immulate not someone who seems to deny God and scoffs at most accepted Christian tenants. i'd rather immulate Paul ( but then again spong says he was gay, i've read spongs material and by no stretch can i read that much between the lines) or model myself as Jesus himself. i'm curious...is Jesus Christ the incarnation of God or is he just another also ran to you ? the whole of the matter rests on that one view point. someone earlier poster that Jesus was either a lunatic, a liar or he was telling the truth. we must take a stand !

Isn't it great that the Bible is translated into a language we can read and understand ourselves without depending on others' intepretations of it. In fact, I think I'll go read it now. Have a nice day!

Do ya think its a coincidence that Passion is used in the name of this letter? Dem editors sure do come up wit some nifty names.

Buz, I am not overly proud of myself. Neither am I saying that we are better than those first disciples. I am only trying to emphasize the heart of what I wrote - that arguing over doctrine ultimately does not make a difference in people's lives. It only forces us to put boxes around how we define God and how Jesus was God in our midst. I am not saying that doctrine is not important, only that doctrine was not the point of my letter. I cited Spong not as a scholar or defender of the Presbyterian faith, as Chip suggested earlier, but as someone whom I believe encapsulates the heart of who Jesus was and what he came to do when he cites Jesus' statement in John that he came to give others life and give it abundantly. I would love to see discussion here about what it would mean to live that out as a mission of Christ in the world.

Truth - to respond to an earlier comment you made:
You stated that many people would disagree with my interpretation of the Bible. Yes, they do, even as many of these blog comments prove. You also stated that many would disagree with the fact that I call myself "reverend." Let me clarify - I do not call myself reverend. Really, that is not even a title. The proper usage in front of a minister's name is "The Reverend" which makes this an adjective. I did not bestow myself with this name. It was bestowed upon me by the Presbyterian Church (USA) after much education, examination, and faith-sharing and development along my journey to the point of ordination. At that service of worship, I was surrounded by friends, families, and colleagues who represented a portion of the Body of Christ that saw me fit to be a minister of the Word and Sacrament. I saw all this not as boasting but rather as explanation. I also realize that your point was that many people think that women ministers are in violation of Scripture. Perhaps discussion on that issue is for another time and another blog.

ms.valentine,
thank you for the reply. for sake of fairness i must ask this question. by stating "that arguing over doctrine ultimately does not make a difference in people's lives", then you proceed with your "doctrinal" discourse on the giving of the ten commandments, oral traditionals passed down and numerous others doctrinal viewpoints - did you not think this rhetoric would evoke a discussion on doctrine ? you cite in your last post to 'truth' that you are much educated, a developed faith sharing individual whom is ordained and fit to minister. in your opinion can one (a Christian) be fit to minister without the education, ordination and developement that you allude to ? we both know what 2Ti 2:15 says " Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." personally i do not read into that, that one must be ordained to rightly divide the truth. do not misunderstand me, i applaud you for you dedication to your pursuit of a divinity degree, i simply do not believe it prerequisite to serve God or to be able to understand His truths. i'm fairly simple minded and without education past ninth grade, but i have a passion to serve God and simpleminded enough to even believe that God actually did hand Moses the ten commandents etched in stone (and Jesus walking on water, healing lepers, turning water into wine etc.). in no way do i expect you to believe anything i present, rather seek His righteousness and everything else will be added . Thanks !!

Laurie- You characterise Spong as someone whom you believe encapsulates the heart of who Jesus was. Yet Spong denies the Deity of Jesus. Can you say Jesus Christ is God?

You have already said the 10 Commandments were not from God. Jesus actually validated them and warned against those who would dismiss them. He said the whole of the Torah is summed up in this way: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, strength and soul. You are, quite literally, arguing against Christ and the Presbyterian Church's (USA)tennants of faith.

