Protestants

[sweetnpetite]

Doc,



In my experience, most people are what they are dur to socio-economic reasons, not doctrinal differences. Most people stay with whatever religion they were raised. Exceptions occur due to upward mobility (Rockerfeller was a Baptiest until he becam a billionaire), strong differences in beliefs, or marriage.

Rumple Foreskin

What did he convert too?

 

[sweetnpetite]

What I can offer is the link to the website: http://beliefnet.com/
And, as tacky as it may seem, the 'Belief-o-matic' (lol). It tells you, based on your answers, what religion you fit into best: http://beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html

For example, I just took it again, and my top 4 were:
1. Neo-Pagan (100%)
2. Mahayana Buddhism (95%)
3. Jainism (91%)
4. New Age (84%)

Then once you get the answers, you can click on the different ones and read about them.
Of course, if ya dig around, you can just get the brief explainations of different religions.


I'm glad I took a peek over here!

Some of these questions are hard!!!!!

I'm still working on it

 

[dr_mabeuse]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is to confirm that

JEANNE D'ARTOIS

has been ordained as a minister of the Universal Life Church, Modesto, California.

Date of Ordination: 6/6/2004

by Kevin Andrews, Pastor
www.ulc.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not to brag, but I was ordained by the Universal Life Church too, way back in the '70's. I think there was different pastor then, and it cost me $10. I've since lost my card. I might be a bishop now for all I know.

A lot of people were joining because you could set yourself up as a church and not pay taxes. They closed that loop hole though.

---Reverend Zoot

 

[NoJo]

Not to brag, but I was ordained by the Universal Life Church too, way back in the '70's. I think there was different pastor then, and it cost me $10. I've since lost my card. I might be a bishop now for all I know.

A lot of people were joining because you could set yourself up as a church and not pay taxes. They closed that loop hole though.

---Reverend Zoot

Will you marry me?

 

[carsonshepherd]

Actually Joe, he could marry us

 

[NoJo]

Actually Joe, he could marry us

That would be bigamy. And big of him.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Protostants to Aviod:

CHRISTIAN RECONSTRUCTIONISM, DOMINION THEOLOGY, AND THEONOMY

Dominionism, Dominion Theology, Christian Reconstructionism, Theocratic Dominionism, and Theonomy are not denominations or faith groups. Rather, they are interrelated beliefs which are followed by members of a wide range of Christian denominations.

Its most common form, Dominionism, represents one of the most extreme forms of Fundamentalist Christianity thought. Its followers, called Dominionists, are attempting to peacefully convert the laws of United States so that they match those of the Hebrew Scriptures. They intend to achieve this by using the freedom of religion in the US to train a generation of children in private Christian religious schools. Later, their graduates will be charged with the responsibility of creating a new Bible-based political, religious and social order. One of the first tasks of this order will be to eliminate religious choice and freedom. Their eventual goal is to achieve the "Kingdom of God" in which much of the world is converted to Christianity. They feel that the power of God's word will bring about this conversion. No armed force or insurrection will be needed; in fact, they believe that there will be little opposition to their plan. People will willingly accept it. All that needs to be done is to properly explain it to them.

All religious organizations, congregations etc. other than strictly Fundamentalist Christianity would be suppressed. Nonconforming Evangelical, main line and liberal Christian religious institutions would no longer be allowed to hold services, organize, proselytize, etc. Society would revert to the laws and punishments of the Hebrew Scriptures. Any person who advocated or practiced other religious beliefs outside of their home would be tried for idolatry and executed. Blasphemy, adultery and homosexual behavior would be criminalized; those found guilty would also be executed. At that time that this essay was originally written, this was the only religious movement in North America of which we were aware which advocates genocide for followers of minority religions and non-conforming members of their own religion. Since then, we have learned of two conservative Christian pastors in Texas who have advocated the execution of all Wiccans. Ralph Reed, the executive director of the conservative public policy group the Christian Coalition has criticized Reconstructionism as "an authoritarian ideology that threatens the most basic civil liberties of a free and democratic society."

