John Shelby Spong

[brandonleestewart]

Hello,

Has anyone here read anything by John Shelby Spong? I am currently reading The Sins of Scripture, and have read Rescuing the Bible From Fundamentalism and Why Christianity Must Change or Die. And I would be interested in discussing any of these books, if anyone has read them.

[taminator]

I haven't read any of his books, but I've seen a couple of documentaries with Bishop Spong in them. I really like him. I'll have to check out the books you mentioned. Have you read anything by John Dominic Crossan or Bart (or is it Bert?) Ehrman?

[taminator]

"Saving Jesus" and "Living The Questions." Those were the documentaries I've seen. They were very interesting. I came from a fundamentalist church and after joining an open and affirming United Church of Christ and watching those videos, I had quite a crisis of faith. But I've recovered. :lol:

[BruceChris]

Know. Except possibly for some of the women out there, in their own areas of expertice. The idea that gays or women are somehow lesser beings is something that he speaks out against regularly.

I have read most of what he has written, but that was a long time ago. I am curious as to what you have to say, but I'm not sure that there is much to discuss. I think he got most of it right the first time.

Peace and Love, Bruce Chris

[Pablo Rafael]

I read not very long ago Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism by John Shelby Spong. It was interesting that when I checked the book out , the librarian looked at the title , and said, "Do you think it is possible?" I replied, "I certainly hope so."

I have read something else by John Shelby Spong, but now I can't remember the title. Although I appreciate his opinions and think he is a great writer and a fine man, I have sort of a problem with his views. It seems to me that he deals with the Bible by just disregarding everything in it. Oftentimes liberals get accused of throwing the Bible out and just creating a religion from their own reason. I think that is almost always an unfair and distorted view, but when reading Spong's writing, I get the feeling that he has done just that. That's just my opinon. I really want to agree with him, but on so many points I just can't.

I do think that he has done great things and has taken a strong stand for gay rights from the very beginning.

[BruceChris]

"If you want to take the Bible seriously, you cannot take it literally" -- J.S.Spong.

Concerning the woman and feminist theologians that I read so frequently, I wrote elsewhere that "Anyway, in the introduction to many of these books, these women-and-feminist-theologian authors will tell us that their beliefs come from many sources. There is the Bible. There are the beliefs and teachings of their own denomination, and often those of other denominations. There is their relationship with the Divine, and how they feel that their prayers have been answered. There is their own thought and reason, and there are their own experiences in this life". I'm sure that Spong has said much the same, here and there in his writings.

If Spong is doing something like you accuse him of, I would suggest that perhaps his actions are in some way divinely inspired. As the history of the human race has shown us, God, having given us free will, has allowed room for error (sin), which we are constantly looking for ways to correct for. Religious reforms are nothing new. Obviously, that is pretty much what we are attempting to do right here.

I find that his understanding of, and loyalty to the overarching themes of the Bible to be a thing of beauty

BC

[Gennee]

I read not very long ago Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism by John Shelby Spong. It was interesting that when I checked the book out , the librarian looked at the title , and said, "Do you think it is possible?" I replied, "I certainly hope so."

I have read something else by John Shelby Spong, but now I can't remember the title. Although I appreciate his opinions and think he is a great writer and a fine man, I have sort of a problem with his views. It seems to me that he deals with the Bible by just disregarding everything in it. Oftentimes liberals get accused of throwing the Bible out and just creating a religion from their own reason. I think that is almost always an unfair and distorted view, but when reading Spong's writing, I get the feeling that he has done just that. That's just my opinon. I really want to agree with him, but on so many points I just can't.

I do think that he has done great things and has taken a strong stand for gay rights from the very beginning.


Though I have never read any of Bishop Spong's books, disregarding the bible is tantamount to throwing the baby out with the bath water. There are many Christians in glbt community that love God and desire to serve Him. I fellowship with a Christian glbt group and have been blessed.

Gennee

:pray:

[alphie]

I am currently wrestling with what I really believe (I used to be somewhat fundamental). I will try to re-read some of Spongs writings - but as I recall - I agree with Bruce - Spong seems to just "chuck-it" when it comes to the Holy Scriptures.
I'll just have to see where the Lord leads me in this whole thing.

[BruceChris]

I am saying that Spong is drawing on other spiritual resources. I would say that Spong is trying to employ a hermaneutics of love and intelligence, not a simple bibliolatry. You don't worship the Bible, simply because it is the Bible.

