Posted by Dinah on July 22, 2011, at 9:07:29
In reply to Re: Inerrancy - what do you think?, posted by hyperfocus on July 19, 2011, at 14:40:39
It depends on what you mean by mainstream.
I'm a non-Pauline Christian, more of a Jamesian Christian, and non-Trinitarian. The pastor who welcomed me to the church knew it. There are those within the church who find that distressing, but others who are perfectly accepting. Another member of my church once confided to me that she was non-Pauline and non-Trinitarian too, but apparently she wasn't going public with it.
I think if you find a really mainstream Protestant church (Methodist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, etc.) that values intellectual curiosity, that you won't have any problems at all. Though of course it likely depends on the congregants and the pastor. I'm perfectly at home in my mainstream Protestant church, even though I don't believe in the Trinity, and have no real liking for Paul. I accept that without his tireless activity Christianity may never have spread across the world. But I also see his personal issues riddled throughout his writing. And frankly his "wretched sinner" view of mankind makes me so angry. But that's me.
I spoke once with an ordained minister who smiled at my confession of distrust of Paul, and said that there are a lot of people who feel as I do in the theological community.
Catholicism and Mormonism, as what I call "revealed" religions, may be less open to intellectual divergence. But surely Protestantism is based on the idea that one *should* think about the Bible themselves, not slavishly accept church doctrine? Though I know more than a few active and devout Catholics who take a decidedly cautious view of the Bible.
I think it may be more the non-mainstream churches that would have issues with it. The traditionally mainstream churches have become fairly liberal. At least overall, though there may be pockets of orthodoxy.
poster:Dinah
thread:990902
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20101230/msgs/991580.html