Why I left Christianity for Jesus (video and discussion)

[bekkilyn]

*Please note that this post is in the progressive/liberal Christianity group*

I came across this video today and thought it did a really good job addressing the problems within the religion and why people, whether they still be Jesus-followers or not, are entirely and thoroughly sick of it. (If you're coming into the thread as a conservative evangelical/fundamentalist with the intention of arguing and condemning everyone for not believing as you do, then please don't. Practically every other forum here on CF is available to you for that purpose.)

What I'd really like to have conversations about is how can we restore Christ into Christianity? Is "Christian" as a word too damaged to ever have any real meaning anymore when so many associate it NOT with the love and healing and restoration of Christ, but with hatred and bigotry and exclusion? Can we take it back to the extent that non-believers can really expect to *see* Jesus in those who witness in his name, or is it just too mired in politics and bible-worship and condemnation?

Anyway, here is the video link. Keep in mind if you are sensitive to such things that there are a couple places where the f-word gets used in an anecdote to describe what a homeless man was yelling when a church called the police on him. There is also a very cute dog in the video before the serious part gets started.

 

[SkyWriting]

*Please note that this post is in the progressive/liberal Christianity group*

I came across this video today and thought it did a really good job addressing the problems within the religion and why people, whether they still be Jesus-followers or not, are entirely and thoroughly sick of it. (If you're coming into the thread as a conservative evangelical/fundamentalist with the intention of arguing and condemning everyone for not believing as you do, then please don't. Practically every other forum here on CF is available to you for that purpose.)

What I'd really like to have conversations about is how can we restore Christ into Christianity? Is "Christian" as a word too damaged to ever have any real meaning anymore when so many associate it NOT with the love and healing and restoration of Christ, but with hatred and bigotry and exclusion? Can we take it back to the extent that non-believers can really expect to *see* Jesus in those who witness in his name, or is it just too mired in politics and bible-worship and condemnation?

Anyway, here is the video link. Keep in mind if you are sensitive to such things that there are a couple places where the f-word gets used in an anecdote to describe what a homeless man was yelling when a church called the police on him. There is also a very cute dog in the video before the serious part gets started.

Focus on the actions of Jesus and know that Jesus never blinded anyone for three days to teach them a lesson. It never happened.

 

[Not David]

Focus on the actions of Jesus and know that Jesus never blinded anyone for three days to teach them a lesson. It never happened.

Yes, St. Paul.

 

[Not David]

*Please note that this post is in the progressive/liberal Christianity group*

I came across this video today and thought it did a really good job addressing the problems within the religion and why people, whether they still be Jesus-followers or not, are entirely and thoroughly sick of it. (If you're coming into the thread as a conservative evangelical/fundamentalist with the intention of arguing and condemning everyone for not believing as you do, then please don't. Practically every other forum here on CF is available to you for that purpose.)

What I'd really like to have conversations about is how can we restore Christ into Christianity? Is "Christian" as a word too damaged to ever have any real meaning anymore when so many associate it NOT with the love and healing and restoration of Christ, but with hatred and bigotry and exclusion? Can we take it back to the extent that non-believers can really expect to *see* Jesus in those who witness in his name, or is it just too mired in politics and bible-worship and condemnation?

Anyway, here is the video link. Keep in mind if you are sensitive to such things that there are a couple places where the f-word gets used in an anecdote to describe what a homeless man was yelling when a church called the police on him. There is also a very cute dog in the video before the serious part gets started.

That's an interesting topic, I feel current US politics try to acommodate Christ to their view rather than accommodating their view to Christ. Of course, all of us has done that, even myself.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

*Please note that this post is in the progressive/liberal Christianity group*

Please note that Jesus Christ of Nazareth is progressive as well. That aside, I enjoyed the video very much. There is no restoring Christ in the Church as His Church, known as the Body of Christ, lives in all those who have been regenerated and walk in His Spirit, like the man in your video. These are the people who hear His voice,"my sheep shall l hear my voice". Jesus Christ of Nazareth
Very few would take offense to what the Pastor did. Yet one did take offence. And why? Because the Spirit lives in him.

13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

 

[bekkilyn]

There is no restoring Christ in the Church as His Church, known as the Body of Christ, lives in all those who have been regenerated and walk in His Spirit, like the man in your video. These are the people who hear His voice,"my sheep shall l hear my voice". Jesus Christ of Nazareth

My question though was about if we could restore Christ into Christianity and NOT if we could restore Christ to his church. HUGE difference!

