Anonymous wrote:Are there any "aggressively" liberal churches?

I think when people say they want "politics free" they mean liberal.

Every United Methodist church I am familiar with is filled primarily with liberal Democrats. The issue for me is not that the church might be liberal. My issue is when a pastor is acting as a salesperson for the Democratic party (or for the Republican party, though I've never seen that happen).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course Jesus was a radical.

Why on earth do you think everyone in power wanted him dead?

Jesus was no radical. He merely repeated traditional Jewish teaching. The gospels were written decades after Jesus died. We don’t even know if there ever was a Jesus. Why he was condemned to death, if in fact he ever lived, is lost in history.

You are totally and completely wrong. Please cite your sources.





There’s no doubt Christ existed.

"Christ"? though your sources are questionable, there may have been an itinerant Jewish preacher named Jesus. But there's no proof of a Christ -- that's all religious belief.

I am not religious. I did take religious courses at Duke Divinity school to get my humanities credits. An odd thing for someone with no religious beliefs or background. My adviser counseled me I I wouldn't hesitate to be both critical and analytical. The rare poor kid at Duke, it was indeed a place to shine

In any event one of the courses I took was called the Historical Jesus. It was taught by the first Westerner to have access to the Dead Sea Scrolls. From a historical perspective and not a theological one, there was little doubt there was a man named by Jesus who had significant social impact. An examination of the Gospels alone and their conflicts and inconsistencies demonstrated how the Gospel writers strove to make the life of Jesus as a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, what you would do in trying to establish a religion. I don't know why anyone would deny the evidence of Jesus' existence as a man given the record. And I don't think calling him a preacher is accurate. It assumes Jesus thought he was establishing a religion which doesn't appear to be the case. He was a Jewish man with a call to seek justice in a turbulent time among one of the few generally literate cultures at the time Now theology - lots to argue about but thankfully not my thing. By the way the other two who received A's in the class - i always felt like an imposter being an ill prepared scholarship athlete -went to Yale and Oxford Divinity and both are very successful leading churches in the DMV area. I had it so easy because I could merely spot conflicts and inconsistencies and explicate the tension. But these two took it a step beyond and consistently reconciled there faith with what to me were rather obvious human created tensions. They were not my cup of tea but intellectually I respected them, even when not buying into their objectives. Having no parents or guidance, I thank the professor who really taught me tolerance. Never have been proselytized because I have a respectful presence which politely expresses no interest. I had no problem dealing with science either, taking a biology class on evolution which was ahead of its time.

One thing Christians have going for the. The founder of their faith, even if unwitting or unintended, was not a warlord.

Anonymous wrote:Are there any "aggressively" liberal churches?

I think when people say they want "politics free" they mean liberal.

I haven’t been in awhile but at one point I would have described Table Church in DC as “aggressively liberal”.

Anonymous wrote:Are there any "aggressively" liberal churches?

I think when people say they want "politics free" they mean liberal.

I think when people say they want politics free they mean they want a church that embraces their political agenda disguised as religion.

Anonymous wrote:Hi all,

I am looking for a church in the DC area. Preferably Episcopalian or Presbyterian, but honestly any mainline Protestant church will do. The difficulty is I am looking for a church that is NOT overly political - seems to be an issue in DC, where all of the churches are either aggressively conservative or liberal. I am trying to avoid lectures about how MAGA/social justice is the way, the truth, and the light and just trying to find a traditional church. Any recommendations? I don't want to be subjected to sermons about critical race theory or Donald Trump being the most Christian president ever (which, as a Christian, lol no). Any suggestions?

Thanks!

Any church doing this needs to be reported to the IRS

Anonymous wrote:Hi all,

I am looking for a church in the DC area. Preferably Episcopalian or Presbyterian, but honestly any mainline Protestant church will do. The difficulty is I am looking for a church that is NOT overly political - seems to be an issue in DC, where all of the churches are either aggressively conservative or liberal. I am trying to avoid lectures about how MAGA/social justice is the way, the truth, and the light and just trying to find a traditional church. Any recommendations? I don't want to be subjected to sermons about critical race theory or Donald Trump being the most Christian president ever (which, as a Christian, lol no). Any suggestions?

Thanks!

How far are you willing to travel?

Are there any "aggressively" liberal churches?

I think when people say they want "politics free" they mean liberal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course Jesus was a radical.

Why on earth do you think everyone in power wanted him dead?

Jesus was no radical. He merely repeated traditional Jewish teaching. The gospels were written decades after Jesus died. We don’t even know if there ever was a Jesus. Why he was condemned to death, if in fact he ever lived, is lost in history.

You are totally and completely wrong. Please cite your sources.





There’s no doubt Christ existed.

"Christ"? though your sources are questionable, there may have been an itinerant Jewish preacher named Jesus. But there's no proof of a Christ -- that's all religious belief.

