Gimme That Old Time Religion

[questionfear]

Since some asked, My religious background is as follows. I was raised Catholic but was never comfortable as one. I spent by early adult life studying with various Christian denominations, Baptists, JW"S and Lutherans, to start with.  But I had always felt a pull towards Judaism. I began the conversion process in 1999. I spent more than a year studying for conversion. I was taught by Hasidic, Orthodox, Reform and Conservative Jews. I converted officially via reform Judaism. Over the years, though , I have determined that while I do feel inherently tied to Judaism, I do not believe in God. That was a pretty difficult realization to come to, but I am OK with it.  I'm not alone, though. I know more than a few Jews who do not believe in God. 

 I know that is hard to understand from a Christian perspective, that I still consider myself Jewish despite not believing in God. But Judaism is about actions, not beliefs. A good Jews is one who performs mitzvahs, and Tzedakah, and is engaged in Tikkun Olam (Repairing the world). One is not a good Jew for believing the right thing. It's what you DO that matters.

That's awesome, thanks for sharing your story!

 

I grew up jewish (reform), so for me christianity is just super confusing. You've articulated really well what I love about being jewish, that it's about tikkun olam, not whether you're keeping kosher specifically, or observing shabbat. I know reform jews who keep kosher, and conservative ones who don't. And I always had rabbis in school who were very supportive of me questioning the nature of god and fate and such...I think my jewish education was a big part of why I was so drawn to majoring in philosophy in college. 

 

I also always feel so lucky that I was so involved in judaism, especially in high school, because I started coming out as a lesbian when I was around 15. My public school was useless when it came to any sort of GLBT education, let alone support, but the regional youth group almost always had GLBT issues as a discussion point/support group, especially on retreats. It got to the point where I was only out at youth group stuff, because I was safe and protected there, and I knew that the rabbis and teachers were incredibly supportive, and so were all my friends. Reform Judaism gave me a safe space when I needed it, and a moral center to help me understand the world, and to me that's what religion should be-someplace that supports and embraces you, and gives you the tools and education to actually be better and make the world better, not just yap about it endlessly.

[galax-arena]

One is not a good Jew for believing the right thing. It's what you DO that matters.

There are a lot of Christians who use Ephesians 2:8-9 ("For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God - not the result of works, so that no one may boast.") as a release from that sort of social obligation, even though James 2:14-16 states, "What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but do not have works? Can faith save you? If a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill," and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is the good of that?" But there are some denominations that emphasize working towards social justice, e.g. the United Church of Christ, although they can vary from church to church.

[JennyMominFL]

There are a lot of Christians who use Ephesians 2:8-9 ("For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God - not the result of works, so that no one may boast.") as a release from that sort of social obligation, even though James 2:14-16 states, "What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but do not have works? Can faith save you? If a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill," and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is the good of that?" But there are some denominations that emphasize working towards social justice, e.g. the United Church of Christ, although they can vary from church to church.

Yes, Please don't take me wrong. I'm certainly not saying that most Christians don't view good works as important. Many certainly do. There are millions of Christians out there every day doing good deeds. I'm only speaking of it in the sense of defining someone within their religion. I'm merely pointing out the inportance in Judaism on actions, rather than on  beliefs.

  There is that old  quote, which I am screwing up, but it's something like, Ask 3 Jews a question, get 3 answers.  There is a lot of wiggle room in Judaism when it comes to theology.

[MarysWetBar]

Yes, Please don't take me wrong. I'm certainly not saying that most Christians don't view good works as important. Many certainly do. There are millions of Christians out there every day doing good deeds. I'm only speaking of it in the sense of defining someone within their religion. I'm merely pointing out the inportance in Judaism on actions, rather than on beliefs.

There is that old quote, which I am screwing up, but it's something like, Ask 3 Jews a question, get 3 answers. There is a lot of wiggle room in Judaism when it comes to theology.

Thanks much for taking the time to explain that to me. I really appreciate it! Judaism: 1, Fundies:0.

[galax-arena]

 There is a lot of wiggle room in Judaism when it comes to theology.

That's true for Christianity as well; it's just that we don't hear much about it because certain denominations (ahem, lookin' at you, SBC) are so vocal and make people think that they speak for all Christians. Heck, for ages I didn't even realize that progressive Christianity was a thing. And what, you mean to tell me that there are Christians out there who don't think the Bible should be interpreted literally?? For the longest time I also thought that being gay and being Christian were mutually exclusive because that was what I had been told. It blew my mind when I discovered the existence of gaychristian.net and lgbt-affirming denominations.

 

Of course, groups like the SBC look upon more progressive denominations as not being really Christian. Is that true for Judaism? e.g. What do Hasidic Jews think of Reform Jews? I mean, Quiverfull types like the Duggars and sites like the Gospel Coalition think that people in the United Church of Christ aren't Christians at all. IIRC, Obama is affiliated with the UCC, and to some people he's quite literally the antichrist.

