“discruptive” Did I subconsciously mean a combo of descriptive and disruptive? Or did my finger just hit the wrong key?

cath

Of course, I was not at the discussion mentioned here, and it seems to have been a good one, appreciated by the participants.

To use descruptive language, I am a Quaker, a theist and a non-christian. Oops! But I am so much more and I feel and believe so much more. And some people may see one of those descriptive words and be put off by it without having had an opportunity to get to know everything that can’t be summed up in one or two words. And other people may see one of those descriptive words and assume things that aren’t be true.

If I am a Quaker, how am I a Quaker, and what does it mean to me and my way of living ?

If I am a theist, how am I a theist and what does it mean re: my relationship with words like “God” “Spirit” “Creation?”

If I am a non-christian, what does that mean about my relationship with Jesus? the Bible? The Sermon on the Mount? Love your neighbor? Attending worship? A concept of the afterlife?

And is there a better way to say non-christian than “non-christian?” I’m not oppposed to christianity (I just don’t believe some of the major tenets of christianity), so I feel the “non” is inappropriate.

But if a person were to ask me what I do believe and what I consider important to living a good life (e.g., the Quaker Testimonies, and yes, the Sermon on the Mount–except for any reference to Hell–and being a good steward of creation, and yes, creation, etc. etc.) we’d have to sit down for a nice long chat.

Descriptive words are so easy, but they can take us down the path of easy stereotype. Stereotypes are good for quick sorting, but, IMO, quick sorting isn’t good for quality spiritual dialogue.

I’m sorry I was not at Powel House in early January. I think I would have enjoyed getting to know folks.

cath