Good news: Former atheist and post-evangelical dives into a Blue Ocean Faith

[guillaumeb]

From the article:

An in-your-face atheist until his early 20s, Schmelzer ended up in seminary and, eventually, at the pulpit of Vineyard Christian Fellowship, an evangelical church in Cambridge, Mass. Under his leadership, membership soared despite its location in one of the most secular enclaves in the U.S.
Then something changed. Schmelzer started asking why some Christians focused less on Jesus and more on exclusion, drawing lines between themselves and other people whose sexual orientation or politics they disagreed with. He took his church in another direction, focused on inclusion, eventually formalizing its philosophy as a “Blue Ocean Faith” — because these churches “fish” where others don’t and because blue oceans connect the world.

To read more:

http://religionnews.com/2017/09/04/former-atheist-and-post-evangelical-dives-into-a-blue-ocean-faith/

[MineralMan]

1. I would encourage you to expand your website horizons.

religionnews.com is not the only website of interest to the Religion group, I'm sure.

Stories about individuals and their religious doings are OK, but are not indicative of anything, really, beyond some individual's journey.

Every Christian, for example, was born an atheist, becoming a Christian after some time and exposure to that line of faith. Had the same person been exposed to Hinduism to the same degree, he'd probably have become a Hindu. If exposed to Islam, a Muslim.

He may yet return to atheism, as many do from other religions.

So, since you did not comment on your blivet from religionnews.com, I have to ask what you took from it that made it worthy of posting in the Religion Group.

It is the story of one person's journey so far. More than that I cannot take from it.

[guillaumeb]

2. One person's journey might influence another's.

The religion group is filled with stories such as this. Some frequent posters in the religion group focus solely on the negative news, others try to present more balance.

[MineralMan]

3. Really? Why would that story influence anyone?

What did you take from it that interested you?

[guillaumeb]

4. This type of question can properly be asked of nearly every post here.

Why, for example, are endless posts assigning blame for the 2016 election still showing up on the board? Probably because people are still interested in discussing the issue.

Thus we have many posts here, including very many discussing the supposed negatives in religion. Are any people here influenced one way or the other by the posts? Who can tell?

But to your question:


Then something changed. Schmelzer started asking why some Christians focused less on Jesus and more on exclusion, drawing lines between themselves and other people whose sexual orientation or politics they disagreed with.

[MineralMan]

5. Those posts about the 2016 election are not in the Religion Group.

Philosophical questions and post about religion are the general topic of the Religion group. You might consider some of those to be negative, but others might not see them that way. Those posts are discussions about religious belief and religious beliefs. They are of interest to many.

If the key thing in the post at the top of this thread was the paragraph you included in this reply in boldface type, it could be raised without the extraneous stuff about that guy's religious journey. Many people here have questioned the general focus of some Christians on things that are exclusionary. I've posted threads like that, myself.

Why not just get to the point of what you want to discuss? I'm sure the members of this group will gladly oblige you with a discussion.

[guillaumeb]

6. One hopes that readers will actually read the entire article.

Some, judging from the comments, read only the title. I have received responses from a few posters where the poster literally admits to not reading the article and the poster often misinterprets the title.

If any here wish to engage in a discussion they are, of course, free to do so.

[MineralMan]

7. Really, if I wanted to read articles from religiousnews.com,

I'd have that site in my favorites list and visit it regularly. It is not in that list, nor do I visit it regularly. Normally, I do not read articles from that site, even when they are linked to here. I don't find them useful or informative, generally.

I do, from time to time, wonder what caused a person to post an excerpt from that website, especially if they don't indicate why they chose that particular story to post. If there was such an indication, I might well venture to the site to read the entire article, but lacking such a reason, normally do not do so.

If you find a story you think would be interesting, why not post a bit about why you find it interesting and about what questions it raises or points it illustrates? That might stir people's interest in the story, rather than cause them to question why you bothered to post it, as I have done a couple of times today.

[AtheistCrusader]

8. I did, and I'm not particularly interested in stories about how more people pull the hood of religio

n over people's heads and dupe them into even a 'kinder gentler message'.

It's like a 'friendlier' form of con artist, and I don't consider it 'good news'.

[Mariana]

9. I read the article.

Summary: Schmelzer didn't like the flavors of Christianity that were already available, including the one he preached for years, so he made up a new one and wrote a book about it.