For liberal Christians only

[Paidiske]

Sometimes, anger is the only healthy response to our experiences.

If we get stuck there, that can be a problem; but it can also be a problem to try to suppress it out of misplaced guilt or the like.

 

[FireDragon76]

Sometimes, anger is the only healthy response to our experiences.

If we get stuck there, that can be a problem; but it can also be a problem to try to suppress it out of misplaced guilt or the like.

You're right. I rarely stop to consider that my anger might be justified.

I suppose what makes me angry was I confronted my pastor with grievances and he basically gave a Sunday school lesson instead of really validating anything I had to say.

 

[Paidiske]

I suppose what makes me angry was I confronted my pastor with grievances and he basically gave a Sunday school lesson instead of really validating anything I had to say.

I'd be angry with that too. It sounds like pretty poor pastoral care.

I still wonder whether a spiritual director might be the right sort of person to help you sort through everything. Is that something you've considered at all?

 

[FireDragon76]

I'd be angry with that too. It sounds like pretty poor pastoral care.

I still wonder whether a spiritual director might be the right sort of person to help you sort through everything. Is that something you've considered at all?

Yes. I'm not sure how that would work with somebody like me who has fairly liberal beliefs, though. For instance, I accept the conclusions of the Jesus Seminar, more or less, and just telling my pastor that was something he let me know he didn't approve of at all.

I have a friend in New Zealand who is trying to hook me up with an American pastor she knows, to have somebody to talk to from a genuinely liberal Christian perspective.

 

[Paidiske]

A spiritual director shouldn't be trying to tell you what to believe, or approving/disapproving of your beliefs. They should be helping you to reflect on your own experiences/beliefs and so on.

I've had four spiritual directors who belonged to three different denominations; I'm sure their own beliefs differed with mine at various points. But their job is to work with the directee within the framework of the directee's understanding.

 

[dms1972]

Fire-Dragon, I read your post, and while I am not following you I do pick up on your posts in various threads from time to time - please give me a hearing if you can - you sound in some respects just like where I was intellectually a good few years ago - I seemed to be hearing people saying a lot "I accept the results of the Jesus Seminar".

Even in my teens I went from what I thought was a bona-fide conversion experience and then back into Bultmann, who I must have picked up even earlier - back down the well trod path away from New Testament Christianity.

I used to feel in my teens great and hopeful about seeking and finding a historical Jesus, apart from Scripture in some way. If I could put all this on a historical, scientific basis I felt I would be much more effective in convincing others, offering them something outside the Bible, and more convinced myself. I adopted the "criterion of disimilarity" methodology without really questioning it, its only recently I have been led to ask questions about that like why should Jesus who was Jewish and must have been brought up knowing the tradition of the elders etc., why should he never say anything distinctly Jewish?

What is the motivation of later scholars changing the texts, putting in sayings that Jesus never said. How could people invent the sort of things he said if he never said them - could anyone really event such sublime sayings, and dialogues as in the NT Gospels?

I spent a lot of time in introspection - asking myself as honestly as I could what where my reasons for turning away from New Testament Christianity.

Even if you no longer identify as a christian, it would be good if you could find a church that is accepting of you at the place you are at in your search.

Keep posting on the forums anyway you are welcome here.

I am not going to tell you to read the Fundamentals or John McArthur, but if you would be open to looking at Otto Borchert's The Original Jesus, I think you might find it a helpful treatise on Jesus. There is also a book called Investigating Jesus: A Historians Quest, by John Dickson.

Anyway take care, and I hardly need to say you are welcome to keep posting on the forums.

 

[Brianlear]

I accept the conclusions of the Jesus Seminar, and on the issue of God's existence, I am not a realist, though I think the idea of God can be useful for some people, I think it doesn't make any sense to me except perhaps as a metaphor. Though I am not a philosophical naturalist and I do believe in some kind of existence after death. I do believe in prayer and sometimes I do pray, but I do not pray to God as most Christians would understand it. It's just a time for me to focus on having positive intentions for myself and other people.

