John Fulton wrote:

In message <79du0q$i3m$1@newsource.ihug.co.nz> - "Andy Bearsley"
<andy@ambient.gen.nz.remove>Fri, 5 Feb 1999 18:02:53 +1300 writes:
:>
:>
:>Patrick Dunford wrote in message ...
:>
:>>Rubbish. The extremists are the people like him (SPONG) who want to rewrite
:>>the Bible.

I take it the "extremists" are Bishop Spong and theological allies.

Folk are upset by Bishop Spong's call for a radical rethinking of  Christian theology.
I can understand  why they are upset and  why they call  him "extremist."  I was taken back
myself recently when the good bishop called for the Church to jettison its theistic God.
That would indeed be rewriting the Bible and counter to 2000 years of Christian ideas
of God.   Extreme indeed.

However, after thinking about the matter for a couple of weeks  and,  aquainted with the ideas
of Paul Tillich who is the inspiration of Spong's new God,  I had to admit that the Bible's theistic
God has had  His/her day  and is ready to exit stage right (maybe pushed, too).
Anyway, the hook  is ready to nab the  old beared guy at center stage.  We're talking  'bout
the concept of God and not the reality.   I am not interested in offending the higher powers
whether you call  Him  God or the Ground of Being, seeing as I have to get along with Him
for the rest of eternity.

So I think Spong's pronouncements on  a dead theism are well founded  - they are rational and in line with a lot of thinking among   mainline Christian  leaders and theologians.

However, lately I have felt the Bishop is  light years ahead of the folk sitting in the pews.  Too
much radical rethinking of the Christian basics and too fast.  Many Christians worldwide are still
wandering around the Garden with Adam and Eve, floating with Noah on the Ark waiting for the
waters to subside,  not any monkey's uncle (Gould),  and, having their mind definitely made up,
are not going to be confused, in the forseeable future,  by any facts Spong throws their way.  And I'm sure the good  Lord in  Heaven (whoops) or  the Ground of Being  (Gob,  hmmm not so good) loves them no less for their antiquated theology.   Maybe loves them more for their possession of  greater humility than those pounding the latest correct Christian thinking (and I don't mean Spong).

Anyway, for those Christians not wanting to commit intellectualy suicide as part of the deal to follow
Jesus, I recommend a tamer introduction to modern theology as presented in the writings of Tom Hapur who is a popular columnist with the Toronto Star (Ontario).  Also author.   But at the end of the day the theology of Harpur is pretty much in line with Spong's.  As  Harpur's article below shows, though the most popular view of God is "in heaven"  or  "up there," it still ought to be scrapped.  Just as Spong suggests.

Harpur writes -

   Where is God? I can only attempt a very short answer, but few questions are more crucial. In ancient times, before monotheism (belief in one God over all gods), our ancestors saw gods or divine energies everywhere , in rocks and streams, in animals and in oceans. Sky gods were particularly popular. There was a special deity for every phase of life. Mostly, however, the gods were "up" - on mountains tops or somewhere in the starry heavens.

Even after at least 3,000 years of monotheism, the words "up there" still best describe the most popular view about where God is. My research makes me certain that for all practical purposes - and for the great majority today - God is up "in heaven," as the Our Father seems to imply. Thousands of Christian hymns confirm this belief, particularly children's hymns

In reality, the concept of a god who is chiefly "out there" or "up there" ought to be scrapped and the central great truth of all major religions that God is "as close as breathing, nearer than hands or feet" needs to be rediscovered, especially by the churches. God dwells throughout the whole of creation, but God also dwells in the human heart. The biblical evidence f or God within is overwhelming.

So, it's time to stop "looking" outwards and upwards and to emphasize once more that "in him/her we live and move and have our being" right here.

Tom Harpur       Toronto Star    Feb. 07/99