I hope you're comfy.
Let me preface this post by saying that these are my beliefs. I'll do the best I can to present you with the facts as well as my opinion. Though since I'm writing this without my textbooks I can't cite any of it for you. Its there... just look on Google. And I'm being myself writing this... I'm not trying to give you a run-down of Christian Doctrine 101 or Theology 102... just being me.
Sometime in the year 2002-2003, a friend of mine from church told me that there are 2 things that could possibly happen when you go to seminary (which I was about to go to): 1. You graduate firm in your beliefs, with unwavering faith because it has been tested to its breaking point. 2. You come out of seminary distraut, with a faith that is in shards, and a sense of failing something.
I'd love to give that person credit where it is due... he was right. I came out with the second one.
Now the Christian church believes 5 root truths. Every denomination. Even Catholics, though they'll argue that there are more than 5 root truths. In the 1800's (maybe early 1900's, I'm not really sure) these became known as the fundamentals of faith. You'll see... when you read them, they sound naive and senseless. Here they are:
1. The inspiration of scripture as the literal, revealed word of God.
2. The virgin birth as the miraculous and literal means by which the divine nature of Christ has been guaranteed.
3. The substitutionary view of the atonement that was accomplished in the death of Jesus. The affirmation of the saving power of his blood and the gift of salvation that was accomplished by his death.
4. The certainty of the physical bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead. The accuracy of both the empty-tomb and the appearance stories in the gospel tradition.
5. The truth of the second coming of Jesus, the reality of the Day of Judgment, which would be based on the record of one's life, and the certainty of heaven and hell as eternal places of reward and punishment.
I think I'll take these one at a time. Then add some things.
The inspiration of scripture as the literal, revealed word of God.
I think you would be hard pressed to find a person that believes that God on high wrote the Bible. Or even dictated it. And scholars have proved that he didn't. Take for instance, the Torah, the first 5 books of the Bible or the Hebrew Bible... NOT written by God or Moses! There are 4 authors, rather groups of authors that wrote editions of the Pentateuch. They are:
J-Pro-Judah; anti-Israel, their rival. Less interested in Moses.
E-Pro-Israel; anti-Judah, their rival. Pro-Moses; Anti-Aaron.
P-Written as an alternative to JE. Pro-Priests, specifically the priests who claim to be descended from Aaron. Against rival priests who claim to be descended from Moses.
R-Redactor. J & E were put together earlier to create JE. The Redactor combined JE, D, & P, adding just a few lines of his own to make the transitions smooth. The D mentioned was a group that was Pro-Josiah... the king who's country collapsed from underneath him basically.
There are many other examples... I think my favorite one to laugh about is that the Gospel of John was most likely not written by John. :)
The virgin birth as the miraculous and literal means by which the divine nature of Christ has been guaranteed.
This one is kindof tricky for believers. And it is 2-fold. One part is that even the Gospels under scrutiny suggest that Jesus was not born of a Virgin. Lets go to the earliest written Gospel. Written approximately 70-90 years after Jesus chronologically died, the Gospel of Mark, chapter 3, verse 6 quite clearly says, "Is this not the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?" I can hear you now saying, "yeah, but that's just pointing out who his Mom is"... well no, its not. In those times, a Patriarchal society mind you, people were identified by their birth mother, and the allusion to his siblings meant that they all shared the same father... and the daddy wasn't God.
Second in this two-fold argument is about the divinity of Christ. Christ never claimed divinity. He claimed he was a prophet, no more. He even silenced the people that said that he was more than a prophet for fear that he would be killed. And yes, it finally caught up to him... mostly because Peter couldn't shut up. But the fact remains that Jesus was NEVER (even by the Gospels) assumed to be divine until the Council at Nicea. Thats right, a group of politicians, including the Roman Emperor Constantine got together in modern-day Turkey in the year 325 to decide the politics and direction of the Christian church (to which Constantine only joined from the pagans one year prior). They did a lot more too... read the Nicene Creed sometime. None of it existed before that.
The substitutionary view of the atonement that was accomplished in the death of Jesus. The affirmation of the saving power of his blood and the gift of salvation that was accomplished by his death.
I'll direct you again here to the Council of Nicea. The year was 325 folks. Kindof late to start throwing around rumors that Jesus healed everyone's sin wounds 322 years prior. Again, not much mention of it before this... Even though there was some mention of it before 325. The next fundamental pretty much covers that one.
The certainty of the physical bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead. The accuracy of both the empty-tomb and the appearance stories in the gospel tradition.
The Resurrection was not written into Mark (the earliest Gospel) until a very late edition of it... somewhere around AD 90-100.