You seem to be a nice person. Why are you writing as if you don't beleive Jeusus is God?

chip,
i am not defending or trying to speak for ms. valentine but if you look at her most recent post to me (buz) you may find a very innocuous answer to that question....i.e." how we define God and how Jesus was God in our midst". she may be quoting spong here or maybe something she heard or maybe she believes that Jesus was in fact God in our midst. here is the question i previously asked her "i'm curious...is Jesus Christ the incarnation of God or is he just another also ran to you ? the whole of the matter rests on that one view point."

Rev. Valentine:
I realize this isn't the first time you've posted your opening comments to this blog, but I don't think you saw my response to the original so here goes:
I wish I lived closer to the Triad. I'd love to visit your church. Your rational and scholarly and loving response to the stone-worshipers (those who revere the statues yet seemingly abhor other humans) is a nice change from the garden variety " Hate thy neighbor- it says to in the bible" type of christians I encounter daily.

With no sarcasm whatsoever, I say to you " Have a blessed day" as you are, to me, an example of "WWJD."

Alice, are you referring to me, Buz, Truth and others? Are you not the person who thinks the bible is more damaging than helpful?

What do you mean by scholarly? Laurie's letter quotes one extremely contraversial person and is misleading at best. Is this really about tolerance? Or making a way for Gay men and women to change what virtually all Christian churches say about homosexuality?

Gay men are welcome to worship Christ at most every church.

I meant Gay men and women are welcome...

Reverend Valentine,

I don't question your right or ability to minister to people. If I had to consider WWJD, I'd say he never cared much for worldly titles in the first place. If your heart is in the right place, Jesus knows it and you don't need to explain it to me or anyone else.

Alice,

Your nice words had an awful backlash to the rest of us here. The fact that you chose to include only Reverend Valentine in your blessing implies that you exclude the other Christians here who don't appeal to your sense of WWJD. But the real Christians here love you regardless of whether or not you agree with them.

hey !!!
what is wrong with " it says so in the bible"....as long as it is ministered in love....personally i can't think of a better book to quote. i totally realize the bible is used as a tool or a weapon....i've seen no one draw their sword !
chip & truth...have i come off as a stone worshipping individual who shows no compassion for my fellow human being ?

alice,
i'm with 'truth' when he says he loves you regardless ! no sarcasm ....have a blessed day yourself !!

buz, I know you were not asking me about Jesus and God being one and the same but I would like to share my own belief here.

Since the beginning of time God was seen as omnipetent, greater than life, purist of the pure. In other words, definitely not human. The common people, therefore, could not identify with God in a human way. So God wisely created the human form of Himself, Jesus. Jesus walked among the sinners, thieves, wicked, heathens and performed His miracles to win souls for His heavenly Self.

It is my belief that had God not created Himself in human form His word and works may have never have been received by the people who needed them most.

Regarding the notion that Jesus is the same as God... you folks are aware, aren't you, that this was established as a required Christian belief by voting on it in a council a couple of centuries after the "facts." Every time I see this idea talked about as a given, I have to chuckle. Who the heck votes to establish reality?

yvonne,
thanks for your point of view. while on the surface it sounds as though you believe that the Father & Son are equal. it is your wording that trips me up...you say " God wisely created the human form of Himself "...here is where i differ in my understanding, let me quote one scripture ...Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. this is only one scripture which causes me to believe that God did NOT create Jesus, but in fact they are one ( as Jesus claimed more than once ). some may think this is a small point, but for me it is a pivotal point of faith. you also see Jesus taking part of creation in Gen1:26. i realize each person can read these same words and seemingly find another truth and i suppose that is why we have hundreds if not thousands of different churches and denominations. thanks for letting me share.

eric,
are you referring to the Nicean or Trent councils or to something else ? i want to understand your thought process!

Nicea, yes. You know, the whole thing with Constantine and ironing out what was orthodox and what was not. By voting. Well, I guess that's better than killing over orthodoxy, but that came later, eh?

Yvonne,

Along those same lines, it makes sense that Jesus would come to minister to the thieves, the sick, the heathens, the sinners. It seems to me that the one thing that Jesus/God liked less than anything else is pride.