I think the first issue is, you aren't sure if you are a theist or not. To me, thats sort of the fundamental question that everything else flows from. And if you get stuck there, you're going to be stuck at square 1 forever. You will have to decide for yourself, first, whether you believe it is "possible" that there is a master entity in control of the entire universe. This can be a very difficult point to get to. For me, it helps to be out in nature, or at least look at something natural like a tree, something with significant complexity. Look at the mathematics behind how that "thing" is alive, how complex it is. Something MUST have dreamed that up and brought it to life. How that happened, could be debated forever. But you need to get to the point where you at least believe its POSSIBLE.

I don't agree with the Bible for the most part, don't consider it to be a magical book, and don't believe alot on the creed. In fact I find forcing people to say a creed to be a terrible idea. I don't consider myself a bad person and I don't want a blood sacrifice so that "God" can forgive me. I don't operate by guilt in my life anymore. I am not a sinner.

The bible is an incredibly complex piece of historical literature with far-ranging interpretations. Though the part about Jesus is pretty concrete. I'd say don't focus too much on the details at this point. You still have to decide if you're even a theist, first

But I do find myself missing church this time of year, and I guess I continue to respect Jesus' teachings about compassion and justice. So it's not easy.

Respecting his teachings is, actually, a HUGE part of believing in him. The fact that his teachings differed so significantly from the major life philosophies of the time period, I believe, lends support to his divine origin. Doesn't prove, but does lend support.

My partner continues to go to church most Sundays. But I don't go.I think I'm very angry about all the injustice Christians have done throughout the years, and esp. the attitudes Christians have had about LGBT people . My church's stance on the issue is simply too ambiguous, and I don't see how I can consider it anything but a moral failing to have anything against gay or trans people. And in my own life, I do not have friendship with those who think otherwise, it's a deal-breaker for me. I have thought about visiting a moral liberal church, like the UCC which is more explicitly pro-LGBT, but I am so burned out I just can't work up the motivation.

Christians have been judging people, and in doing so, defying Jesus, for centuries. It's nothing new, and it feels terrible when you are the focus of it. Just know that true Christians will never judge you for how you live or who you are. They may have a wildly different interpretation of the bio-psycho-social facts surrounding the issue, but someone who follows Jesus should never judge you.

Nobody in their right mind would claim that the Bible contains any sort of medical or psychological exploration of non-standard gender or sexuality. It's basically silent on the issue. There are a few frequently cherry-picked verses that people like to use, but the vast majority of the Bible has to do with the coming of Yeshua to Earth, not gender and sexuality.

People claimed the Bible supported Earth as center of the universe too. The point is, people will contort the Bible to fit their preconceived notions in any way they see fit. You are RIGHT to reject that. The problem is, anywhere in humanity you look, Christian or not, you will find people doing precisely the same thing. A Christian church SHOULD, ostensibly, be the one place in the world where you can go and expect not to be judged or ostracized. As you have seen, however, its not so simple.

I guess my point is, making a decision about who God is, Jesus, or Christianity in general based off what any one particular person says or does, is a bad idea. You have to decide for yourself.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think the first issue is, you aren't sure if you are a theist or not. To me, thats sort of the fundamental question that everything else flows from. And if you get stuck there, you're going to be stuck at square 1 forever. You will have to decide for yourself, first, whether you believe it is "possible" that there is a master entity in control of the entire universe. This can be a very difficult point to get to. For me, it helps to be out in nature, or at least look at something natural like a tree, something with significant complexity. Look at the mathematics behind how that "thing" is alive, how complex it is. Something MUST have dreamed that up and brought it to life. How that happened, could be debated forever. But you need to get to the point where you at least believe its POSSIBLE.

My spirituality does have room for wonder and awe but I read the Bible and I just don't resonate with much of it, increasingly. If you are familiar with Dr. Valerie Tarico, she is a psychologist that takes apart the Old Testament concept of God and shows how it's the result of cognitive errors and the moral lessons these stories teach are far from benign. She is also a former evangelical who went to Wheaton college.

