By: andylambert

Don’t confuse ignorance with rejection. I reject the doctrine of salvation. I personally feel that there is no otherness to God. There was no Fall of Man. I have no need of salvation. This is my personal theology. It is not the theology of UU Tradition. We have strayed far afield. The purpose of this post was to elucidate the need for a sense of definition for Unitarian Universalism. You cannot expect me personally or other UUs or the world at large to blithely accept your theology as fact. You believe it. That’s great. It is also a mistake to assume that I don’t understand or know the reasons that Conservative Christian theologians have given to explain the inconsistencies in scripture or in the actual day-to-day practices of their churches. I know what they are. I am not ignorant of the narrative that has been created counter to logic and, in many cases, historical fact. I choose not to accept it. You can say that this makes me a heretic or that I am going to hell. If so, that sounds like a fine place full of educated, loving folks. I will not conform to the interpretations of theologians. I will take what wisdom I can from the Christian Tradition and leave the rest. The Buddha advised his followers to accept nothing that had not passed the test of logic. Specifically he warned us against passive acceptance of truths which are presented in scripture, Oral axioms, the words of our teachers/mentors, “common sense,” or anything that is presented as truth by others. Instead we must test for ourselves these things that are presented to us to see if they actually reduce our suffering. I strive to do so, regardless of what Tradition the wisdom comes from. Thank you for comments on this topic, but I do believe that we have gotten rather far afield. So unless you wish to further comment on what I actually wrote in the post in a constructive manner the post is closed to you.