Specific beliefs include

Postmillennialism: the belief that Christ will not return to earth until much of the world has converted to Christianity. This will not take place for some considerable time; it will not be a painless transition. Most Fundamentalists and other Evangelists hold to a different view. They are Premillenialists and believe that all (or almost all) of the preconditions of Christ's return have been met. They expect Jesus' second coming to occur very soon.

Dominionism differs from more common forms of Fundamentalism in a number of key areas.

Dominionists:

Emphasize the importance of the Hebrew Scriptures vs. the Christian Scriptures.
Believe that all Christians must attempt to reconstruct society along Biblical lines.
Believe that, once they attain power, they will suppress other religions through genocide and mass murder, rather than through proselytizing.
Would require all religious groups to strictly follow the Mosaic law.
Believe that Jesus' second coming is in the far future.

Dominionism thought is finding considerable support among Pentecostal and Charismatic denominations and churches.

Rousas John Rushdoony of the Chalcedon Foundation is often considered the founder of Christian Reconstructionism. Author of Institutes of Biblical Law.


http://www.religioustolerance.org/reconstr.htm

 

[NoJo]

I'd be a Dominionist, if only they'd just let me carry on coveting my neighbors ox.

 

[sweetnpetite]

I'd be a Dominionist, if only they'd just let me carry on coveting my neighbors ox.

In fact, they'll stone you to death for it.

 

[NoJo]

In fact, they'll stone you to death for it.

Ouch! I don't fancy it that much. My neighbor's ass, on the other hand....

 

[sweetnpetite]

Ouch! I don't fancy it that much. My neighbor's ass, on the other hand....[/QUOTE ]

 

[sweetnpetite]

This link groups denominations together into 'families' probably a bit easier to study and understand:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_deno.htm

 

[NoJo]

This link groups denominations together into 'families' probably a bit easier to study and understand:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_deno.htm

Fascinating. Especially about Wiccan's doubling in number every 30 months. Doing the math, I've just calculated it would take only another eighty years before the whole world is Wiccan.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

Not to brag, but I was ordained by the Universal Life Church too, way back in the '70's. I think there was different pastor then, and it cost me $10. I've since lost my card. I might be a bishop now for all I know.

A lot of people were joining because you could set yourself up as a church and not pay taxes. They closed that loop hole though.

---Reverend Zoot

Being a Cardinal in the ULC, I will fill in the blanks in your knowledge base. (and if you try to kiss my ring, I'll hit you with my censer). The old gents name was Kirby Hensley. I joined after reading an article about him and the ULC in National Review.

Knowing Lady Jeanne is a true believer is a blessing.

Sweetnpetite: I'm not sure what church John D Rockerfeller joined. Odds are it was Episcopalian.

Right Rev Rumple Foreskin

 

[Pure]

complexities

Hi Mab,

I think that's not a bad read, and rumple has made some good points.
Likewise several others about the varieties of 'baptist.'

Baptist: Biblical literalist, evangelical, conservative, blue collar

Add, one key is the decentralized approach. no bishops.

Epicopalian: Upper middle class, snooty, conservative, WASP

There are in US and England "high church" and "low church" episcopalians. the latter certainly not snobbish or rich, and tracing themselves back to Wycliffe. The feel the high church is too much like the RC church, and the buildings and interiors are simpler, verging toward methodist (an offshoot of the C of E)

Methodist: Liberal white collar

I think there's variety here. Hillary Clinton says methodist as do lots of midwestern farmers. While some are liberal in theology, many would NOT be political liberals. Again besides urban rural there are other splits.
One segment of methodists opposed slavery.

