Looking over the articles on my blogs to date, I think it is safe to say that I have focused my articles on the ideas of what some would call "Conservative Christianity". I would admit doing so has been unfair. Certainly, those who would contemporarily be described as "Moderate" or "Liberal" Christians/theists/supernaturalists make their own erroneous claims and conclusions.
Perhaps the most common mistake I see moderate/liberal supernaturalists make is their manipulation and misuse of terms. As I have been an Atheist for a long time, I am beginning to see these kind of believers do these things in an attempt to hold onto, modify, or "fit" an old belief structure into a new one, which typically seem to come from greater education or the realization of old beliefs contradicting new beliefs which are more accurate. I also see this as a common step some theists go through on their way to Atheism.
"GOD IS LOVE"
For example, I have heard more than one person say that since "god is love" and since they believe in love, they therefore believe in god. This attempt at Aristotelian syllogistic logic is quite flawed. The person is equating god with love, however people understand "god" to be much more than "love" and I would bet the person who makes such statements does as well. I have little doubt this person thinks of god as possessing some kind of sentience, even if they hold a deistic view of god. They may also see god as the "cause" for the universe. This is much more than just love. Anyway, we already have a word for love. That word is "love" and we do not need a second which would in no way be different than the first.
Another statement I have heard people say is that "I'm spiritual, not religious". This statement is quite vague, to say the least. While this statement clearly means many different things to many different people, I know for some people, this statement means that the person holds onto some supernatural beliefs while not being a formal follower of a particular religion, religious denomination, or religious sect. In other words, the person seems to be asserting that they hold supernatural beliefs that are individualistic. I think it is fair to say that this person may not be the type of person who likes the idea of having an authority figure tell them what to believe.
Despite this, the word "spirituality" derives from the word "spirit". To date, there is no evidence whatsoever that people have a "spirit" or "soul". These are ancient concepts used by primative people to explain animation. There is as much evidence for "souls" as there is for Atlantis. Yet the description of people as being "spiritual" often means moral or good. I have been called a "spiritual" person by people who didn't know I was an Atheist. I'm curious what they would say if I told them I was an Atheist, but I have never said this to a person who has called me spiritual. The bottom line is that the word "spiritual" is very vague; so much so that it is almost nonsensical. I think other words could be put in its place which would be much clearer.
"ENERGY" AND "QUANTUM"
Terms from contemporary physics and other fields of science have been hijacked by New Age pseudoscientists like Deepak Chopra. So called "quantum healing" and "energy healing" are used by people who are nothing more than modern day snake oil salesmen. It is clear that these people either are not being intellectually honest or they do not understand basic scientific concepts, such as falsifiability and operational definitions.
We hear the term "energy" being thrown around a lot today, referring to what is called "qi" or "ch'i" in ancient and modern day Chinese culture. Throughout history there have been different definitions of qi. The definition I will focus on in this part of the article is "life energy" or "life force". I think it is true that if people assert things frequently, people will come to believe the assertions are true, even without proof. People may be surprised to hear this, but there is presently no evidence or proof whatsoever that such "energy" exists. People have tried to prove that such energy exists, but all have failed. The assertion that such "life energy" exists is as equally true as the assertion that two headed, cigar smoking unicorns exist.
The term "quantum" from the scientific field of physics is probably the most misused scientific term today. The word "quantum" refers to quantum mechanics, which is "a set of scientific principles describing the known behavior of energy and matter that predominate at the atomic scale" (wikipedia). It has nothing to do with healing. As the definition says, it describes the behaivor of microparticles. Yet charlatans like Chopra use this and other scientific words in ways never intended to spin a web of gibberish, which sounds interesting, but makes no valid sense.
In conclusion, there really is no difference between the reasonable and logical mistakes that "conservative Christians" make and those that more "liberal" and "moderate" supernaturalists/Christians make. Both make assertions without offering any proof of what they are talking about. Each group might as well be talking about and discussing mermaids living on Neptune.