Respecting his teachings is, actually, a HUGE part of believing in him. The fact that his teachings differed so significantly from the major life philosophies of the time period, I believe, lends support to his divine origin. Doesn't prove, but does lend support.

One could appreciate Jesus as a humanist or a non-Christian, and understand him in a completely different way. That is where I am at.

I guess my point is, making a decision about who God is, Jesus, or Christianity in general based off what any one particular person says or does, is a bad idea. You have to decide for yourself.

I appreciate your input. You are right, people should make up their own minds. Unfortunately, I haven't found a religious community that shares my attitudes and where it is safe to find flourishing.

 

[Brianlear]

My spirituality does have room for wonder and awe but I read the Bible and I just don't resonate with much of it, increasingly. If you are familiar with Dr. Valerie Tarico, she is a psychologist that takes apart the Old Testament concept of God and shows how it's the result of cognitive errors and the moral lessons these stories teach are far from benign. She is also a former evangelical who went to Wheaton college.

Ancient theological texts aren't really a route to becoming a theist. Most people decide they believe in a God because they look at the world and are so amazed with its beauty and complexity, they feel it could not just be a random assemblage of coincidences. It must have been created by some type of "mastermind"--a being who is so vastly intelligent and creative, that we can barely even approach comprehension. It's at that point that Christianity enters the conversation. Jesus came out to people and said, "You know that vastly powerful being you are always wondering if they're actually real or not? Yea that's me."

When I learned about Christianity, I realized that I had to decide if I believed him or not. Which prompted a long period of questioning, investigation, and, ultimately, deciding I thought he was the real deal.

 

[FireDragon76]

Ancient theological texts aren't really a route to becoming a theist. Most people decide they believe in a God because they look at the world and are so amazed with its beauty and complexity, they feel it could not just be a random assemblage of coincidences. It must have been created by some type of "mastermind"--a being who is so vastly intelligent and creative, that we can barely even approach comprehension. It's at that point that Christianity enters the conversation. Jesus came out to people and said, "You know that vastly powerful being you are always wondering if they're actually real or not? Yea that's me.".

Thank you for sharing that perspective. I guess I would consider the notion that the world needs such an explanation to be strange and curious, and that the Christian explanation amounts to a crude anthropomorphism. I prefer a less anthropocentric perspective, the sort of stuff of Heidegger or similar philosophies.

I do not believe the historical Jesus ever said words to that effect, even while he clearly had a strong affinity with God and saw himself embodying God's mission for Israel. I believe that's something the Church put in his mouth. And I wouldn't be alone in that perspective, many liberal Protestant scholars and pastors would also agree. But many people in the pews who don't go through seminary training never encounter the sort of evidence those scholars consider.

My own former pastor rejected much of liberal scholarship, which is one thing that alienated me from the congregation and the church. I need a religion that engages me and allows me intellectual integrity and doesn't treat me like a rube.

 

[dms1972]

The difficulty is and I share it myself, is that people have a limited view of who God is. They may see something true enough but then some fall prey to the temptation to reduce God to that one thing, this will always be the case if we operate only on the basis of our own experiences. We are like the three blind men (or was it four?) and the elephant. Each of us has our experience of the elephant but we arrive at the wrong conclusion. Is it a snake, or maybe its a rope, no its tree trunk, no its not its a wall. We are finite we cannot comprehend God exhaustively in our own experiences. The theological liberals no more comprehend clearly who God is than the Wheaton College Prof.

Tell all the truth but tell it slant —
Success in Circuit lies
Too bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth's superb surprise
As Lightning to the Children eased
With explanation kind
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind

Emily Dickinson

 

[FireDragon76]

The difficulty is and I share it myself, is that people have a limited view of who God is, they may see something true enough but then they some fall prey to the temptation to reduce God to that one thing, this will always be the case if we operate only on the basis of our own experiences. We are like the three blind men (or was it four?) and the elephant. Each of us has our experience of the elephant but we arrive at the wrong conclusion. We are finite we cannot comprehend God exhaustively in our own experiences. The theological liberals no more comprehend clearly who God is than the Wheaton College Prof.