Edited January 12, 2016 by galax-arena

[JennyMominFL]

That's true for Christianity as well; it's just that we don't hear much about it because certain denominations (ahem, lookin' at you, SBC) are so vocal and make people think that they speak for all Christians. Heck, for ages I didn't even realize that progressive Christianity was a thing. And what, you mean to tell me that there are Christians out there who don't think the Bible should be interpreted literally??

 

Of course, groups like the SBC look upon more progressive denominations as not being really Christian. Is that true for Judaism? e.g. What do Hasidic Jews think of Reform Jews? I mean, Quiverfull types like the Duggars and sites like the Gospel Coalition think that people in the United Church of Christ aren't Christians at all. IIRC, Obama is affiliated with the UCC, and to some people he's quite literally the antichrist.

I would say that there is less division between Jewish movements than with Christian denominations. But of course I am generalizing and there are exceptions.

 Hasidic Jews believe Reform Jews are Jews.  The only place where there can be some question is with Conversion. An Orthodox Jew may not view my Reform conversion as legitimate. I've not experienced that and have been warmly accepted by the Orthodox and Hasidic Jews I have met, and as I said, Orthodox and Hasidic Jews taught me in my Pathways to Judaism, conversion classes.

    When I studied with JW's and Baptists they certainly had no issues with telling me my Catholic upbringing was not a Christian one.

Edited January 12, 2016 by JennyMominFL

[JennyMominFL]

I should add to, that an element of that acceptance as a Jew comes via birthright. A Jew is Jewish if they had a Jewish mother, so an Orthodox Jew would view a Reform Jew  as a Jew if they had a Jewish mother.

 Now, conversely, Jewish lineage comes via the paternal line.

Edited January 12, 2016 by JennyMominFL

[NewDigs]

Presbyterian here. Lapsed, if is there is such a thing. Parents had us in so many church activities that, for me, were more social than religious. Never really felt the pull.

But I think the Golden Rule is pretty great. And the 10 Commandents tie up some loose ends.

Shame there aren't more ethics and morality lessons in education available w/o a religious context.

[JennyMominFL]

The Talmud tells a story of Rabbi Hillel, who lived around the time of Jesus. A pagan came to him saying that he would convert to Judaism if Hillel could teach him the whole of the Torah in the time he could stand on one foot. Rabbi Hillel replied, "What is hateful to yourself, do not do to your fellow man. That is the whole Torah; the rest is just commentary.

 

 That's how religion should work.   That's the Golden Rule, Jewish style.. One form or another of the rule has existed in almost all societies and religions. Too bad we aren't so good at following it. The Duggars included.

[Henri205]

Presbyterian here. Lapsed, if is there is such a thing. Parents had us in so many church activities that, for me, were more social than religious. Never really felt the pull.

But I think the Golden Rule is pretty great. And the 10 Commandents tie up some loose ends.

Shame there aren't more ethics and morality lessons in education available w/o a religious context.

You make a good point about ethics and teaching of same. I attended a Jesuit university (I know but the Jesuits really pushed us to think, not conform) and we were required to take two semesters of theology. THAT stuck in my craw, especially as I was just coming to accept the fact I'm gay, but I took my semesters studying Greek Orthodox ethics, just one class among dozens.

It was fascinating, and the professor did NOT push his religion's views, just explained the viewpoint and we were encouraged to push back to him, ask questions, some of the workshops were great. It would be beneficial to expose younger people to courses like that. Ya know, let's examine a problem or a question, and discuss different approaches to dealing or understanding. All the while using our critical a thinking abilities. Oh wait.......

I may have gotten way off topic here as I think I tend to, if so move as needed.

Might happen in the northeast or the west coast, but never in Jesus land. Too bad really.

[latetotheparty]

You make a good point about ethics and teaching of same. I attended a Jesuit university (I know but the Jesuits really pushed us to think, not conform) and we were required to take two semesters of theology. THAT stuck in my craw, especially as I was just coming to accept the fact I'm gay, but I took my semesters studying Greek Orthodox ethics, just one class among dozens.

It was fascinating, and the professor did NOT push his religion's views, just explained the viewpoint and we were encouraged to push back to him, ask questions, some of the workshops were great. It would be beneficial to expose younger people to courses like that. Ya know, let's examine a problem or a question, and discuss different approaches to dealing or understanding. All the while using our critical a thinking abilities. Oh wait.......

I may have gotten way off topic here as I think I tend to, if so move as needed.

Might happen in the northeast or the west coast, but never in Jesus land. Too bad really.