Is "Christianity" as it stands even salvageable?

I agree that Jesus Christ is progressive and actually quite radical as well!

 

[bekkilyn]

Focus on the actions of Jesus and know that Jesus never blinded anyone for three days to teach them a lesson. It never happened.

Do you mean that the person (Paul?) wasn't blinded for three days at all, or that it just wasn't Jesus who did it? Or maybe that part of the story wasn't meant to be taken as a literal event, but symbolic in some way?

 

[SkyWriting]

Do you mean that the person (Paul?) wasn't blinded for three days at all, or that it just wasn't Jesus who did it? Or maybe that part of the story wasn't meant to be taken as a literal event, but symbolic in some way?

Jesus does not blind people. Jesus does not work that way.
I have asked many people if Jesus forces people to believe in Him.
They all say no. He did not and He does not do it.

 

[bekkilyn]

Jesus does not blind people. Jesus does not work that way.
I have asked many people if Jesus forces people to believe in Him.
They all say no. He did not and He does not do it.

In your view, how should the three day blindness be interpreted? What caused it? Or did it even really happen? What is the message we should be getting out of it and how do we instead see Jesus in a more authentic way through our understanding?

I think answering these types of questions concerning scripture in general (not just with this one example) is very important when it comes to being witnesses for Christ and ambassadors for God's kingdom. If the fundamentalist "bible literalist" view of scripture is that "Jesus caused Paul's blindness in order to punish him and force him to his will" because that seemingly common view of scripture is consistent with what I consider to be a very narrow view of God as a vengeful, spiteful, punishing entity that uses fear and condemnation to keep everyone in line, then it is important to scripturally deconstruct such harmful views and instead more accurately interpret these passages through lenses that are more consistent with the character of Christ.

 

[PloverWing]

A couple of thoughts.

1) It sounds like the speaker was already a "worship minister" in his church before he started to question his beliefs, and before he noticed that his church believed in restrictions on women and in the imperative of evangelizing people lest they burn in hell. I'm glad he's started to think about what he believes and why, but it's odd to me that he got as far as being an (ordained?) minister before thinking about these things. Shouldn't these questions have come up during his ministry training and the ordination process? I expected that seminarians would be taken through a process of questioning and reflection before entering the ordained ministry.

2) I think he's exactly right about the homeless man sleeping outside his church. Which brings me to...

3) I don't know how damaged the word "Christian" is. It's not a word I want to let go of. But the word does have lots of baggage glued onto it. Maybe we first work on living in kindness, generosity, and mercy, and after we've successfully done that, we get to reclaim the word Christian.

 

[SkyWriting]

In your view, how should the three day blindness be interpreted? What caused it? Or did it even really happen? What is the message we should be getting out of it and how do we instead see Jesus in a more authentic way through our understanding?

I think answering these types of questions concerning scripture in general (not just with this one example) is very important when it comes to being witnesses for Christ and ambassadors for God's kingdom. If the fundamentalist "bible literalist" view of scripture is that "Jesus caused Paul's blindness in order to punish him and force him to his will" because that seemingly common view of scripture is consistent with what I consider to be a very narrow view of God as a vengeful, spiteful, punishing entity that uses fear and condemnation to keep everyone in line, then it is important to scripturally deconstruct such harmful views and instead more accurately interpret these passages through lenses that are more consistent with the character of Christ.

Jesus did not, does not cause blindness. It never happened.
I can support this with billions of cases over 1000's of years
where Jesus does not blind people to cause them to convert.

If this does not satisfy the point then we can argue that the
only true Christians are blinded for three days by Jesus to
force then to bow down and worship Him.

The rest of us have not been born again yet.

 

[bekkilyn]

Jesus did not, does not cause blindness. It never happened.
I can support this with billions of cases over 1000's of years
where Jesus does not blind people to cause them to convert.

If this does not satisfy the point then we can argue that the
only true Christians are blinded for three days by Jesus to
force then to bow down and worship Him.

The rest of us have not been born again yet.

I don't believe there is an argument. I'm just confused because I've been asking what the blindness *was* and you keep answering with what it *wasn't*.

 

[bekkilyn]

A couple of thoughts.