There are many different ways of interpreting the Bible. If one interpretation does not work towards the optimization of God's works on this Earth in this day, we need to find one that does. If you simply want to take the Bible at "face" value, why not start with the clobber passages.

Bruce Chris

[brandonleestewart]

I don't thing that Spong intends to throw the Bible out at all, he merely asks that it be interpreted responsibly in today's context. It is difficult to take the Bible literally because we know that science casts doubt over the worldview of the authors.

[alphie]

thanks for the correction/clarification Bruce.
Please pray for my spiritual journey
God bless,
alphie

[Gregory_de_Bois]

I have a major problem with Spong: his denial of the Divinity and Resurrection of Jesus. While I am personally fine with people who believe such things (though I view them as wrong), I am more disturbed that this man remains a Bishop. Sorry, but the Nicene Creed firmly establishes the Physical Resurrection of the Christ as a tenet of the faith. Moreover, St. Paul says we are fools if we remain Christian and deny the resurrection. I can appreciate Spong's activism for the GLBT community and for women (among other issues), but I think his theology is poorly derived (dare I say heretical): unhistorical, unbiblical, untraditional, unChristian.

Mind you, I am fine that he holds such views, but just not as a Bishop of a Christian Church.

*awaits the fire for slight conservativism*

[nmwolfboy]

While i disagree with many of the positions at which Bishop Spong seems to arrive i am also immensely grateful that he so publicly asks the questions that a life devoted to the church has led him to ponder. He also seems to completely PO so many pious religious folks which mirrors the reaction Christ himself provoked from the religious authorities of His day. For that alone i would be grateful that there is a Bishop Spong. ;)

[Pablo Rafael]

I very much disagree with a literalist approach to Scripture. And while I appreciate Spong's work for LGBT rights, I think some other religious leaders have expressed the Christian vision in a way I find more reasonable. I don't mean to criticize Spong, but from my point of view he doesn't even look like a Christian. (Of course my view isn't necessarily the "right" view, but it is the way I perceive things.)

A great book to read is In the Eye of the Storm by Gene Robinson. Also outstanding is The Good Book by Peter Gomes. (I think Gomes is an Episcopalian, though he grew up an Americn Baptist.) What's So Amazing About Grace by Philip Yancey is also well worth reading.

All three of these authors are considered "liberal" theologians, but they still cherish the Bible and regard the events written therin as historical events. They have no trouble confessing the Creed every Sunday. This is more in line with my beliefs.

[BruceChris]

but I think his theology is poorly derived (dare I say heretical): unhistorical, unbiblical, untraditional, unChristian.

And yet he is usually regarded to be one of the most accomplished Biblical scholars around.

So to you he doesn't pass the smell test; to me, he more than passes.

Spong and I, and many others believe that Christ's greatest gift to us is his teachings, those of love and forviveness. That and the fact that He was willing to die for His beliefs. those two things together affirm His Divinity in my eyes.

My definition of sin is simply that of human error, weakness, and fallability. It has always been with us. To believe in the fall, and original sin, is to believe that man (and woman) could break something that God couldn't fix. I guess that I'm a Universalist, among other things, so I don't see sin as an absolute.

I suppose that you could call me a Christian Heretic. Of course, to the Roman heirarchy, all Protestants are heretics.

Gotta run, be back BC

[alphie]

yup - now I remember why I have re-read Spong's writings - "his denial of the Divinity and Resurrection of Jesus". My beliefs/understandings could possibly change but for right now I will just agree with Spong on the LGBT issues.

[Gregory_de_Bois]

And yet he is usually regarded to be one of the most accomplished Biblical scholars around.

So to you he doesn't pass the smell test; to me, he more than passes.

Spong and I, and many others believe that Christ's greatest gift to us is his teachings, those of love and forviveness. That and the fact that He was willing to die for His beliefs. those two things together affirm His Divinity in my eyes.

My definition of sin is simply that of human error, weakness, and fallability. It has always been with us. To believe in the fall, and original sin, is to believe that man (and woman) could break something that God couldn't fix. I guess that I'm a Universalist, among other things, so I don't see sin as an absolute.

I suppose that you could call me a Christian Heretic. Of course, to the Roman heirarchy, all Protestants are heretics.

Gotta run, be back BC

I must apologize for any misconceptions I had given. I am also generally very liberal (also a universalist of sorts here). I also am an evolutionist (it's practically proven...), pro-gay, pro-woman, and generally loose with my interpretation of Scripture (Christian Scripture, that is). However, I am a fundamentalist when it comes to the "fundamentals" of the faith.

