Relda

"the homeless are housed, the poor are clothed and fed, the mentally ill are cared for, young mothers are supported, prisoners are visited, and refugees are welcomed..." and you could add, homeless animals sheltered and the environment maintained.

None of the above is politically incorrect, it is the decent and humane thing to do. It is civilised. What it is not is the exclusive preserve of any one religion, but common to all caring people irrespective of creed.

RELDA: You said "At St Mary’s, the homeless are housed, the poor are clothed and fed, the mentally ill are cared for, young mothers are supported, prisoners are visited, and refugees are welcomed – all ... generally politically incorrect."

Well and good. But the Salvation Army does that and more, both in church and in its extensive social ministry, reflecting James 1:22 :"Do not merely listen to the word .. Do what it says" and 2:17: "..Faith itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead."

The Salvation Army demonstrates practical, altruistic Christianity *without* compromising on the essentials of orthodox-evangelical doctrine. I don't think anyone who's been to a Salvation Army service would consider them politically correct.

You say "The Trinity ... is hardly supported by anything more than hypothesis and doubtful logic." I don't agree. John 14:7-11 is one of several references that point strongly toward the Trinity. But all this is peripheral. What matters is whether you believe in Jesus, accept his sacrifice and seek personal transformation by him.

You say "if we will become just like him and bear his image when we are raised (literally) from the dead, then we will also (literally) be "God"" . That sounds like the wilderness of New Age and Gnosticism to me - Shirley Maclaine and all the "you are god" stuff. It's a sophistry and a distortion. I don't see that in the text.

Incidentally, the Wesleyan Quadrilateral doesn't actually *require* us to do anything. It is a descriptive encapsulation of the main sources of doctrine drawn on by John Wesley in compiling his theology.

Your posting to Sells talked about the "core struggle for a contemporary Christian". I see a contemporary Christian as someone who believes that the message of Jesus is just as valid and relevant today as it ever was; who wants to live by the teachings of Jesus despite the overwhelming tendency in contemporary culture to negate them; and who seeks out opportunities to spread the message of Jesus in today's world, even though this means being counter-cultural.

Fractelle,
“...it is the decent and humane thing to do. It is civilized..” True, and from where do these roots and feeling for and of “civilization” arise (as perhaps the ‘barbarians’ knock upon our door)?. . . Politicians perhaps used to decide, or at least believed they did but now it seems, they merely grope. Governing is now unquestionably more difficult. The ideals, as expressed in your opening sentence, appear increasingly beyond the achievement of any current government – i.e., it smells of a utopia beyond all of our 'dreamtime'.

Blandness exists amongst a ‘caring’ people for whom civilization has lost its religious root. Maybe there is a feebleness in the expression of the idea of God within the Anglo-Saxon language, but nevertheless, a universality exists. Perhaps unseemingly so but Christianity (taken in all of its forms) has been polycentric - almost from its very inception. Western or non-Western literature is a useful resource for revealing a multi-faceted nature of this ‘spirituality’. The West African lexicon of Fanti (Akan) “Wana so onyi Nyami se? Dasayi wo ho inde, okina na onyi, Nyami firi tsitsi kaisi odumankuma”, meaning:
Who says he is equal with God?
Man is to-day, tomorrow he is not,
I am is from eternity to eternity.
The Hebrew ‘I am hath sent me,’ is not a fanciful play on roots, for these Africans continue singing these words today.

Glorfindel,
I’ve no problem at all with the ‘Salvos’.

The philosophy espoused by Shirley McLean is indeed quite peripheral – in the final analysis, it really is just all about her, as with much of the 'New Age' superficiality.

Re-read my post. I didn’t just say, "if we will become just like him and bear his image...etc.” but instead, indicated the absurdity of taking the Trinitarian formula too literally. It is a primitive form of poetry and therefore defies logic, as with most poetry. And yes, the message of Jesus is “just as relevant today as it ever was” – it is just that I read him a little differently to you.

Relda

Long before religion and politicians, there were people living and cooperating together, sometimes successfully and sometimes not. But those that succeeded, were more likely to ensure that all members of the community were kept safe and cared for.

Formal religion as we know it today is very recent in terms of human history and evolution. Even now scientists are discovering more about the culture of Neanderthals who are found to be more thoughtful and intelligent than first surmised.

I see care and love in other animals too. Years ago, my dog protected me from the threat by two men while out camping. We hear stories all the time about animals aiding others not even of their own species.

I am sure we have much more to learn about the universe around us, if 'bad' or 'evil' teaches us anything it is to value the good and wholesome. I and many people like me do not need a god to be humane.

I do understand what you mean by 'politically incorrect' to strive for a cooperative caring community, I've been called a 'bleeding heart' many times. If religion helps some people to be more considerate of others, then that is a good, however it is not the only way. Religious people cast aspersions on agnostics and atheists at their own loss.

<< The philosophy espoused by Shirley McLean is indeed quite peripheral – in the final analysis, it really is just all about her, as with much of the 'New Age' superficiality. >>

Spiritual masturbation.

Christians (and Muslims and Jews) are every bit as ego-driven, narcissistic and superficial as the most cliched new-age hippy.

When modern spiritualists get self-righteous and sermonise on the evil ways of nonbelievers, that's branded self-serving. But when Christians do exactly the same, and with a substantially greater amount of ignorance, they dress it up as humble service to the Lord.

Religion meets the ego needs of the faithful. That is all, and that's how it survives.

"Christians (and Muslims and Jews) are every bit as ego-driven, narcissistic and superficial as the most cliched new-age hippy." _ Sancho

Good point. Last night on the National Geographic channel it was put the Christians invented Pilate washing his hands to differentiate the Christians from the orthodox Jews. Herein, placing the blame for the crucifixation on the Jews, rather than the Romans. In the first decades post-Nicaea, the Christians were every bit as good at persecuting non-Christians, as Nero was persecuting them. Seems as-much-to-do about politics as to do with theology.

Jesus as a teacher from the House of David would have ministered to the godfearers, Judaised Gentiles. After his death, the fall of the Second Temple and the appointed of Latin Pope post Hadrian's excile of the Jews, the underdog Jewish faction became dominant over the mother religion. Egos were supported by a revision of history in 80-120 CE and doctinaire instutionalisation in 325 CE.