 

Or the North Coast.  (Lake Superior is so a coast)

[JocelynCavanaugh]

I was raised Southern Baptist, although I wouldn't consider my upbringing "fundie" (that term rubs me the wrong way, anyway). I'm still Protestant although more toward the Presbyterian way of thinking. My family was involved in evangelical churches and activities my whole life, and several family members and close friends are in ministry careers. My own career is academic (I'm a professor), so I have some experience in very opposite worlds.

[JennyMominFL]

I was raised Southern Baptist, although I wouldn't consider my upbringing "fundie" (that term rubs me the wrong way, anyway). I'm still Protestant although more toward the Presbyterian way of thinking. My family was involved in evangelical churches and activities my whole life, and several family members and close friends are in ministry careers. My own career is academic (I'm a professor), so I have some experience in very opposite worlds.

I would call the Baptists I belonged to Fundies, but they were Independent Fundamental Baptists.. To me there is also a difference between Evangelical and Fundamentalist

[Henri205]

Or the North Coast.  (Lake Superior is so a coast)

Maybe its proximity to water. I grew up in New England and spent years in California. People in both places are just more receptive IMHO. Back in New England now and it feels like civilization LOL.

[JenCarroll]

I believe Judaism doesn't have a hell, and the rest of the Jewish afterlife is largely undefined, I'm not Jewish though. Best to ask JenCarroll.

There's supposed to be a "world to come" once the Messiah arrives, but I've never heard anyone describe it.

But -- and this is a key point -- you don't have to be Jewish to have a place there.

[JenCarroll]

Yes, Please don't take me wrong. I'm certainly not saying that most Christians don't view good works as important. Many certainly do. There are millions of Christians out there every day doing good deeds. I'm only speaking of it in the sense of defining someone within their religion. I'm merely pointing out the inportance in Judaism on actions, rather than on  beliefs.

  There is that old  quote, which I am screwing up, but it's something like, Ask 3 Jews a question, get 3 answers.  There is a lot of wiggle room in Judaism when it comes to theology.

Oh please. You'd get nine answers, minimum. :-)

[GeeGolly]

The Talmud tells a story of Rabbi Hillel, who lived around the time of Jesus. A pagan came to him saying that he would convert to Judaism if Hillel could teach him the whole of the Torah in the time he could stand on one foot. Rabbi Hillel replied, "What is hateful to yourself, do not do to your fellow man. That is the whole Torah; the rest is just commentary.

 

 That's how religion should work.   That's the Golden Rule, Jewish style.. One form or another of the rule has existed in almost all societies and religions. Too bad we aren't so good at following it. The Duggars included.

This comment makes me wonder how some people I know call themselves a certain religion then go on to explain that they don't believe in parts of said religion. For example, a Catholic that is pro choice and believes in equal rights for the LGBT community. Doesn't that make them no longer Catholic? Isn't the "commentary" what makes each religion separate and defined?

[JennyMominFL]

This comment makes me wonder how some people I know call themselves a certain religion then go on to explain that they don't believe in parts of said religion. For example, a Catholic that is pro choice and believes in equal rights for the LGBT community. Doesn't that make them no longer Catholic? Isn't the "commentary" what makes each religion separate and defined?

ITs harder if your religion is belief based yes. ON the other hand, if a religion, like Judaism believes that the "commentary" is meant only for Jews, they aren't out there trying to stop others who wish to do those things.. ITs why you don't see Jews holding God Hates Prawns signs... Jewish  Law is for Jews and there is no need to force beliefs on other

Edited January 13, 2016 by JennyMominFL

[Churchhoney]

This comment makes me wonder how some people I know call themselves a certain religion then go on to explain that they don't believe in parts of said religion. For example, a Catholic that is pro choice and believes in equal rights for the LGBT community. Doesn't that make them no longer Catholic? Isn't the "commentary" what makes each religion separate and defined?

 

Well, according to those who think theologically it does. But most of humanity doesn't think theologically, I don't believe. We think culturally -- in terms of all the flavors and traditions and practices and feelings we pick up when we're in a group that has some common core, be it a place where we live, a socioeconomic milieu, or a religion.

 

You can easily stop believing in Catholic theology, for example, while still retaining all the marks -- and even the love -- of whatever Catholic culture it was that you were (or are) part of.

 

Honestly, I think that most modern people are far more  "culturally Catholic" -- or Presbyterian, or Jewish or Muslim or Lutheran -- than they are "theologically" those things That certainly goes for the people who acknowledge they've dropped the tenets of their former faith. But I'd include in it even a lot -- maybe even most -- of the people who have not dropped the "believing in the theology" part. If you go through any church or other religion group and quiz each person on their actual specific metaphysical and ethical beliefs, I'm betting you'd find many many many who presume themselves believers who actually don't believe just what the faith's actually theologians believe.

 

For many people, religions function as cultures as much as or maybe even more than nationalities do, I think.

