http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

Open Source » Bl…

I was listening to God 2.0, an episode of Open Source Radio, Chris and Mary and Katherine and Brendan an [...]

christianity – a mode of lifelong inquiry indeed. let the seekers search online too.

i find i’ve become bolder about being a christian after i’ve started blogging about it as part of my life. that’s an immense gain for me.

i would like to note that what the web shows us of christianity is skewed in favor of those who are able to express their opinions here. as shown by the preponderance of what i shall call “the west”. where are the indigenous(for lack of a better word) expressions of faith? even though they are out there, they hardly affect us…

i fear i have made no sense. but i cant seem to express myself any better tonight.

Sarah Dylan Breuer
http://www.sarahlaughed.net/lectionary/ – Dylan’s lectionary blog
http://www.sarahlaughed.net/gracenotes/ – Grace Notes (a personal blog)

It was refreshing to hear open air discussion about God. I hope that there will be more shows like this in the future.

On the topic of Dvinity and all that is sacred, has anyone brought up the issue of the forces throughout history that have attempted to destroy religions and upright faith in God(s), namely Marxist idealologies?

As of late I have been reading a document called the Epoch Times Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party. With so much attention on China these days from so many anlges (population, economic development, polution, spiritual development/decay), this document has provided some insights into a lot of questions. Furthermore, nearly 2 million chinese have quit the party after reading the nine commentaries, or Jiuping as it is called in mandarin.

From my understanding of God, China is one of his favorite countries. Could it be that from within this great land we will soon see some truly majestic unfoldings?

Just some food for thought…

BTW .. has there been discussion about extending the program after radio air time by audio, strictly on the net ?

I think there would be a continuation of at least part of the audience.

I’m intrigued by this idea that allowing individual believers to create their own experiences of God. Jeff’s right that this is often a “Protestant� mindset. But even the most hierarchical of religions leave space for the unmediated experience of God by individual believers. In the Roman Catholic Church, Julian of Norwich, who had here series of visions while a nun before the Protestant Revolution, has become a Doctor of the Church.

And what I like about the Internet is that it might allow people to know that even in the most non-protestant of religions there is room for their own experience of God.

RLP does this for some. I had one of my very few mystical experience while reading his blog. And I think that that opening to other traditions (perhaps via doubt) may make our own religion more profound, deep, and genuine.

(Accidentally posted on the Web 2.0 forum first.)

I manage the Crosswalk forums on the Faith Community Network.

http://forums.crosswalk.com

What is the measure of validity of a particular viewpoint?
Would it be based upon how popular the weblog or website is?

I have a little travel time on the net looking at religious web sites, most of them are based upon established religious structure – and this is not what I am making reference to – not the extension of a brick and mortar edifice.

The questions I have pertain to those expressions that have no basis in established religious structure.

I think one has to remember that the Internet is source of information and resources readily available with just a click or two of the keyboard.

In many ways this is more like a giant library.

The difference is that the Internet also serves as a conduit that allows individuals to readily connect in live communication with people from around the world.

When asked why people come to my forum the #1 response is that people come back because of the connections they’ve made with other people.

It is these online relationships that create an incredible bond… in some cases as strong as any relationship one may build in a local setting.

Having no worry about ‘effects’ about what is said {as one guest just expounded} and no need to have bona fides makes for a union that gives near infinite possibilities.

But is there a lasting influence, and lasting truth from this marriage, or is it just ?

There’s a freedom for one to be a bit more aggressive in defending their position,

While others engage and find their position sharpened and clarified.

Iron sharpens iron.

Gordon started RLP anonymously, because there were things he just needed to talk about and his real life persona made it difficult to do so. We really admire the fact that even though he “came out” as Gordon Atkinson, he hasn’t lowered the honesty level on the blog. That’s a major problem with people in most conventional churches (especially pastors)… they sacrifice honesty in an effort to present a flawless facade, as if appearing to be superior will foster some sort of trust or respect. RLP is a great example that a person can be themselves, and be honest about their flaws, and still be a positive influence in the spiritual pursuit of another. It’s inspiring to us, because we aren’t perfect and we aren’t any good at faking it, so we have a hard time fitting into a “regular” church.

On the flip side, as much as we really love RLP and many other blogs, well… they aren’t church. Blogs are great for provoking thought and giving a forum to meaningful discussions, but let’s face it — there’s just something about meeting together with real live people that can’t be replicated in a blog setting. We hope to someday find a church we feel comfortable with, but even if do, we’ll still seek additional insight online. Thank God it’s out there!

And to RLP we say, “Peace, brother!”.