Lutheran: more conservative than Methodist. Northern European, Calvinist

This is the biggest glitch, since Luther and Calvin were NOT pals and had major disagreements. Lutherans (called Evangelische in Germany) are an establish church in several countries like Germany and Sweden, hence partake of middle and upper class. Originally they rejected Catholic ideas of the priesthood as set apart; Lutheran priests may marry etc., and in a sense 'every person may be his own priest.' (pray directly to God.

So we add Presbyterian, Congregationalist and "Reformed"(in Europe). These are the Calvinists, though the Presbyterians split on some of the hard core stuff. Calvin held your status was determined at conception/birth--going 'up' to heaven or to the other place. The Mass Puritans were Calvinists, and they now call themselves Congregationalists, and some have lost the rigor of Calvinism (so their neighbors feel safer). Calvinists are scriptural literalists, though not stupidly so; the Puritans put the 10C directly in their law books, and believe in punishing adultery and even non attendance at Sunday services. Not keen on gays.

Church of Christ: No idea

Unitarians: Very liberal, humanitarian, intellectual
These folks tend to deny the divinity of Christ, or historically affirm only God the father-- Jesus being a moutpiece/prophet. Nowadays the unitarians allow ANY belief set, so long as the conduct is right and compassion is there, i.e., you may be a Wiccan or Lutheran or tree worshipper.

Quakers are harder to place, since they spread from conservative to liberal, in the latter case being similar to pacifist unitarians. There are even self labeled 'evangelical quakers.' the original core denied that anyone should be a special 'priest', so there is only an administrative head or committee in charge of these 'meetings' (not churches). Further it might be said that Quakers, in being linked to Amish and other 'peace churches', often deny they are either protestant or catholic. As an example, consider that both the Church of England and the Puritans in Mass had a good many executed (5 in Mass). All but the evangelical quakers (like methodists, I've heard) generally support 'peace' or pacifism, which comes in a number of varieties (some affinities to Gandhi). For instance, in WWII, some were happy to be ambulance drivers or medics in war zones.
Quakers of the non evangelical variety are a very small group, but very well known.

Mennonites and others should be mentioned. Hutterites. All of these represent attempt to get at the nonviolent essence of Christianity, the latter essentially abolishing private property, farming in communes.

 

[Guest]

Fascinating. Especially about Wiccan's doubling in number every 30 months. Doing the math, I've just calculated it would take only another eighty years before the whole world is Wiccan.

I'd better bone up on my spells.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

Good breakdown, Pure.

There's one variable about Baptists that needs to be mentioned. What do Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson, Jesse Helms, and Strom Thurmon have in common? They're all Baptists.

There are four primarially black Baptist denominations, and two that are Methodist.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[Pure]

Thanks, Rumple, it might be mentioned that a major Black denomination is the African Methodist Episcopal church, probably more resembling the 'spirit led' methodists.

Just for the hell of it, here are 11 main dimensions on which protestants may differ (Note in some cases a group wants to embrace both ends, or reject the whole dichotomy).

Mab, if you do the math, 11 dimensions, assuming simple dichotomy, nothing in between, gives 2 to the 11th power possibilities (2048). Of course, in practice, positions tend to hang together, like 1 and 2, so that a 100 combinations might do the trick, the rest of difference being connected with geography/nationality and history.

1.Literal Bible reading v. Biblical principles.
2.Moral rigorism (abstemiousness, asceticism)- 'situational'.
3.Salvation through works/deeds v. Salvation through faith
4.Theological rigor (theology respecting reason) v. 'spirit led.'
5. Presence of hierarchy, 'chain of command', bishops-- little or no hierarchy
6. Designating priests, or all believers are priests.
7. JesusChrist as third person in trinity v. Jesus is subordinate or in 'prophet' position.
8. Final days as per Revelation, limited numbers; v. a number of possibilities; one is--all are saved
9. Attitude towards the state: suspicious, keep distance v. join in, support, receive money from.
10. Attitude to war; just wars v. no war morally justified
11. Politically conservative v. progressive

---
Of course you might say, why not tall v. short, rich v. poor. Fair enough. But the above are dimensions that have been historically 'debated' and have led to the 1000 splinters. Instead of 'debated', one might say 'fought to the death' in some cases, for each item above.

