What's your opinion on Liberal Religion?

[Belacqua]

What about the part about having urges towards a married woman being just as bad as committing adultery? That's emphasis on internal desires and urges... and not just emphasis... equating it with actually behaving in a given way. That verse has always bothered me. Like, you can't control spontaneous urges. Nor should one be faulted for them.

Hmmm... I hadn't thought of this as metaphysical at all. Though it's an interesting psychological and ethical question. 

I think traditionally -- in a way that's unfair to Jews -- the idea is that Jewish practice was legalistic, and that as long as you outwardly follow the letter of the law you're fine. It makes sense to me that a change of heart, while far more difficult, is also a superior goal. 

And of course all these are goals, and recognized to be beyond the reach of most. That's what grace is all about. Then I suppose we might even distinguish between spontaneous urges and those desires we mentally encourage. This becomes almost Zen-like -- if you watch the thought come and go through your mind, you're not responsible for the thought. If you attach yourself to the thought, that's a different level. 

But all of that is just me pondering -- I don't know what the experts have said on the issue. 

I do remember years ago learning about mirror neurons, and saying (to the annoyance of the doctor I was translating for) "This shows Jesus was right! Action and thought are the same!" 

Also, maybe @Neo-Scholastic can fill me in on this query, since he's the de facto resident scholar on the topic: doesn't the Bible seemingly endorse hylomorphism? I'm largely ignorant of where and how it does this, but some philosophers think it does. And I even remember some televangelist saying things about the resurrection being a "bodily resurrection." Is this actually in the Bible or is this more theology from Augustine or something?

The only instance of hylomorphism in the Bible that I can think of is when Paul talks about resurrection. He doesn't say, significantly, that we will be disembodied souls, but that we will be given a new body of a different kind. Dante emphasizes this, too. 

All kinds of sin, including urges towards ones neighbor, are misdirections of love. Purification of the soul is learning to aim one's love to the proper end, which is really our best end, in our own best interest. I'm guessing that a post-resurrection body would make this easier, but the real work is done in the soul. 

I really regret using the term liberal, as it is a somewhat relative and somewhat loaded term. [...] I'm seriously impressed by the Quakers.

I think "liberal" is as good a term as any. It's in wide use, and any good discussion will demand a definition of terms anyway. 

There is a fascinating history of non-conformist and antinomian sects in England, of which the Quakers are the best known. These started in secret, put their heads up during Cromwell's reign, and then went underground again. They stayed quiet and didn't evangelize, and, as part of their structure had no hierarchy or official administration, which makes them hard to research. 

William Blake appears to have been raised Muggletonian, and many of his ideas about the necessity of personal expression in religion appear to come from them, but little is known of that group -- as they wanted it. 

Again, Christianity includes more than its detractors usually acknowledge.

Also (to the broader subtopic that has emerged in this thread) I wonder if "Anti-literalist" (or liberal) religion isn't a way for some folks to contemplate the deeper realities of life. I mean, personally, I like the logical rigor of philosophy. But that's not everyone's cup of tea. There are large numbers of people who may prefer to examine things like human suffering or justice through a religious lens. Again, I only think the literalists are dangerous when they do this. Symbols like "Christ," "Samsara" or even "Satan" allow us a vantagepoint to contemplate the deeper things.

Plato knew this. Logical rigor is necessary but limited. Aporia are inevitable. Myth is required for deep understanding and wisdom.

I'm also kind of curious about your Zen Buddhist experience, as another poster was. It's cool if you'd rather not share, but I am awfully curious...

I was not very good at it. I don't mean to be secretive about it, but I'm not sure there's much to say. The place was beautiful, the food was great, the goals were admirable. I learned some things about myself, most of them bad.