(July 2, 2015 at 2:21 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:Oh my, and here I thought it was only xtians who liked showing up here and insisting we abide by their definition of what we claim to believe. She is suggesting an intelligent, allegorical reading of the bible. Nothing wrong with that as far as I'm concerned. If it were possible for more xtians raised in stupid, literal traditions to move in her direction I would count it as a win for everyone. Gawd knows there are many, many more fundies than intelligent xtians. This is a good thing, not a categorical mistake.(July 2, 2015 at 2:02 pm)cercatorius Wrote: I think that there is a broad spectrum. I'm rather in the process of deconstructing right now, to be honest. At the moment, I'm neck deep in Rene Girard's theories on mimetic theory and reevaluating my beliefs in that context. I very much enjoy his ideas on violence and sacrifice and their place in religion. I believe Jesus to have been someone who was more fully in touch with his own humanity than I am. His teachings offer a good guideline for me to step out of rivalry with others and hopefully evolve in my treatment of others, and also myself.
This borders on the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but unless there's something in there about believing that Jehovah is the one true god (that actually exists) and that Jesus is his son (that actually existed), "progressive christianity" doesn't sound like it's actually christianity by definition.
Anyway, I don't hear her suggesting that there would be any advantage to us as atheists in adopting her views. I'm not tempted but I count her as a peer and a well developed person.