1) It sounds like the speaker was already a "worship minister" in his church before he started to question his beliefs, and before he noticed that his church believed in restrictions on women and in the imperative of evangelizing people lest they burn in hell. I'm glad he's started to think about what he believes and why, but it's odd to me that he got as far as being an (ordained?) minister before thinking about these things. Shouldn't these questions have come up during his ministry training and the ordination process? I expected that seminarians would be taken through a process of questioning and reflection before entering the ordained ministry.

The process of becoming an evangelical pastor isn't necessarily all that formal. They are often ordained by their local church, perhaps by laying on of hands, and their ministry training is hands-on and/or perhaps going to "bible college" which may or may not be an actual seminary. It did sound like he started to ask questions while he was in school, but that it didn't all start coming to a head until he was out of school and working in a church. I think he was trying to sum up in one short video a process that probably took him years, especially when coming from an environment that is very cult-like.

 

[Blade]

Left Christianity.. I guess its how one interprets the word. To me its always "Christ"..people that follow Christ. I'd rather be called a follow of Christ but.. matters not. Granted it was 1st used to make fun of them.

Did you listen to the guy? Whats the first word from his mouth? The problem is not Christianity. We are not of this world. This world is not our home. We are a holy people. Is this about YOU or Him? Its old and maybe silly but.. its a truth.. would that word that seems to mean nothing.. EVER come out of Christs mouth? Why? Everything He does is LIFE! Is good..for the good.. on and on. LIFE! Surprised no one caught this.

 

[FireDragon76]

I'm a member of a relatively liberal denomination- they don't preach hellfire and such, but still I have the same sort of issues. I stopped going because it's not clear exactly what I need to believe: I've read and accepted the conclusions of higher criticism of the Bible, I can no longer take the Nicene Creed at face value, and I don't believe the Bible is infallible or inerrant. I believe Jesus was an inspiring Jewish teacher who challenged the religion of his day, was killed, and some of his followers interpreted his death as an exaltation (perhaps though visionary experiences). I don't believe in a literal resurrection and I don't believe in a transcendent, personal God.

I think Christianity helps alot of people, but it also does alot of harm and it's also got alot of human accretions around the actual historical Jesus, the same as many other religions who want to believe their religious leader embodied transcendent truth (Buddhists say the Buddha is the teacher of "Gods and Men" and that he is an emination of a primordial Buddha- not unlike the concept of "Incarnation" in Christianity).

 

[hedrick]

OK, but remember that Jesus himself didn't see himself as a moral teacher. He certain taught about and cared about what we do. But that was an effect of his primary concern: God's intervention through him to right the world.

 

[FireDragon76]

OK, but remember that Jesus himself didn't see himself as a moral teacher. He certain taught about and cared about what we do. But that was an effect of his primary concern: God's intervention through him to right the world.

After studying historical criticism, I am far from certain about that conclusion.

At any rate, I am unconvinced the institutional mainline churches are an appropriate place to develop ones capacities as a human being towards virtue. I am no longer interested in struggling through cultures wars as a silent bystander, hoping and praying that my co-religionists become enlightened.

I studied the Enneagram and according to my Enneagram type (artist), the worst possible thing I could do is attempt to help other people and lose myself in the process. Instead, I must do what I believe is right. And I believe that's true. So if I believe in God at all, it's more like how Quakers might understand it, and far away from evangelical religion. I look within for guidance, I cannot look to pastors enmeshed in institutional respectability.

 

[bèlla]

I understand where he’s coming from. I love Christ but cannot subscribe to Christianity.

 

[FireDragon76]

I understand where he’s coming from. I love Christ but cannot subscribe to Christianity.

Most mainline churches are trying too hard to be irenic, even towards bad actors in our society, because they are afraid of losing people. As Jesus said, don't give what is holy to dogs and don't toss pearls before swine. And if salt loses its saltiness, it is not good except to be thrown out and trampled.

When churches can decide to stand for something concrete that actually makes a difference beyond what I can do in my own life cultivating my own mind, maybe it will be a different story for me.

The real Jesus was a liberal Jew and social reformer with an apolcalyptic and mystical vision of the world. Until churches actually preach that, I can't take them seriously.

 

[bèlla]

@FireDragon76

I’m not into group think, people pleasing, seeking validation from others, or condemning unbelievers.