Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by AMY ADAMS SQUIRE on 1st mo. 21, 2012 at 8:40pm

Hi. I like your name. I'm kind of new too and have discovered the same thing. I have found some interesting dialogues and information on Facebook. I have one posting on my own site right now. My page is Amy Squire.

Permalink Reply by MerryAntics on 1st mo. 21, 2012 at 8:48pm

Thanks Amy :)  I'll look on Facebook!  Hopefully some of the original (notice I refrained from saying older?) Friends of the Liberal persuasion will jump in also.

About my screen name,  Merry is my outlook and Antics reflects my approach.  I usually have the attention span of a gnat.  ;)

AMY ADAMS SQUIRE said:

Hi. I like your name. I'm kind of new too and have discovered the same thing. I have found some interesting dialogues and information on Facebook. I have one posting on my own site right now. My page is Amy Squire.

Permalink Reply by Marianna Boncek on 1st mo. 21, 2012 at 9:10pm

I don't find a lot of activity, but if you post, people tend to reply. Welcome :)

Permalink Reply by Gustavo Cordoba Guerrero on 1st mo. 22, 2012 at 8:51pm

Hello,

with all of facebook, twitter, emails in our head, it is some times hard to watch and post in all of them.

Anyway, thanks MerryAntics for shaking us a bit. It is needed from time to time.

Permalink Reply by MerryAntics on 1st mo. 22, 2012 at 10:48pm

No worries :)

There are other lines of discussion I have been reading.    Is there a place where I might find more about the "Liberal" tradition? 

I see a lot of controversy in other discussions about those of the Liberal persuasion and whether or not they (liberals) even fit as Quakers.  Perhaps some Conservative or Evangelical Quakers may wonder whether there should be such a thing as a "Liberal Quaker."  Those posts I've seen frequently point to the original Quaker tradition:  Bible based Christian.  I see those who say we are to be followers of Christ just as the Apostles were.  Uh, anyone else recall that Jesus warned Peter that he would deny Him... and whoopsie, Peter did. Three times!   Thomas must have been the original "show me" Missourian.   Frankly, Paul had no use for women unless it had to do with domestic tasks.  Well clearly, I cannot be a follower of Paul, I'm spouting off already!  It is quite likely that I'm all wet.  That's fine.  I may dry out over time.

For myself, I am a wanderer and wonderer, and a theist.  I believe that the world we inhabit is not an accident.   It is likely (to me) to be a product of Creation, just not in 7 days as the indicated in the OT.  IMHO, the books of the bible may have been inspired by God, (The Divine, The Creator) however, they (the books) are terribly flawed because of the limited understanding of the people therein.  How can a human begin to understand the mind of the Creator?  Even with all the science discovered to date I wonder who can comprehend the complexity of the universe, not to mention even the human body.   So for myself I am comfortable admitting my ignorance and standing in awe of it all.

I am merely an explorer here, wondering if there might be other like-minded people.   I learned a long time ago that amongst people sometimes we may simply agree to disagree.  Others may have differing thoughts or opinions that do not reflect poorly on me or my opinions, nor mine on them.   There is no need for rancor in the exchange of ideas. 

Peace be with you all.