The liberal Protestants at least are driven by humanistic ethics to take the positions they do. I can appreciate that, whereas I'm not sure the sort of thing you are talking about is consistent with sound ethics.

BTW, the story of the men and the elephant is from India. I'm not sure whether it's Buddhist or Hindu, but it's not necessarily about God, but it does show how reality can be understood from different perspectives.

 

[dms1972]

The liberal Protestants at least are driven by humanistic ethics to take the positions they do. I can appreciate that, whereas I'm not sure the sort of thing you are talking about is consistent with sound ethics.

BTW, the story of the men and the elephants is from India. I'm not sure whether it's Buddhist or Hindu, but it's not necessarily about God, but it does show how reality has different perspectives possible.

Sorry i was editing my post and added the verse from Emily Dickinson

What sort of thing was i talking about in your view?

 

[FireDragon76]

Sorry i was editing my post and added the verse from Emily Dickinson

What sort of thing was i talking about in your view?

God being unknowable and we just have to take a leap of faith and trust. In the absence of evidence, that seems foolish. I need evidence that there is a path of some kind that has some kind of evidence for its veracity or efficacy. Protestantism doesn't really promise that, and from what I've seen, the virtues of the average person in the pew are quite mediocre and modest. Not impressive for a religion that claims to have exclusive truths. You'ld figure the truth would do more for people, but it seems to mostly confirm them in their mediocrity and conventionality.

In short, church people aren't so great, and I figure the institution is no better than the people in it, so I doubt anything is actually happening there. I've done more growing in my life by being in touch with people on the margins of this society than the people flocking to the respectability of churches and conventional morality.

 

[Tom 1]

A few months ago I stopped identifying as Christian and stopped going to church. I belong to an ELCA church. But I felt conflicted about identifying as Christian when I had so many problems with Christianity.

I find myself missing the people there and the social contact. But I'm not sure how I can identify as a Christian in good conscience.

I accept the conclusions of the Jesus Seminar, and on the issue of God's existence, I am not a realist, though I think the idea of God can be useful for some people, I think it doesn't make any sense to me except perhaps as a metaphor. Though I am not a philosophical naturalist and I do believe in some kind of existence after death. I do believe in prayer and sometimes I do pray, but I do not pray to God as most Christians would understand it. It's just a time for me to focus on having positive intentions for myself and other people.

I don't agree with the Bible for the most part, don't consider it to be a magical book, and don't believe alot on the creed. In fact I find forcing people to say a creed to be a terrible idea. I don't consider myself a bad person and I don't want a blood sacrifice so that "God" can forgive me. I don't operate by guilt in my life anymore. I am not a sinner.

But I do find myself missing church this time of year, and I guess I continue to respect Jesus' teachings about compassion and justice. So it's not easy.

My partner continues to go to church most Sundays. But I don't go.

I think I'm very angry about all the injustice Christians have done throughout the years, and esp. the attitudes Christians have had about LGBT people . My church's stance on the issue is simply too ambiguous, and I don't see how I can consider it anything but a moral failing to have anything against gay or trans people. And in my own life, I do not have friendship with those who think otherwise, it's a deal-breaker for me. I have thought about visiting a moral liberal church, like the UCC which is more explicitly pro-LGBT, but I am so burned out I just can't work up the motivation.

I suppose I need to meditate more. I used to do this every day for twenty minutes twice a day, but in the past month I've been lazy and it's hard to reinstitute the habit. I'm just not sure what direction I go in my life, whether I should give the church another shot, or I should formally become Buddhist.