Bruce, I suppose my main disagreement with you would be that I think he came not only to teach (called exemplary atonement theory), but also to live for us, to die for us, to be resurrected for us. I don't think it was just to die for us, mind you. I think many "fundies" are too ardent on the exclusivity of the penal nature of his sacrifice. (side note: these discussions are far too difficult to be given justice online. :lol:)

You see, with my limited scope of knowledge, I remain unconvinced that man can do it on her :D own. We have come a long way in many respects, but I think we still remain separated as humanity from God. Bruce, It would be wonderful if we could have a more detailed discussion on some of the more specific aspects of the faith. :) Don't worry, I'm not an inquisitor, I just don't like it when my church starts to slide into theological apathy, which I sometimes see. It's just as bad, in my mind, as social apathy. I think if we could combine the activism of the left with some ideas from the right. That would be glorious... :cool:

Still gay though. And proud of it.:p

[u-dog]

I must apologize for any misconceptions I had given. I am also generally very liberal (also a universalist of sorts here). I also am an evolutionist (it's practically proven...), pro-gay, pro-woman, and generally loose with my interpretation of Scripture (Christian Scripture, that is). However, I am a fundamentalist when it comes to the "fundamentals" of the faith.

Bruce, I suppose my main disagreement with you would be that I think he came not only to teach (called exemplary atonement theory), but also to live for us, to die for us, to be resurrected for us. I don't think it was just to die for us, mind you. I think many "fundies" are too ardent on the exclusivity of the penal nature of his sacrifice. (side note: these discussions are far too difficult to be given justice online. :lol:)

You see, with my limited scope of knowledge, I remain unconvinced that man can do it on her :D own. We have come a long way in many respects, but I think we still remain separated as humanity from God. Bruce, It would be wonderful if we could have a more detailed discussion on some of the more specific aspects of the faith. :) Don't worry, I'm not an inquisitor, I just don't like it when my church starts to slide into theological apathy, which I sometimes see. It's just as bad, in my mind, as social apathy. I think if we could combine the activism of the left with some ideas from the right. That would be glorious... :cool:

Still gay though. And proud of it.:p

Couldn't have said it better myself! (certainly not when I was 18 -- especially that last sentence.) You go boy!

[BruceChris]

I find that this has been a very respectful conversation, so far. And oh, yeah, if you want it straight from the horse's mouth, there's always

http://johnshelbyspong.com/

I'm going to go there, and do some catching up, when I get the chance.

Peace, Love, and Dangerously Liberal theologians, :eek: . :eek: . :eek: . :eek: . :eek: . :lol: . :rofl: . Bruce Chris

http://www.jesusisaliberal.org

[BruceChris]

http://johnshelbyspong.com/bishopspongon_homosexuality.aspx

Bishop Spong said
"To the threats of parts of the Christian Church to leave if homosexual people are welcomed fully without any distinction, the body of Christ must be prepared to say, "That is your choice but we do not compromise truth to comfort you in your prejudice. The Church's doors will be open when your consciousness is finally formed and you decide to return, but we will not reject homosexuals now to avoid offending you". And,

To defend [the exclusion of gays and lesbians from full inclusion in the church] by claiming that the refusal to accept this perspective will destroy "the unity of the Church," is a breathtakingly bankrupt idea.

And there is more, a lot more.

If you want to criticize the good bishop, to be honest, you should at least read him first.

Peace and Love, Bruce Chris

[Gregory_de_Bois]

http://johnshelbyspong.com/bishopspongon_homosexuality.aspx


Those were some powerful quotes indeed. I must admit that I have not read sufficiently the man's works. I do not doubt his theological prowess, I admire him for being bold in a time when so few would be (I believe he was one of the main bishops who ordained the first women and GLBT). I am also glad that this discussion has gone fairly respectfully.

I think, once I get the time, it would be interesting to see what exactly he calls for. I have seen some of his debates, which were interesting. I found it hard to identify with some of his statements (I think his exegesis on St. Paul is a little wrong, as I don't think Paul was anti-gay), but I must admit the opponent was sometimes worse (i.e., way too conservative for me...:D).

Don't worry, Bruce. There's still a good, fighting liberal spirit within me.:lol:

Grace and Peace,

Gregory

[NathanATX]

yZM3FXlLMug