That's not me trying to speak biblically, just as a human.

Eric, the doctrine and beliefs were there long before the Nicean Council. The council was called to respond to heretical teachings and merely formalized the doctrine that was already in place.

eric,
thanks for clarification. yvonne earlier mentioned opening a can of worms. this whole constantine, alexander,arius,pope & catholic church..i.e. 1st council of nicea would open a whole case of worms.i'll not go there here on this thread, but it certainly warrants a discussion. thanks.

eric,
i re-read your post:
"Regarding the notion that Jesus is the same as God... you folks are aware, aren't you, that this was established as a required Christian belief by voting on it in a council a couple of centuries after the "facts." Every time I see this idea talked about as a given, I have to chuckle. Who the heck votes to establish reality?"
it sounds as though you stated by inference that you also believe Jesus / God are the same person. if the reality shows who Jesus was (i.e God) then why vote on it , eh ? are you sure you're not a closet Christain ?
also only those who hold true the tenets of those councils must adhere to them (i.e. the catholics). those councils only hold historic value to me as a Christian. be happy !

buz et al:
You folks haven't studied much history, comparative religion, or archeology, I take it.
The Council of Nicea affected CHRISTIAN belief.

Alice

Ready to check the e-mail in-box to see if proud example of christian-love "Steve" has again sent me more obscene e-mails from his real (earthlink) address...

Yvonne, The doctrine of the Trinity(about which I know very little) contradicts your beleif about God creating Jesus. Father, Son and Holy Spirit are equal, yet one God.

Eric, the Nicean Councel did not alter the written word within the books determined to be authentic. All the gospels have Jesus claiming to be God.

There are several things that alarm me about Laurie's letter. First, she writes as a teacher and pastor of the PCUSA. In the few words she has written, she is contradicting the doctrines of her own denomination. This smacks of subversive, false teaching. Why become a pastor if you do not beleive in the demonation's doctrines?
(Eric, in contrast, is honest about his view of Christianity.)

While making a good point about stone monuments, she lowers the 10 Commandments from God's Word to a man made metahor- never meant as moral law. Many PCUSA (and other denominations) pastors would agree about stone monuments, but few would teach the 10 commandments are simply a metaphor.

Her use of "credible scholars" is prejudicial and subjective and therefore, misleading. She went to an Ivy League seminary and received either a Masters or Doctorate. Most pastors are scholars like her. Nevertheless, there are scholars who beleive in Christ (as the one true God) and those who do not. Those who beleive are bent on learning more about God. Those who do not beleive are bent on learning about man. The latter are false teachers within the church.

Her reverance to Spong as a man and a teacher clearly aligns her with him. She does not say she beleives all his teachings, but why mention him at all? Spong stands against Christ and His church, which includes the PCUSA.

Alice, why do you not answer the public questions we asked of you? We are not the ones berating you.

alice,
i have no credentials in divinity, archaeology or history. it is your prerogative to take it any way you choose. i do however study the scriptures, read history and archaeology. i currently am reading 'the bible as history' by werner keller,who is a non theologian with no apparent axe to grind. it is a very enlightening and informative piece on archaeological discovery in relationship to the bible. here is where the worm box gets opened. you stated "The Council of Nicea affected CHRISTIAN belief". may we establish one fact, the 1st ecumenical council of the "catholic church" was the council of nicea. that established, your assumption is that the catholic church represents Christianity, with which i very much disagree. i cannot work from that premise, sorry. i in no way intent to offend anyone intentionally, but as usual when one shares their beliefs, it is inevitable that some get offended. therefore alice i find no value in your comment "The Council of Nicea affected CHRISTIAN belief".

Friends, we can go on and on until we are blue in the face debating all the Christian theology and doctrine that has been brought up here. We all think differently and that's OK. Even in the midst of those differences we consider ourselves faithful Christians. I truly believe that God is big enough to embrace us all. Debating doctrine reminds me of how limited human language and images are to describe the mystery of God. I will briefly address a couple of things here that have been raised by previous comments.