I wonder about how Christianity developed, what makes it so definite in some ways but so open to different interpretations in others. The Jewish nation came out of the ancient world as one of the most clearly defined and cohesive ethnic groups with a definite sense of their own identity, and a very strong 'us and them' mentality. The same thing carries over into Christianity I think. But there's a lot of tribalism involved within Christianity, I don't know if that's the case within modern Judaism or not. In Christianity it has it's positive side, I've been part of some very close knit groups because of shared beliefs and that defintely has its benefits, but it has its downsides too. I can see how Christianity only 'works' if it is both rigid in some ways and open in others, open in terms of leaving room for the huge range of difference between one person and others. I think Abraham's story illustrates this quite well - he is clearly shown with all of his individual weaknesses and uncertainty, yet he holds on to a fixed notion of faith through it all, despite acting as if he didn't have this faith at times. Anyway I'm rambling a bit but there are so many questions that I've found a lot of Christians don't like to discuss or think about in any depth.

 

[FireDragon76]

I wonder about how Christianity developed, what makes it so definite in some ways but so open to different interpretations in others. The Jewish nation came out of the ancient world as one of the most clearly defined and cohesive ethnic groups with a definite sense of their own identity, and a very strong 'us and them' mentality. The same thing carries over into Christianity I think. But there's a lot of tribalism involved within Christianity, I don't know if that's the case within modern Judaism or not. In Christianity it has it's positive side, I've been part of some very close knit groups because of shared beliefs and that defintely has its benefits, but it has its downsides too. I can see how Christianity only 'works' if it is both rigid in some ways and open in others, open in terms of leaving room for the huge range of difference between one person and others. I think Abraham's story illustrates this quite well - he is clearly shown with all of his individual weaknesses and uncertainty, yet he holds on to a fixed notion of faith through it all, despite acting as if he didn't have this faith at times. Anyway I'm rambling a bit but there are so many questions that I've found a lot of Christians don't like to discuss or think about in any depth.

No need to apologize for your rambling. In fact, I found your post very insightful and one of the best I have read here, ever. And I am serious.

 

[Hazelelponi]

...

 

[Tom 1]

No need to apologize for your rambling. In fact, I found your post very insightful and one of the best I have read here, ever. And I am serious.

Uh thanks, you made me blush . Those are ideas I'm interested in discussing because I only really have a sort of nebulous sense of it all, there are so many factors involved.

 

[JackRT]

The liberal Protestants at least are driven by humanistic ethics to take the positions they do. I can appreciate that, whereas I'm not sure the sort of thing you are talking about is consistent with sound ethics.

BTW, the story of the men and the elephant is from India. I'm not sure whether it's Buddhist or Hindu, but it's not necessarily about God, but it does show how reality can be understood from different perspectives.

THE BLIND MEN AND THE ELEPHANT.

A HINDOO FABLE.

I.

IT was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.

II.

The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me!—but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"

III.

The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried: "Ho!—what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 't is mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"

IV.

The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:

"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"

V.

The Fourth reached out his eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
"'T is clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"

VI.

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"

VII.

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"

VIII.

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

MORAL.

So, oft in theologic wars
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!

 

[Brianlear]

Thank you for sharing that perspective. I guess I would consider the notion that the world needs such an explanation to be strange and curious, and that the Christian explanation amounts to a crude anthropomorphism. I prefer a less anthropocentric perspective, the sort of stuff of Heidegger or similar philosophies.

I think your impression that the Christian God has been anthropomorphized, is very accurate, and has been done through art mainly over thousands of years. That, however, has NOTHING to do with who he actually is and whether the Christian story is true or not.

I do not believe the historical Jesus ever said words to that effect, even while he clearly had a strong affinity with God and saw himself embodying God's mission for Israel. I believe that's something the Church put in his mouth. And I wouldn't be alone in that perspective, many liberal Protestant scholars and pastors would also agree. But many people in the pews who don't go through seminary training never encounter the sort of evidence those scholars consider.

It's true, there is no proof. You weren't there and you didn't see him do any miracles, or hear him say he was God with your own ears. If you require that level of proof to believe in something, or even entertain it as possible, then I'd say you MIGHT want to adjust your requirements, just a TINY bit

I need a religion that engages me and allows me intellectual integrity and doesn't treat me like a rube.

That's so true. Unfortunately, the Christian church has been treating people like "rubes" for some time now. PLEASE don't make a decision about God and his son based off that.