 

[ishtat]

Zorrro et al

Zoroastrianism isnot on the list which seems a ahame.

Zoroastrianism was the first great monotheistic religion and was probably the greatest world religion at the time of Christ. It started in Persia in about 1200BC and almost disappeared in a generation with the ascendancy of Islam.

Reasons for joining up:

1 They have lost their Holy book "The Avesta" .There are only a few Hymns left - in Old Persian which about 3 people understand.

2 They have no Priests.

3 The name sounds good.

4 When they die they are stripped naked and left for the vultures on "Towers Of Silence"

5 They invented the concept of Good & Evil - Ohrmazd & Ahirman.

6 When the Jews were exiled in Babylon most of the more sophisticated concepts of God they developed there were taken pretty much straight from the Avesta and Zoroastrian ethics. They invented the ideas of a just God and a loving God before the Jews took them over.

There are a few left called Parsis in India and an even smaller group in southern Iran.

I like the idea of a neo- zorroist converting southern baptists.

 

[Pure]

There are lots of fine religions, e.g., Buddhism.

As far as converting, that's another relevant dimension: evangelical zeal, efforts to convert. Most protestants (in common with Catholics, though Catholics are less obnoxious, usually) have a lot of this 'missionary zeal.' Protestants are more likely these days to try to 'convert' you in a meeting or in a mass gathering like a footbal stadium or maybe over the TV. Baptists often rate high on evangelism, but Quakers and similar make no effort to convert, even discourage you (a bit like some rabbis do, if you ask them to help you 'convert'). Buddhists, in my experience, do not care about converting those they talk to.

PS to Ishtat: you don't mention the reason that Zoroastrians expose bodies to the birds and insects: it's an interesting bit of knowledge. Corpses are polluted and polluting (do you want one in your backyard?). To bury one, is to defile the earth; to burn one is to defile the fire and the air. Hence exposure on a metal grate (ie., so the bones eventually fall through) in a giant kind of courtyard is about the only answer. You become bird food, and presumably that doesn't matter since some birds are designed to live on carrion (i.e., it doesn't pollute them). Don't some Native persons in North America expose bodies on raised platforms? Is there a similar rationale?

 

[Kassiana]

Since there seems to be so much interest, and some confusion, over what we UUs "believe" and "are," I have linked to the UU FAQ on the official Web site: http://www.uua.org/aboutuu/uufaq.html

From the Newcomer FAQ:

I've heard that Unitarian Universalists can believe anything they want to. Is that true?

No. One could not be considered a Unitarian Universalist and believe that subscription to specific doctrines or creeds are necessary for access to God or spirituality or membership in our congregations.

Unitarian Universalists could not believe that God favors any group of people based on any inherent qualities, such as skin color, gender, sexual orientation, physical ability, etc.-or that any group of people is more worthy of access to opportunities than any other as a result of these qualities.

We don't believe that autocratic, undemocratic or overly hierarchical systems are appropriate methods of organizing our congregations or the larger society.

We don't believe that humanity has the right or moral authority to exploit the environment or other life forms with whom we share this planet.

 

[shereads]

Anyone else feel a little odd about having 2 porn windows and 3 church windows open?

Three? That's a lot of church windows. If you just feel "odd," you're getting off easy. I closed my church window when I moved out of my parents' home, but the lingering guilt still interferes with my porn window and my relationship window. For years, it wreaked havoc with my my mastu - mastur - mm-bb- with that other thing.

Is anyone else bothered by the Eternal Damnation pop-up? Or just ex-Southern Baptists?

 

[Pure]

Kass quoting FAQ: //I've heard that Unitarian Universalists can believe anything they want to. Is that true?

