Pete

I think that is a good point. Most faiths focus on both life and death (IMO). Also I understand Buddhism (a largely atheist faith) and its teachings of karma, also has teachings on life and death, and many do not believe in just the one life. I understand that atheists are often treated badly by some people who seem to think they have no right to exist (IMO), but not by all theists. I guess like the theists, no two atheists are alike.

Thanks Murph

------------------------------------------------------------- Actually Cool, it is. "Quaker faith and Practice" is a book that is supposed to help people understand the experiences of some quaker members. It is not scripture or a set of rules or a creed. If one reads it and they feel inspired then all well and good but if they do not then also all well and good too. I know one of the criticisms people throw at quakers is that they substitute the "Quaker Faith and Practice" for the Bible but that is only a thought held by those who have no real experience of its use in a quaker meeting (IMO). In most quaker meetings there are a number of books present for people to use (if they want) during the meeting. In our meeting, the Bible is also one of the books. Back to your original question. I would have to say no. Quakers often say that they believe there is that of God within everyone and the meetings are designed to have a shared experience of that of God. There is no ministers and everyone has an equal status. I find the experience of the meeting very moving and it is that which has led me to recognise that no one faith has the handle on the whole of the God experience. We have members from a cross section of beliefs and that does include atheists too. Members are very loving in my experience and their faith is very deep. As for your comment about Quakers being afraid of intimacy, I find that incredible. I find the meeting touches people at a very deep level and people of all persautions sharing their experiences together and finding unity with each other an amazing thing. It is odd but I have wondered whether fundamentalists often have a fear of intimacy in that they need a prescribed set of beliefs and code of conduct in order to meet each other. How the other half sees each other eh!

That was a question I was attempting to ask earlier. I can see that some are brought to God via the Bible and some I believe by other things and writings but I feel that the main thing that is important to me is not the scripture they read but the affect it has upon the persons life and their experience of that of God. I have no problem feeling I share a common faith with other faiths and Christianity alike, because I feel they are inspired by the same God (which we all have a problem fully defining). I have met many Christians on the street who get almost livid with me because I do not see things as they do and I also have had some pretty nasty experiences from church organisations ( Elim (AOG) being one of them) I used to belong. I just wonder, has there been a change in the AOG's stance or do they feel I have gone astray or something? I ask this because Elim AOG in my experience used to be pretty narrow about how they see other religious groups and what they feel constitutes a Christian.

Yep! My spelling is getting worse. I am working nights at the moment and I hope you can forgive my lack of function. I need more coffee!

I understand that Quakers in the US are sometimes different from those in the UK. Most UK Quakers are very Liberal in their outlook and although I see things differently at times, nothing has ever happened to me. There is also a broad spectrum of beliefs present in the meetings that I have attended. However, I have heard that some Quaker meetings in the US can be very fundamentalist/conservative. This is one of the reasons I only mentioned the UK meetings. I could of mentioned the Universal Unitarians, but I am not fully sure of where they stand on things in the UK and the US. Perhaps another colleague can help me on that?

I do not feel isolated by the experience of being different to fundamentalism and I would not say your not fully Christian just because a person is fundamentalist. I wonder if you can recognise me and others as fully Christian too (without qualification from that fundamentalism)?

Although I am not an Atheist, I have little doubt that Atheism does not prevent anyone from being inspired by the spiritual.

I do not feel I can agree with you there Cool. I am not saying that a person cannot experience God by believing in the Bible as inerrant, but I do believe it often comes down to a hearding instinct. Shall we say a safety in numbers and a fear of making ones own path. I mean how many would arrive at what they believe without a fundamentalist church pushing it at them and how many would feel free to stand up in that church and say they disagree with something. Remember I once sat on your side of the fence and found the experience very painful when I challenged something. Now, I think they just did me a great favour. Maybe Fawzo and myself can ask you if you can understand what it is to have faith and be outside fundamentalist principles, and still feel loved by God?