 

(Protestantism is a little different from Catholicism in this, though. Because Protestantism was based on each person encountering God as an individual, rather than as part of the church, Protestant culture (in some places and times at least) has dealt with not believing certain things your church believed by just starting another church. That's kind of the Independent Baptist thing, really. And, of course, there's the old joke that the mere phrase "United Methodist Church" shows that the Methodists aren't united. .... And, best, there's Lake Wobegon, where Keillor notes that there were so many theological disagreements in town that all the churches are just seven people in Uncle Lars's living room (soon to be five as Aunt Katrina and Uncle Knut start their own group because of a dispute over First Ephesians.))

Edited January 13, 2016 by Churchhoney

[Vaysh]

This comment makes me wonder how some people I know call themselves a certain religion then go on to explain that they don't believe in parts of said religion. For example, a Catholic that is pro choice and believes in equal rights for the LGBT community. Doesn't that make them no longer Catholic? Isn't the "commentary" what makes each religion separate and defined?

The former State Church of Sweden is Lutheran and has been since the 16th century. It is also liberal, allows gay marriage, has female clergy and has a strong focus on social work and helping the needy. There is no preaching of hellfire and brimstone, no fundamentalism, the Bible is not considered to be literal truth even by ministers (at least the ones I've come across, I'm sure there are exceptions) and there's no denial of evolutionary theory or other such anti-science nonsense. So obviously I've always considered contemporary Lutherans to be pretty harmless and sane. But then I come on here and other places online and see non-Swedish lutherans having completely different experiences, some to the point where I would consider them fundies, and yet they all sincerely claim to belong to the same denomination as my meek little lutheran lambs.

 

From an atheist point of view this can quite confusing but I've basically had to accept that interpretation is everything and that different people will look at the same text, the same rules, the same doctrine and arrive at utterly different conclusions. I honestly think cultural mores as well as individual personalities play a bigger part in religious beliefs than what the book actually says. Which makes it very difficult for me to take the more extremely judgemental and hateful versions of any religion seriously because when I look at people screaming about hell and condemning other people to eternal torture for whatever behaviour they don't approve of (I'm looking at you Bin), all the while claiming that this is what their god wants, all I can think is that no, this is what you want.

[questionfear]

Oh please. You'd get nine answers, minimum. :-)

9 answers, a bowl of chicken soup, and a sandwich, because you look too skinny. 

[louannems]

I so agree with Churchhoney's view of church as culture. I used to love dressing my kids up each Saturday morning (Seventh Day Adventist) and taking them to their adorable Sabbath School classrooms. I had friends at church and potlucks and volunteer work at the church's free clothing bank, etc etc. But it did dawn on me that I simply was not a believer in any of it and I quit going.

[Churchhoney]

I so agree with Churchhoney's view of church as culture. I used to love dressing my kids up each Saturday morning (Seventh Day Adventist) and taking them to their adorable Sabbath School classrooms. I had friends at church and potlucks and volunteer work at the church's free clothing bank, etc etc. But it did dawn on me that I simply was not a believer in any of it and I quit going.

 

Exactly. I did pretty much the same thing. But I also know a lot of people who don't believe the stuff any more than you and I do, and yet they consciously keep going, often because they want to impart to their children the sense of a culture somewhat unified around important things, but sometimes just because they themselves enjoy the culture and consider that enough reason to stay, especially since most people don't seem to find any alternative cultures to be part of today -- and humans like being part of a culture.

[JennyMominFL]

IT's very very difficult to leave a religion that you were raised in, especially if it's one with a strong cultural component, Catholicism, Judaism, Baptist. It's a part of who you are, even if you don't believe the doctrine. It's hard just to cross denominations. It's even harder to switch religions completely, like I did, from Christianity to Judaism.

  My life would have been so much easier had I just stayed Catholic. In some ways it felt like turning my back on my entire family, and like I was repudiating my upbringing. I wanted very badly to fit in and to just believe. The bottom line was , I just couldn't. BUt some people can. They find ways to accept some things and to discard others. Maybe they are fooling themselves? Or maybe they figure the religion is right, it's just people who screw it up.

I'm 45 and I still feel some guilt about leaving.

[Absolom]

I've found very few people who agree with every tiny tenet of faith in any denomination or religion.  It could be my friends or as I believe very few people look that deeply.  They are probably more like my mother who said as long as the basics are OK it's better not to get mired in the trivia. 

[Muffyn]

There are a lot of Christians who use Ephesians 2:8-9 ("For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God - not the result of works, so that no one may boast.") as a release from that sort of social obligation, even though James 2:14-16 states, "What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but do not have works? Can faith save you? If a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill," and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is the good of that?" But there are some denominations that emphasize working towards social justice, e.g. the United Church of Christ, although they can vary from church to church.