No. One could not be considered a Unitarian Universalist and believe that subscription to specific doctrines or creeds are necessary for access to God or spirituality or membership in our congregations. //

I find this a little misleading. Afaik, any set of (first order) religious beliefs, OR, the declared absence thereof will do, provided there is a commitment to honor, integrity, concern for others and the environment.
By a 'first order' belief, I mean, for example: That Jesus was the Son of God, the Christ; That Jesus was born of a virgin; OR that Mohammed was the most excellent prophet sent by God.

Thus UU becomes a kind of 'umbrella' group, since you may be Jewish, Christian, atheist Buddhist, or plain atheist-- but a decent and humane sort of person-- and belong. In that sense the unitarian of today is NOT like the original ones who were quasi-Christians, believers in God, but not in the dogmas about the Son, his 'equality' etc. (iow, Jesus was a prophet).

Indeed, Kassiana, I think you'll agree that a unitarian, per above, need not be Christian, though s/he may be. So discussing unitarians as a species of protestant makes no sense, except in those cases where the unitarian *happens* to be Christian.

To be clear, I'm not actually objecting, since there's a lot to be said for "I don't care about your theology or dogmas or absence thereof; I care about your moral conduct, your compassion, mercy, and commitment to peace."

The author of the above answer is referring to what might be called a second order belief-- that one's religion is the only way. Not just "Jesus is the Son of God" etc. but *Only those who hold the above beliefs [about Jesus, for example] are saved.*

This is a feature of the traditional form of several religions, e.g, Christianity and Islam. Essentially it's a kind of supremacist position or intolerance principle, and obviously, as the person says, that goes against the spirit of unitarianism.

In the deeper sense, though, as I understand it, ANY set of first order beliefs or their absence will do *provided you are tolerant*: You may be Sun-worshipper or Christian so long as you don't say "The Sun-worship[Christian] way is the only way." Thus a tolerantly inclined Jew or Muslim would not have any problem being [accepted as] unitarian [by unitarians]-- as i understand it--though his/her religious authorities (within the synagogue or mosque, respectively) might not be too happy about what might be seen as apostasy.

The above are my opinions based on my brother's being a longtime member and officer of a UU group, along with two good friends of mine; together with some reading of the classic and modern unitarian or UU literature (some on the 'net), including that handed out at our local main UU church.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

From that link SnP provided a few posts back:
--------------

Size of religious groups in the U.S.

Polling data from early 2001 indicate that:
-- 76.5% (159 million) of Americans identify themselves as Christian. This is a major slide from 86.2% in 1990. Identification with Christianity has suffered a loss of 9.7 percentage points in 11 years -- about 0.9 percentage points per year.
-- 52% of Americans identified themselves as Protestant.
-- 24.5% are Roman Catholic.
-- 14.1% do not follow any organized religion. This is an unusually rapid increase from only 8% in 1990.
-- 1.3% are Jewish.
-- 0.5% are Muslim, followers of Islam.
-- The fastest growing religion (in terms of percentage) is Wicca. It went from 8,000 in 1990 to 134,000 in 2001. Their numbers of adherents are doubling about every 30 months. 3

The percentage of Americans who are Protestants are expected to dip below 50% at sometime during the period 2004 to 2006
-----------------

Number of Christians decreases by 9.7% over 10 years. That's pretty something. I thought we were supposed to be in the midst of a religious revival.

 

[ishtat]

Active religious

Thanks to Pure for the info about why the Zoroastrians exposed their corpses.It makes sense because they consider fire and earth to be, well Pure.

Those figures from Dr M about the numbers in each denomination are interesting but perhaps more interesting is the number of practitioners. I read somewhere that 40% of Americans went to some church or another on Sundays which seems incredibly high. In Australia it would be less than 3 or 4 %. However, we are beginning to be infected by an increase in the number of Bible thumping Protestant fundamentalists . They are not yet, however, running the government.