The term "historical Jesus" refers to the life and teachings of Jesus as interpreted through critical historical methods, in contrast to what are traditionally religious interpretations.[1][2] It also considers the historical and cultural contexts in which Jesus lived.[3][4][5][6] Virtually all scholars of antiquity accept that Jesus was a historical figure, and the idea that Jesus was a mythical figure has been consistently rejected by the scholarly consensus as a fringe theory.[7][8][9][10][11] Scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the biblical accounts, with only two events being supported by nearly universal scholarly consensus: Jesus was baptized and Jesus was crucified.[12][13][14][15]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus#:~:text=Virtually%20all%20scholars%20of%20antiquity,consensus%20as%20a%20fringe%20theory.

That you reject the historical consensus about the existence of JC- you aren’t someone to be taken seriously. You are fringe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course Jesus was a radical.

Why on earth do you think everyone in power wanted him dead?

Jesus was no radical. He merely repeated traditional Jewish teaching. The gospels were written decades after Jesus died. We don’t even know if there ever was a Jesus. Why he was condemned to death, if in fact he ever lived, is lost in history.

Why He was condemned to death is “lost history?”



Jesus existed, and although you may not like it, it’s not controversial to accept Jesus was a real man who walked the earth, and was executed. Historians, scholars, professors, regardless of their religious beliefs, accepted Jesus existed.

Anonymous wrote:Jesus' teachings were inherently political and revolutionary. They shape how you view society and your interactions with your fellow human beings. You can't separate the church from politics.

The guy who said to render unto Cesar that which is Cesar’s and who was rejected as messiah precisely because he wasn’t delivering revolution and political liberation for his people was political and revolutionary?

Anonymous wrote:Grace Covenant in Chantilly

In 10 years I can’t tell you the political affiliation of the pastor. He’s so ambiguous in his comments..., on the fence... “pray for our leaders” because they need help? or because they are doing what we want?

what happened w his son that he had to step down?

Ok, so, to summarize, recommendations from this group are:
McLean Bible
Fall Church Anglican
St. John’s Lafayette
McLean Presbyterian
Little Falls Presbyterian
St. Peter’s Episcopal in Arlington
National Presbyterian
All Saints Episcopal, Chevy Chase
Fourth Presbyterian, Bethesda

What do people think of Grace Episcopal, Georgetown?

Anonymous wrote:St. John’s, Lafayette square, downtown. Episcopal. Leans left like most of DC but very much strives not to be overtly political in sermons or liturgy.

Maybe with the new pastor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course Jesus was a radical.

Why on earth do you think everyone in power wanted him dead?

Jesus was no radical. He merely repeated traditional Jewish teaching. The gospels were written decades after Jesus died. We don’t even know if there ever was a Jesus. Why he was condemned to death, if in fact he ever lived, is lost in history.

You are totally and completely wrong. Please cite your sources.





There’s no doubt Christ existed.

"Christ"? though your sources are questionable, there may have been an itinerant Jewish preacher named Jesus. But there's no proof of a Christ -- that's all religious belief.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus was not a “refugee” in any sense meaningful to today’s world. For one thing, Jesus’ family never left the Roman Empire; they simply fled from one region of Roman territory to another Roman territory. That would be like someone moving legally from one state to another within the USA to leave the jurisdiction of the governor of the first state. Also, Luke makes it clear that Joseph and Mary went out of their way to follow Roman law in adhering to the census (Luke 2:1–5). Everything they did was legal.

This is why churches should not get political. They bend the truth and use the Bible and the life of Jesus to further their political opinions.

Jesus and His family moved to Egypt in order to escape King Herod’s murderous intentions, but they had a plan, and they had supplies and support. Their trip was entirely self-funded, due to the gifts of the magi. And their sojourn in Egypt was short. The family remained there until the death of Herod, at which time they returned home (Matthew 2:19–21). Given these details, there’s no real parallel to the modern, indigent refugee who asks permission to enter a new country to avoid some calamity.

I really dislike listening to preaching from ignorant people, ignorant meaning uneducated and perhaps willfully so.

They were political refugees. From King Herod. He had no jurisdiction over people in Egypt and he wanted to kill Jesus.

AND SEEKING ASYLUM IS ABSOLUTELY LEGAL BY INTERNATIONAL LAW YOU ABSOLUTE POTATO.

The modern ideas of borders that you are discussing didn't exist in the Roman empire- my father has a PHD in Classics, is a devout Christian, and he absolutely deplores this common argument that you put forth.

And the self-funded thing b.c of the gifts is just hilarious!! You are like a parody of a jerk. Calling refugees indigent is just the cherry on top. Just say you hate poor people and don't want them around you.

"I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
"Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me’” (Matthew 25:40 NIV).

but when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, [and] the blind" (Luke 14:12-14)

So how did Joe and Mary pay for their flight? What happened to the gifts of the Magi?

If borders didn’t exist, why didn’t Herod have jurisdiction in Egypt?