Greetings from a returnee

[mitchellmckain]

It has been so long I don't even remember this place. Could be that it was completely made over or that my previous involvement was brief.

I wasn't raised Christian and I was pretty much a self-starter. I have bought no package deals but made my own decisions on theological issues. Furthermore you could say I have layers and my position is more a result of a process of evolving thought rather than revolution/conversion. Thus my Christianity has its roots in existentialism and beneath that is modern science (and I am a physicist by education) and beneath that is a psychology based rationalism (both parents were psychology majors). Pragmatism and Aristotle also had some significant contributions to my way of thinking.

Theologically you can classify me as a liberal evangelical Trinitarian open theist, not universalist, with very little interest in eschatology, and who favors more of an Eastern Orthodox position on the atonement and original sin. I believe in a God of love and feel that much of Christianity has been distorted by a human obsession with power and control. I believe that the Bible is the word of God; but this does not mean inerrant, infallible, self-interpreting, or that the Bible has all the truth, or something being in the Bible is sufficient proof that something is true. What this word of God business means to me is rather...
1. God is the author using human authors, history, nations and kings as His writing instruments.
2. God has all the proprietary rights of an author and nobody should be rewriting it as they like. It says precisely what God wants it to say for whatever reason (according to what He thinks is important) and nobody should presume to think they can say it better -- even and maybe especially to eliminate ambiguities (for like many good authors, God may intend for things to be understood in different ways by different people).
3. This does not just mean that it is inspired by God for I think the inspiration of God rains down upon us in a torrent and is not confined to the Bible.
4. By the words of Jesus, God gives authority to scripture for Christianity and it is to this written word alone which God gives authority. Any authority given to leaders and other writings is given by human beings, which is not to say that God does not play some role in these outcomes, but only that it is a human authority and not a divine authority which is given them.

I defend both Christianity and atheism as rational, which means I don't think any proof for God's existence has any objective validity. Objective proof and evidence comes from the laws of nature, which spiritual things are outside of and indeed I see this as pretty much the whole point of believing in spiritual things -- that the mathematical laws of the universe are not the limit of reality. But this means belief (or disbelief) in them is a choice for subjective only. I do not think a belief in God is of universal benefit to all people, and thus I have no need to push theism or Christianity on others. I reject the gospel of Gnostic legalism (salvation by approved doctrine) and although I will defend my position on theological issues (cause I do think I am right), I don't think they have any bearing whatsoever on salvation.

Besides defending the rationality of atheism and Christianity, I push the following components of rationality itself.
1. logical coherence. (required for a belief to be meaningful)
2. consistency with the objective/scientific evidence. (required for a belief to be reasonable)
3. compatibility with the ideals of a free society. (required for moral belief in the kind of society I will fight to defend)

 

[Tambora]

Howdy do.

 

[patrick jane]

You live in Salt Lake City and you're not a Mormon?

 

[mitchellmckain]

You live in Salt Lake City and you're not a Mormon?

No and I don't see how they can be called Christian, not by a definition that would exclude muslims. I don't see that as have anything other than a semantic significance, however. It is just a matter of classifying different world religions. I see the Nicene creed as the oldest and largest consensus by believers on the meaning of the word. But I would consider any identification of the word with being good or being saved to be very wrong.

Salt Lake where I was born is less than 40% Mormon. My mother's family is from the non-Mormon population of the coal mining towns east of Salt Lake. I think you mostly find Catholicism in my genealogical roots but no Mormonism.

Of course, I am quite familiar with the LDS beliefs and practice. This is difficult to avoid when you grow up here. My personal impression from reading the Book of Mormon is that the person given the name Jesus described in that book does not have the same personality as the one in the Bible. My impression of the people was that there are very different kinds of Mormons. Some are quite decent people while others are obnoxious and intolerant.

My best friends growing up here have been Mormons. Though I also know a few ex-Mormons who have nothing but criticism and antipathy having grown up in the less tolerant sector of the religion found in this region. The difference between the LDS here and those elsewhere is quite significant in that regard.