Most of those below do not share a given creed or a fixed set of beliefs. They would describe themselves as having a common diversity that they believe existed from the earliest forms of Christianity. Most individuals from the list do not believe that the Bible is inerrent and that there is only one way to God. They usually do rely more on ones personal experience with their faith, rather than insisting on a given set of beliefs. Personal note:- Although I am more involved with both the Quakers and the Liberal Christian movements, I do not deny the experience of others with differing beliefs to my own. For me the disciples were diverse in their experience and so is Christianity. I also believe God is at work in more than one religion. I do not believe anyone can describe God in a way that is clear to all or can be agree upon. Must of how we see God will depend upon ones personal experience. However, that does not deny that God exists (IMO). Religious Society of Friends (Quaker) UK. I believe .......................................... (please fill in the gaps with your personal view) Quakers share a way of life, not a set of beliefs. We base our faith on silent worship, and our own experiences of the divine. http://www.quaker.org.uk/ Liberal Christians Liberal Christianity, broadly speaking, is a method of biblical hermeneutics, an individualistic method of understanding God through the use of scripture by applying the same modern hermeneutics used to understand any ancient writings. Liberal Christianity does not claim to be a belief structure, and as such is not dependent upon any Church dogma or creedal statements. Unlike conservative varieties of Christianity, it has no unified set of propositional beliefs. The word liberal in liberal Christianity denotes a characteristic willingness to interpret scripture without any preconceived notion of inerrancy of scripture or the correctness of Church dogma.[2] A liberal Christian, however, may hold certain beliefs in common with traditional, orthodox, or even conservative Christianity. http://en.wikipedia....al_Christianity Progressive Christians Holding to the ideals of Progressive Christianity sets the movement apart from other forms of traditional Christianity. Many, if not most, Progressive Christians believe that the Bible is not the literal word of God. While all Progressive Christians recognize Jesus Christ, some view him not as the only way to God, but one of many ways, continuing the Christian modernist paradigm. Inclusiveness and acceptance is the basic posture of Progressive Christianity.[3] Progressive Christians tend to focus on issues of social justice, rather than proselytizing efforts to convert others, as conservatives and mainstream Evangelicals tend to emphasize. http://en.wikipedia....ve_Christianity Gnostic Christians May or may not fall into liberal/Progressive camps. They generally draw on information found in the Gnostic Gospels and other sources that have come to light. See:- http://www.religious...rg/gnostic2.htm

I agree. The Popes have a lot to answer for (IMO). So many differing Christianities were put to the knife and some popes had little faith themselves and were more interested in power than Christianity. As this following quote shows (IMO):- "This myth of Jesus has served us well!" Pope Leo X

Just the first two chapters explains his difference (his argument with Peter and his early learning taking place away from those who knew Jesus first hand). However, I do love some parts that point out that Paul felt there is no difference between men and women in Christ (Galatians 3:28). Shame he ruined this statement in other writings (1 Corinthians 14:34), & (1 Timothy 2:12).

The only mention of Mithra was inrelation to the celebrations on the 25th of December. The clips portray the development of the gospels in relationship to the histrical events of the time. It gives weight to many of the things I have believed for some time now. Such as:- Paul was at odds with the disciples that knew Jesus. No one who had met Jesus, wrote any of the Gospels in the Bible. There was diversity both within Judaism and the early Christians. Roman bloodshed was the force that made them both to become narrow in what they believed and brought about the eventual split. Stories like Jesus' opposition to the Pharisees was unlikely to have happened as the Pharisees were a small group of little significance during the time of Jesus. The Pharisees came into their own after the slaughter and the invasions of Jerusalem by Rome. They (the Pharisees) were the main opposition to the Christians and therefore the Gospel teller invented an opposition section between Jesus and the Pharisees. There are many more things discussed and I can only recommend seeing for ones self. It also gives weight to the Gnostics, Orthrodox, Fundamentalists, and Judeo Christians as having roots from the very beginning Of Christianity. So, it appears to me, that true Christianity was and is diverse. Paul was just one voice and it just so happens his writtings remained longer in circulatrion (again more to do with the power of Rome than their acceptance at the time or by Jesus' disciples).

I found a four hour history of christianity told by a number of theological historians. You need adobe flash player to view it. I was not sure where to put this on the forum but having seen all the clips I feel it fits well with the forum title. It tells of the diversity of early Christianity and Judaism and how they were both changed by adversity. I found it interesting. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/watch/?utm_campaign=viewpage&utm_medium=grid&utm_source=grid

Thank you too.

I found this article by an ex nun. Sounds good to me. What do you think? :- http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertai...im-1073217.html

Thanks Blackthorn. I believe in God but not in the sense that is expressed in the Bible but in the sense of the spiritual. I would agree that God created material but that would in my opinion be only a minimal part of what I believe to be God. I believe there is that which we see but also that which we do not in the spiritual realm. God for me is the source of both. In the material world we can always find other reasons to justify things. For example The genetical code of DNA can be described as a random event that took millions of years before it wrote the formulae for us. Darwin pointed out that evolution is driven by a competition for survival but it can also be noted that with evolving we have become not only advanced in the race for life in a material sense but also we have begun to turn to that which is the spiritual. I believe God is the spiritual force behind both the creation of the material and also the spiritual. I have found no better way to describe our existence and relationship to God then what one lady described in her near death experience. She saw a light and people in spiritual form standing in front of the light. The light appeared to feed and enrich all. She ask if the light was God and she was told no. She was told it is just the breath of God. That is how I see the experiece we have to both the spiritual and sometimes in the material world. We are all standing in the breath of God (IMO).

Question. Would a loving God ever reject people who love?

My thoughts and prayers are with you at this time. We all owe so much to all the Hensley family. I am so sorry to hear your news. Pete..

Just read a book by Robert Vande Weyer called 'The Call to Heresy' Lamp press, London. Talks about the formation of Christian belief. It was not a simple process or one in which everyone agreed upon. It draws from the differences seen by the disciples, Rome empire, pagan influences and the gnostic's. A very revealing book that leaves one realising just how close we really are to other religions. Sssss! don't tell the fundamentalists. The view that beliefs we hold today always existed is portrayed as in error when looked at from a historic view point. Lovely read.