I would like to give you Brother Johnny's (from RU, Josh's Christian "rehab") interpretation of that verse from Ephesians:  God draws you to him so you seek God but you do not seek because you are drawn, you are drawn because you seek but God seeks you whether you are drawn to him or not.  But then you seek and He draws but He always draws if you seek.  See, perfectly clear!  If you've never heard this man preach you are lucky.  He is as clear as this. 

 

This comment makes me wonder how some people I know call themselves a certain religion then go on to explain that they don't believe in parts of said religion. For example, a Catholic that is pro choice and believes in equal rights for the LGBT community. Doesn't that make them no longer Catholic? Isn't the "commentary" what makes each religion separate and defined?

I absolutely agree with the idea of cultural catholics and members of other religious faiths, especially where religion is vital in the local community.  Churches can offer strong ties to the community.  At the same time, my aunt works for a catholic shrine and is catholic.  She absolutely agrees with the core tenants of the church - the belief in the holy trinity, intercession by saints, the need for good works, the idea of sin, etc. However, she does not agree with the church's stance on many cultural issues.  For example, she is pro-choice.  In the US we see this more and more.  The institution of the church does not always keep pace with the beliefs of the members.  This is especially true in that cultural norms differ by country and sometimes region.  Major religions are international. 

Edited January 13, 2016 by Muffyn

[Churchhoney]

I would like to give you Brother Johnny's (from RU, Josh's Christian "rehab") interpretation of that verse from Ephesians:  God draws you to him so you seek God but you do not seek because you are drawn, you are drawn because you seek but God seeks you whether you are drawn to him or not.  But then you seek and He draws but He always draws if you seek.  See, perfectly clear!

 

Well, it's hard to disagree with him!

[JennyMominFL]

For my own edification, what are the differences between fundie and evangelical?

Love this!

To say it at it's simplest, evangelicals believe they have an obligation to spread the  gospel,to Evangelize.  Fundamentalists see the bible as the absolute literal word of God. They tend to be far  more conservative , like the Duggars. Pretty much all Fundamentalists are evangelical, but not all evangelicals are fundamentalists.

[Marigold]

I have a question. After reading some of the more religious postings in the other threads. .who was brought up with these beliefs other than Churchhoney?

Seems to be more experts on the boards suddenly so just a random q.

I was raised an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist.

Like the Duggars in some of the religious beliefs but not in other ways. I am female and was ALWAYS encouraged to go to college etc.Is that a "lite version"? I have a masters degree and have always worked.

Was a Fundmamentalist Baptist for almost all of adulthood. Dabbled around in Lutheranism and Orthodox Presbyterians...familiar with the Vision Forum churches.

I converted to be a Mormon about 10 years ago. How's that for different? ;)

Edited January 14, 2016 by Marigold

[NewDigs]

I was raised an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist.Like the Duggars in some of the religious beliefs but not in other ways. I am female and was ALWAYS encouraged to go to college etc.Is that a "lite version"?Was a Fundmamentalist Baptist for almost all of adulthood. Dabbled around in Lutheranism and Orthodox Presbyterians...familiar with the Vision Forum churches.I converted to be a Mormon about 10 years ago. How's that for different? ;)

What attracted you to Mormonism?

[MarysWetBar]

I was raised an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist.

Like the Duggars in some of the religious beliefs but not in other ways. I am female and was ALWAYS encouraged to go to college etc.Is that a "lite version"? I have a masters degree and have always worked.

Was a Fundmamentalist Baptist for almost all of adulthood. Dabbled around in Lutheranism and Orthodox Presbyterians...familiar with the Vision Forum churches.

I converted to be a Mormon about 10 years ago. How's that for different? ;)

Thank you! Actually, to be honest, I have always found your posts to be very informative and have helped me with understanding the inside scoop on their beliefs.

I'm rather surprised though, as I haven't seen any responses yet from the users I had assumed were raised fundamentalist by their posts on the other boards. They have a lot of "experiential" posts but so far nothing here!

Edited January 14, 2016 by MarysWetBar

[queenanne]

The former State Church of Sweden is Lutheran and has been since the 16th century. It is also liberal, allows gay marriage, has female clergy and has a strong focus on social work and helping the needy. There is no preaching of hellfire and brimstone, no fundamentalism, the Bible is not considered to be literal truth even by ministers (at least the ones I've come across, I'm sure there are exceptions) and there's no denial of evolutionary theory or other such anti-science nonsense. So obviously I've always considered contemporary Lutherans to be pretty harmless and sane. But then I come on here and other places online and see non-Swedish lutherans having completely different experiences, some to the point where I would consider them fundies, and yet they all sincerely claim to belong to the same denomination as my meek little lutheran lambs.