First, I do not think one has to have a seminary education in order to discuss issues of faith. I do believe, though, that most people are not critical thinkers when it comes to the Bible and their faith. I mentioned my process of ordination to say that I do not indiscriminately call myself a reverend, but that I belong to a denomination that has a connectional approval and accountability system.

Second, I do believe that Jesus was God. I also believe that ultimately, this is a mystery that cannot fully be explained. Jesus claimed to be God but did not stop there. He showed people the amazing and abundant depth of God's love and grace by embracing them - even those people that the world considered to be unlovable, untouchable, unclean. The Gospels are full of such stories. How tragic that Christians have taken our sacred stories and texts and used them over and over again to exclude people because we have not stood in solidarity with our brothers and sisters that have gone before us and understood the historical and cultural contexts in which they wrote and expressed their faith.

Third, I never said that the 10 Commandments were not moral law. What I did say was that they were not seen originally as moral proclamations for all time and history. The commandments were moral law for the nation and community of faith that created them to define who they were and how they experienced God moving in their midst. The metaphor for me is the story of Moses receiving the law. This was a story Israel told from generation to generation to describe how the law came to be. Jesus fulfilled the law by reminding people that it was not to be used to beat people over the head to force them into submission, but rather the law is a tool to invite people into whole relationship with God and with each other. This is why the commandments still have validity today. I just think that we try to prove that validity in the wrong ways.

Now, here's what I'm really hoping to happen here: If anyone is willing to engage in conversation on how people (the Body of Christ in particular) can live out Jesus' ministry of bringing life abundant to all God's children, then I would love to talk. In all the comments on this blog, no one is addressing this. For example, - how do Christians: focus energy on lifting people out of poverty; advocate that people are paid fair wages and have adequate health insurance; see war as a failure of human beings to find a better, more peaceful way to address conflict; abhor abortion, but instead of yelling at each other about it, see the need to keep it a legal option but live with women in the reality of their lives and help them to avoid that choice. Simply banning the procedure does not solve the problem of abortion. What can reduce the rate is adequte education, employment, health care. How do we continue to address the crisis of domestic violence? What about the genocide in Darfur? We say that homosexuals are a threat to "traditional" marriage, but it's heterosexuals that have screwed it up so badly. Why is that? Aren't these the kinds of things Jesus would really have us expending our time and energy over?

laurie,
last post for me (to laurie). your challenge is admirable and worthy. you continue to hang you divinity degree over our heads, by stating "I do believe, though, that most people are not critical thinkers when it comes to the Bible and their faith" which by inference means you are. my ongoing pursuit of Gods word and my desire to grow spiritually to become the servanr He has called me to be, is foremost in my life. i am not sure of your definition of critical thinker, but many here in this post demonstrate thought, emotion and sometimes criticalness (is that a word?). while you find no value in what you refer to as 'debating doctrine', speaking for myself i have grown some and perhaps learned some tolerance, i would say that it was worth it. wishing you well in your ministry and service to God.

Buz, thank you for your comments. Even though we disagree, I do appreciate the time, energy, and faith that you have shared in responding to me, and others, here. I have realized how frustrating communicating only by letters can be, as I have said things with one intention, and then had them read in a totally different way by others. Hanging my divinity degree over anyone's head was the last thing I meant to do. My husband could tell you that I often struggle with feeling totally inadequate to be a pastor, but then there are moments when God reminds me that indeed serving the church and the Body of Christ is where I'm supposed to be. I have found holy moments not in debating whether or not Moses was a real person, or in the validity of the Virigin Birth, but in experiencing the living Christ present at a baptism, wedding, in the context of worship services, and even by parishioners' bedsides as they prepare to journey from this life to the next. My faith journey has been just that, a journey, and I continue to grow and learn along the way. I'll never have all the answers. None of us will. That, I think, is what can keep us open to the great mystery of God moving among us, opening wide our imaginations to see the endless possibilities of living out the Gospel in the world. Jesus was always turning people's notions of what they thought to be true on their heads. I guess that's what challenging people to be critical thinkers is all about.

