We are Stardust
Why I couldn't be a liberal/progressive Christian
The Kingdom was not to come with observation, but was a state of mind, a oneness with God. I found that it was difficult to pin down what this whole thing (Christianity) was about anymore.
Especially what the whole Jesus thing was about.
If the kingdom of God was within us, what did Jesus have to do with that?
Several months before all this started, a friend had blogged that her husband had blogged about some atonement theory that I had never heard of. When looking into that I was surprised to find that Penal Substitution (which is what I learned pretty much from the start) was not one that was always believed and that, really, there had been several ideas to come out of theological minds (and scripture) as to why Jesus had to die.
Did God demand blood or did Jesus offer it?
Was Jesus's death a payment for sin or a ransom to Satan?
Was He a martyr or a victim?
To get us back to the Garden or to save us from Hell?
(One could pick any one of these ideas and run with it, but what was the TRUTH?)
I began to venture out into the sites of liberal/progressive Christians. As much as I enjoyed the non-judgmental love and the great social justice ideas something was off. For the most part progressives are for gay marriage rights and the ordination of women and many are even pro choice, but what did the bible say about these things?
Many would point to the red letters only. Okay, I get that idea, but if these same letters were in the same canon with all this other stuff, what was true and what was not? And even so, Jesus said that if one divorces, it constitutes adultery. ????? How many churches are still clinging onto that one? Even in a metaphorical sense, Jesus says a lot of things that many Christians ignore:
(I know this video is quite irreverent, forgive me)
It started to occur to me that just about all of us pick and chose what we think Jesus's words mean. I found many of the things he said so unsettling that I was thrilled when Pauline dispensationalism entered my life years before.
So in looking into these red letter words more closely and very seriously for the first time (if this was the only part of the bible we could really count on) something was becoming more and more clear.
The whole thing (including the red letters) was full of contradictions, or at least it seemed to me. At that I began to look into these contradictions objectively without running to apologists to comfort me. I also began to wander outside the boundaries of Christianity and explore what the other faiths had to say about spirituality.
Next Part
I started out in one of the more liberal denominations, and it was trying to look at how all the things that I'd been taught fit together that broke my ability to believe. The more I looked at it, the less sense it made. However, because my original denomination was more concerned with grace than guilt, with doing our best rather than getting everything exactly right, my loss of belief was a lot gentler than most.
ReplyDeleteHave you written about your loss of faith anywhere Michael?
DeleteKind of. The Internet wasn't really... um... around at that point, so everything I have is retrospective.
DeleteHere's one take on it.
Here's another.
Oh! I also, at one point, wrote out a description of why I don't believe, which doesn't cover the story of how I got from there to here, but does (I think) a fairly good job of describing why Christianity doesn't work for me now.
Cool. I read those and some linked to those. It does sound like the Christianity you grew up with was much more reasonable. I didn't start believing until I was an adult, but I went all in with it.
DeleteI like what you said about your spiritual experiences, too. I've also had them and at the end realized that they weren't unique to Jesus and Yahweh. I wrote about that on my old blog, but I may repost that one here later.
I enjoy your thoughts.
ReplyDeleteAnd at some point you ask yourself what is the most likely source of the Bible. Was it the work of the creator of the universe wanting to communicate an urgent message for mankind or was it the combined works of ordinary humans with numerous human agendas?
ReplyDeleteWhen I learned of the Documentary Hypothesis, I was relieved, but saddened, too. Not that it is a fact, but it does help to make sense of things.
DeleteHi, I think you were onto something about the atonement. If it's true (as I believe it is, but I know you no longer do), the different theories must nevertheless be mere analogies for a deeper reality. Christians who fight to the death for any particular analogy seem to me to be hubristic - thinking they can understand what in fact none of us can.
ReplyDeleteI think the same is true of understanding Jesus. He often spoke cryptically, using riddles, parables, figures of speech (including hyperbole), etc, which wasn't uncommon for his day. Any christian who claims (like Maria in the Counting Crows song) to be "close to understanding Jesus" is almost certainly not as close as they think. He wanted to make us think, not serve it to us on a plate.
But I am closer to understanding why you "began to wander outside the boundaries of Christianity and explore what the other faiths had to say about spirituality."
Thank you for reading unkleE,
DeleteJesus said to ask, seek, and knock and the door would be opened up to us. I understand that inner soul searching is a good spiritual practice and that God wouldn't just lay it out there, one has to want to find it, but, again, we all pick and chose what part of what Jesus says applies to us and therein lies the subjectiveness that makes anything go.
I agree with you here. I think most christians are very inconsistent in the way they interpret the Bible. I suppose I am guilty as well. But I'm inclined to think that the Bible is as much a catalyst as a text book, and God is looking for a response more than for us to pass an exam. So in one way I'm less worried about subjectiveness - as long as it is honest!
Delete"So in one way I'm less worried about subjectiveness - as long as it is honest!"
DeleteThis is actually quite refreshing to read. It's just too bad that many (most?) believers couldn't not care less about when former believers/skeptics, etc., say that they honestly believed and that they had honest doubt that led to honest conclusions. Much of the time it's all written-off.
correction: "could not care less", etc.
DeleteWhen you are told that your own thoughts, mind, reasoning, feelings, instincts, morals, are corrupt it is very hard to trust them. The only thing that one can do is shut all that down and try to believe what one has to.
Delete"And even so, Jesus said that if one divorces, it constitutes adultery."
ReplyDeleteThat's (not so) funny. I talked to someone today who's living on her own for years now. Guess what, her husband is living with another woman now. Why? Because the Catholic Church doesn't allow divorce.
Something is wrong with this picture, when/if this husband truly believes he's doing the "right" thing by living a life with another woman.
Shaking my head in disbelief...
I know divorce is a BIG no no in the RCC. I have heard of similar living arrangements with separated Catholics.
DeleteThe hypocrisy of the patriarchal dominated church is cyristal clear. It discriminates against women at every turn while turning a blind eye to the same sins of males ... but hey, as long as god's representative on earth (the pope, et.al.) is here to "interpret" the lord's commands, who are the wretched to argue? The real sad part is the woman referenced above has bought into the delusion hook, line and sinker that she is a 2nd or third class citizen compared to her (ex)husband who clearly has "earned" favor in the eyes of the lord by virtue of his loins.
DeleteIn my staunchest freethought days I was quite critical of liberal Christianity. I realize now that much of that was because I still tended to view it from my previous fundamentalist glasses. I still wouldn't want to wear that label because - for me at least - it would be too confining.
ReplyDeleteI guess I didn't understand the need to stay inside the Christian worldview at all in order to be spiritual.
DeleteI didn't, either. And I don't now. But I do think it is unfair to judge liberal Christianity by fundamentalist Christian standards, and that is what I used to do.
DeleteThe Bible of the liberals is a far different book than the Bible of the fundamentalists. And their idea of religious authority differs as well. I just wouldn't want the confinement of squaring the spiritual principles I hold with Christianity as popularly conceived. But I respect those who do.
I can only judge what seems to work (or not work) for me, if it works for others, that is fine.
DeleteI agree that the Bible of the liberals (and even the Catholics as I was once) is much different than the fundamentalism I eventually ended up with.
I take it there are more parts to come?
ReplyDeleteYes there are. I don't really know how many though:)
Delete