 

Are you sure they all call and think themselves the same, though?  I include this not because I understand it, nor will it necessarily help, except to indicate that there are many different kinds of Lutherans, apparently:

 

http://usalutherans.tripod.com/id1.html

 

For example:

 

The AALC were formerly churches of the American Lutheran Church (ALC) and formed in 1987 due to the ELCA merger.  These churches did not want to join the ELCA.  AALC Lutherans believe:

The full authority of the Bible as the inerrant and infallible Word of God;

The Lutheran Confessions as a true interpretation of Scripture;

A purpose focused on the Great Commission with priority for Evangelism and World Missions;

The authority of the local congregation as the basic unit of the church.

Website: http://www.taalc.org/

 

The ELS is another smaller Lutheran body and is very conservative.  This church has about 21,000 members and was originally known as the "Norweigan Synod".  The ELS is in full fellowship with the WELS.  Website: http://www.evangelicallutheransynod.org/

 

The CLC was formed in 1963 due to the break-up of the Evangelical Lutheran Synodical Conference of North America due to disagreements of principles.  The CLC was created primarily from the WELS and Evangelical Lutheran Synod (ELS).  The CLC teaches that the Bible is the only authoritative source for doctrine.  It subscribes to the Lutheran Confessions as an accurate presentation of what Scripture teaches.  Website: http://clclutheran.org/

 

In the end, we are all Lutherans.  Every Lutheran abides by the Book of Concord, which has the basic teachings of the Lutheran Church.  These teachings are mainly Luther's Small Catechism and Luther's Large Catechism.

 

Clearly, these distinctions are very important to someone though they seem like mud to me; and I don't even think these are all the variations of U.S. Lutheran, never mind drawing in Swedish Lutherans.

[Marigold]

I think this belongs in the Prayer Closet so I will be really brief. Although i can relate it back to the Duggars!

I got REALLY tired of all the HELL talk. It's hell 24/7 with these people. Constantly talking about hell. Ben Seewald's rants are all day rants in that religion. Church is 2 hours of hell and sin. You leave church depressed...like Ben and his "I'm a filthy rag" FB post. I know the words well. It was so familiar to me...filthy rags. Imagine hearing that all freaking day?

Mormons rarely, if ever, discuss hell. Hell is for really bad people like Hitler or something and that's the end of it. The guy down the street is not going to hell because he isn't a Mormon. Hell is not a topic Mormons focus on.

I'm know other people have different experiences with Mormons but that is mine. I'm happy being a Mormon and find a lot of peace and strength with them. I'm also not a Utah Mormon and that might be a major variable. ;) It's a whole different vibe here because most of my church are converts from the NYC area.

[DangerousMinds]

But in fundie-land, wouldn't even Hitler be "saved" if he just said the "prayer" and accepted god, whereas a lifelong selfless humanitarian would not if he/she didn't do the same?

[GeeGolly]

But in fundie-land, wouldn't even Hitler be "saved" if he just said the "prayer" and accepted god, whereas a lifelong selfless humanitarian would not if he/she didn't do the same?

And if this is truly what they believe, that is some major effed-uppedness. Poor Mother Theresa.

[Vaysh]

Are you sure they all call and think themselves the same, though?  I include this not because I understand it, nor will it necessarily help, except to indicate that there are many different kinds of Lutherans, apparently:

I can't say I've put much thought into the apparently masses of different kinds of lutherans in the world. ;) It's very possible that I'm just clumping several branches into one, since the ones I have come across didn't really make the distinction themselves. Perhaps they all consider themselves the "true" lutherans.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Vaysh

[Vaysh]

Mormons rarely, if ever, discuss hell. Hell is for really bad people like Hitler or something and that's the end of it. The guy down the street is not going to hell because he isn't a Mormon. Hell is not a topic Mormons focus on. I'm know other people have different experiences with Mormons but that is mine.

During one of my high school religion classes we had a visit from two very sincere young mormon guys (poor bastards... try explaining your faith in front of a classroom full of snarky, mostly atheist/agnostic teenage little shits who have been drilled in critical thinking for the past three years. I think we almost made one of them cry) and their explanation of the afterlife wasn't the usual dichotomy of heaven/hell where unbelievers get tortured for the crime of not believing.

 

Instead, according to them it was more like, if you believed in god and was a good mormon, you got to spend eternity near him. And if you didn't believe you ended up further away, and if you were a horrible person you ended up waaaay further away. There was some kind of space anology involved as well but it's been fifteen years and my memory is a little dodgy. The point of the whole idea though, seemed to be that the consequence for not having faith or for doing bad things isn't eternal punishment in hell, it's simply the abscence of god's presence. Which actually make more sense to me if one believes in the idea of a benevolent and loving god.