Peace to you as well.

Laurie, I'm a little confused about some of your posts. I am sure that you believe that knowing God better is a good idea. Doesn't theology and doctrine entail knowing things about God that are true and things that are not true about Him? Therefore, I would think the theology and doctrine are extremely important. Also, isn't love, helping the poor and the sick part of theology and doctrine? Please clarify your view on this.

Thanks Alice, it felt great.

My last post also. Laurie, you had me going. This is about politics! Pro-abortion, higher min wage, national healthcare, Bush is wrong about war. No, I don't think Christ is as concerned with higher wages and healthcare in the veiled way you speak of.

You are a pastor. I'll be as straightforward as you are deceiving: Christ warned about people like you who are wolves in sheeps clothing. You mislead people about the 10 commandments, who Christ is and worse- you put yourself up as the enlightened.

I don't know why God abhors sin or why many things are sinful. But I do know He is God. What kind of God is it who changes to please his own creation? It is the false gods of Spong and apparently Valentine. You worship the creation, rather than the Creator.

I pray God will be revealed to you. The God who created every one of us is deeply in love with His creation, despite our rebellion against Him. He loved us enough to send His Son, Jesus to pay the price for our rebellion. You know the real Gospel. Turn to it before you lead your friends astray.

Chip, You not only misunderstand my post but also Laurie's. Whether this is intentional or not I don't know. I said God created Himself in HUMAN form, not that they were seperate or unequal. Perhaps "created" is not the word you would have used but I thought it expressed what I was trying to convey. Do you understand "God came to earth in the human form Jesus" better? I believe, and I thought I was clear, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, or the Trinity, are one and the same.

While it is your right to disagree with Reverend Valentine, I think your accusations are unfounded and mean-spirited. Just because you apparently think people of the cloth should not speak out about injustices doesn't mean you are right and she is wrong.

IMHO the wolves in sheeps clothing and the false prophets leading the masses are in Washington, DC, not posting here in this thread.

Chip -- in attacking Laurie Valentine's credentials and belief system you have moved from debating the issue at hand to succumbing to the fallacy of ad hominen attacks -- going after the person rather than the idea. I don't recall any gospel stories that depict Jesus as dealing with anyone in that manner -- rather he spoke truth in love. If you have a valid point to make about the subject matter (do you even remember what it was?) then please make it. Otherwise, when you slander someone that simply says more about you than about the other person.

Yvonne- I did misunderstand your post. I stand by my post to Laurie. Jesus spoke very harsh words in love to people. I think Laurie's letter and subsequent answers make it clear she is a Spong follower.

Further, I conceded her point the stone monuments were not as important as we make them out to be. But she claimed they were not given to Moses by God. She said they were never meant to be moral laws and made it clear their time is past.

She beleives Jesus was God. I wonder if she beleives He still is? Spong beleives Jesus was married, negates the virgin birth and the resurrection and teaches that Paul's thorn in the flesh was his homosexuality.

I am not slandering Laurie. I think she is a pastor who beleives the Gospel needs to change with the times. Would you worship a God who is less than perfect- one who needs to change?

I must say that you folks who have done nothing but hate and criticize Rev. Valentine did everything Satan told you to do!! It seems you missed the part in the Bible where Jesus says the greatest commandments are to Love God and to Love one another?!?!?!

Also, to those of you who detest the idea of "secularization," perhaps you should move to Iran and Iraq where there is a stronger sentiment to keep religious scriptures in the laws and in the courts. Afterall, that is one of the driving forces behind terrorism today, the idea that secularization is evil and that power should be in the hands of the religious leaders. If you don't believe this as a fact, perhaps you should open more books and watch less Fox news shows!!!