[Ilovemylabs]

I can't say I've put much thought into the apparently masses of different kinds of lutherans in the world. ;) It's very possible that I'm just clumping several branches into one, since the ones I have come across didn't really made the distinction themselves. Perhaps they all consider themselves the "true" lutherans.

I've been Lutheran my entire life.  In the USA there are several main branches of Lutheranism and a number of smaller ones.  The ELCA is seen as the most liberal of the bunch.  The Missouri Synod is much more conservative.  Without going into boring (for others) details, I am a member of the ELCA although they have become much too liberal for my liking.  Some Missouri Synod churches in the Midwest are pretty darn conservative.  I've had instances where we were not permitted to receive Holy Communion because, although we were Lutheran, we weren't Missouri Synod Lutherans.  In fact, right after 9/11 a Missouri Lutheran pastor was severely criticized by his church body because he had participated in a large public multi-religious prayer session in New York.  On the other hand, the ELCA is considering allowing anyone who wants (of any faith or belief, or I guess even non-belief) to receive Holy Communion.  If they do that, I'm gone.  I'd become a Roman Catholic except I have issues with their devotion to the Virgin Mary and some problem with the issue of the Pope being God's representative on earth.  This is NOT a criticism...just my personal feelings.  There are a number of countries in Europe for whom Lutheranism is the 'state' religion.

[lookeyloo]

All of this is so interesting.  I guess folks have to have faith to believe - and wait to find out.

[JennyMominFL]

And if this is truly what they believe, that is some major effed-uppedness. Poor Mother Theresa.

Well, I don't exactly view Mother Theresa as a good person.

[mbutterfly]

Well, I don't exactly view Mother Theresa as a good person.

Surely you will tell us more!

[lookeyloo]

I have heard negative things about Mother Teresa too.  Put mother teresa negative opinions into google and a bunch of things come up.

[JennyMominFL]

Surely you will tell us more!

To start with Lancet,  questions the treatment in medical facilities. Denial of pain meds and others because she believed humans needed to suffer.

Copying from one article , Shattering the Myth of Mother Theresa

Teresa’s free clinics provided care that was at best rudimentary and haphazard and at worst unsanitary and dangerous, despite the enormous amounts of donations she received. Multiple volunteers at Teresa’s clinics, such as Mary Loudon and Susan Shields, have testified to the inadequate care provided to the dying. Despite routinely receiving millions of dollars in donations, Teresa deliberately kept her clinics barren and austere, lacking all but the most rudimentary and haphazard care.

Volunteers such as Loudon, and Western doctors such as Robin Fox of the Lancet, wrote with shock of what they found in Teresa’s clinics. No tests were performed to determine the patients’ ailments. No modern medical equipment was available. Even people dying of cancer, suffering terrible agony, were given no painkillers other than aspirin. Needles were rinsed and reused, without proper sterilization. No one was ever sent to the hospital, even people in clear need of emergency surgery or other treatment.

and 

Teresa considered converting the sick and the poor to be a higher priority than providing for their actual needs, and believed that human suffering was beneficial and even “beautiful”. The following quote from Teresa says it all:

“I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.”

On another occasion, Teresa told a terminal cancer patient, who was dying in extreme pain, that he should consider himself fortunate: “You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you.” (She freely related his reply, which she seemed not to realize was meant as a putdown: “Then please tell him to stop kissing me.”)

 

 And while I do understand the Catholic churches position on abortion and contraception, I am bothered by one who would deny contraception to women whose existing children were already dying of starvation.

  There is much to be found if you google her,

Edited January 14, 2016 by JennyMominFL

[GeeGolly]

Well, I don't exactly view Mother Theresa as a good person.

 

To start with Lancet,  questions the treatment in medical facilities. Denial of pain meds and others because she believed humans needed to suffer.

Copying from one article , Shattering the Myth of Mother Theresa

Teresa’s free clinics provided care that was at best rudimentary and haphazard and at worst unsanitary and dangerous, despite the enormous amounts of donations she received. Multiple volunteers at Teresa’s clinics, such as Mary Loudon and Susan Shields, have testified to the inadequate care provided to the dying. Despite routinely receiving millions of dollars in donations, Teresa deliberately kept her clinics barren and austere, lacking all but the most rudimentary and haphazard care.

Volunteers such as Loudon, and Western doctors such as Robin Fox of the Lancet, wrote with shock of what they found in Teresa’s clinics. No tests were performed to determine the patients’ ailments. No modern medical equipment was available. Even people dying of cancer, suffering terrible agony, were given no painkillers other than aspirin. Needles were rinsed and reused, without proper sterilization. No one was ever sent to the hospital, even people in clear need of emergency surgery or other treatment.

and 

Teresa considered converting the sick and the poor to be a higher priority than providing for their actual needs, and believed that human suffering was beneficial and even “beautiful”. The following quote from Teresa says it all:

“I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.”

On another occasion, Teresa told a terminal cancer patient, who was dying in extreme pain, that he should consider himself fortunate: “You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you.” (She freely related his reply, which she seemed not to realize was meant as a putdown: “Then please tell him to stop kissing me.”)

 

 And while I do understand the Catholic churches position on abortion and contraception, I am bothered by one who would deny contraception to women whose existing children were already dying of starvation.

  There is much to be found if you google her,

Wow, I have never heard these stories. Sometimes I feel so naive.

[JennyMominFL]

There was a a brief period of time in my 20's when I tried to go back to the Catholic CHurch. I wanted to give them a chance as an adult and I wanted to try to understand the things I did not know. I have been HIV Pos since 1990 when I was 20 and I have spent the last 22 year with an HIV negative man. When I asked the church about using contraceptives to prevent transmission I was told that I had to just trust in god.  That was the end for me. They have changed their stance on this since then, and there is much to like in the current Pope.

 I'll also be the first one to explain how and why Catholics don't worship(or shouldn't) Mary or the Saints.

[Churchhoney]

Wow, I have never heard these stories. Sometimes I feel so naive.

 

Well, you know, it's the same kind of thing as the Duggars' approach. There have always been plenty of Christians, including very high-profile ones, who elevate the whole conversion/spiritual-has-priority-over-physical/suffering-is-holy stuff. And MT is one of them. (some of them are grifters, of course, but while I've seen that accusation thrown around at MT I don't know whether anybody's ever produced any evidence about that ....)

 

I think it's the danger with any adults who are highly theoretical or who build really intense fantasy worlds in their minds (many artists, sometimes scientists) and certainly adult true-believers in religion -- their concepts about faith or whatever kind of world they have in their heads take precedence over people, totally. If you have a bunch of very strongly held ideas or principles and you lack true empathy, then in your world people for you sort of serve as illustrations of abstract principles. They aren't real to you; they're puppets in your intensely felt play. People like that probably think they're doing well by other people when they tell them how their lives are an illustration of God's plan for the world.

[JennyMominFL]

If gods plan includes misery and suffering then god is a jerk

[NewDigs]

ETA

Well, you know, it's the same kind of thing as the Duggars' approach. There have always been plenty of Christians, including very high-profile ones, who elevate the whole conversion/spiritual-has-priority-over-physical/suffering-is-holy stuff. And MT is one of them. (some of them are grifters, of course, but while I've seen that accusation thrown around at MT I don't know whether anybody's ever produced any evidence about that ....)

 

I think it's the danger with any adults who are highly theoretical or who build really intense fantasy worlds in their minds (many artists, sometimes scientists) and certainly adult true-believers in religion -- their concepts about faith or whatever kind of world they have in their heads take precedence over people, totally. If you have a bunch of very strongly held ideas or principles and you lack true empathy, then in your world people for you sort of serve as illustrations of abstract principles. They aren't real to you; they're puppets in your intensely felt play. People like that probably think they're doing well by other people when they tell them how their lives are an illustration of God's plan for the world.

And, to my mind, MT falls into that category.

It always angered me how because of her anti-birth control etc. views she managed to create for herself "job security".

But it is frequently considered heresy to blaspheme the good teresa with those thoughts, even in conversation with non-Catholics.

Edited January 15, 2016 by NewDigs

[Churchhoney]

If gods plan includes misery and suffering then god is a jerk

 

I have recently been dealing with a loved one who is in a prolonged state of pretty horrible suffering. And a couple of people have said to me that I "have to believe that the Lord is allowing this to continue because the person's suffering is doing good for someone else," even though we don't know who that is or how or why that should be.

 

I don't have to believe that. I do have to believe that anyone who says it is pretty empathy-free, however.

 

There's a whole big universal drama that they're a part of going on in some people's heads, I guess. And being wrapped up in such a thing keeps you from actually looking at what's going on in the real world in front of your eyes. I'm sure that's the case with the Dillards' "mission," for example. I can see how people with this kind of approach really believe in their own great intentions. But they can cause a fair amount of misery as they blunder about the world blind to what's actually in it, in this way.

Edited January 15, 2016 by Churchhoney

[Vaysh]

I have recently been dealing with a loved one who is in a prolonged state of pretty horrible suffering. And a couple of people have said to me that I "have to believe that the Lord is allowing this to continue because the person's suffering is doing good for someone else," even though we don't know who that is or how or why that should be.

 

I don't have to believe that. I do have to believe that anyone who says that is pretty empathy-free, however.

Oh that is horrible Churchhoney. I hope your loved one can get some relief from their suffering; it must be a terrible ordeal for them as well as those who care about them. And I don't understand the logic behind the idea that one person's suffering would make things somehow better for anyone else. Is human existance a zero sum game?

Edited January 15, 2016 by Vaysh