I have much to say about the saving power of his blood, salvation, and atonement and how much they mean in relationship to the resurrection... read on to the bottom.
The truth of the second coming of Jesus, the reality of the Day of Judgment, which would be based on the record of one's life, and the certainty of heaven and hell as eternal places of reward and punishment.
Have you read the "Left Behind" series? Its crazy. My favorite book of the Bible was (and still is) Revelation. I enjoy it for what it is... a story. When the people met at another Council to decide what books (of the Bible) were cannonized and which ones were burned, they argued over this one for days. Not one of them then, nor anyone now should or did take Revelation seriously. It was written by a man, exiled to Patmos, who spent 20 some odd years in isolation. The accounts of visits to him are written down, I don't have my notes to cite where though. But this was one strange bird... Even then it wasn't written until AD 96.
After having written all of this, I'm wicked tired. But I promised a brief run-down on my thoughts about the crucifixion and resurrection.
The meat of the resurrection story is that Jesus died for our sins. He died then and there to erase our sin off of God's radar. Personally, I believe that this is barbaric. Any God that needs to kill or eternally punish those who stray away from him hasn't yet earned the title "God". He'd be essentially punishing that which he created for something that he created for you to have access to... ok, let me explain that. If creation is true (which it's not) then God created you in his image...blah, blah, blah. God is supposed to be perfect right? Then if you are like him, then he cannot punish his perfect being for choosing free will, which he also created.
This is why I don't believe in sin. I don't believe that humans are born into sin… and therefore I don't believe in the necessity of atonement. I don't believe in the theory of "Original Sin", partially because I know that there is no such thing as sin (only an ever changing theory of morality), and partially because there was no Adam, and there was no Eve, but even if there were, they were given the free will to eat from the tree that God created and then hipocritically said do not eat from. With no creation, there can be no original sin, no fall of mankind. Since there are also no universal laws, where would the basis for sin come from anyway?
As far as "sin" goes... I think that there is wrongdoing in this world. I think that there is a morality or a moral code that people live by. This code isn't written, but its a general feeling that pretty much anyone other than a sociopath feels about what is right and wrong. I DO NOT believe that this should be called "sin", mostly because sin, by definition, requires punishment. The bible even says it... "the wages of sin is death." Since I don't believe in the literal and physical resurrection of Jesus, I don't believe that the price for "my sin" has been "paid".
No sin, no need to have the sin attoned for... and therefore no need to have Jesus "conquor death".
Boy, I know that this has been a long post. And there is so much more I'd like to say. So comment, and I'll see what I can come up with.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I'm supposed to be doing Math now, but this is so much more interesting...
I guess to me the "five fundemental truths" don't seem ludicrous because I've had them pounded into my skull since birth...
I've never really doubted God's existence..I've doubted that He is as loving as everyone says...I've doubted if He even knows I exist...I've doubted his holiness...but I've never doubted His existence or if He was the Creator.
About "Left Behind"...I tried to read it, but got bored. Revelation is awesome, though. But it's the part of the Bible I have the hardest time beliveing...it all seems so distant and muddled.
you said, "Any God that needs to kill or eternally punish those who stray away from him hasn't yet earned the title "God". He'd be essentially punishing that which he created for something that he created for you to have access to..."
I've had that line of thinking myself before. Also, He, being God, knew we where going to sin, so if He, being all knowing, knew that we were going to sin, why didn't He crush Satan then and there? Or why didn't he tell Eve, "Stay away from snakes" Or block of the tree enetirely or not create the thing at all...or something..
I'm just babbling now...why is Faith so comlicated? I wish I was six again...
Basically, I reached the point where I no longer had a choice to ignore my skepticism. Knowledge of Good AND Evil made me choose between living a lie - something I will not do, or wrestling to make a very hard decision in going against everything I was ever taught.
My parents don't understand this. They have a very simple faith. And like the Shaker hymn says... "Tis a gift to be simple, tis a gift to be free..."
I've tried to ignore it...it's worked thus far..but I can't anymore. Now I'm begining to question everything I've ever been taught....if Mom knew about this, she'd freak.
I've heard I'm supposed to "Have faith like a child"...which is difficult, being the cynical teenager that I am. Many Christains I know are nice enough, but they seem phony. Even my parents sometimes...they're totally differnt people when they talk to me, and when they're praying. I'm tired of hearing "Do you think what you just did makes God happy?"
I'm so confused...I don't know what to believe.
Your line of thought on Christianity is SO familiar after having read Conversations with God. I sincerely resonate with what he says in that book and I think you would too.
1. This one isn't exactly right. I would agree that the denominations of Christianity believe in the divinely inspired word of God in the Bible, but it is not accurate to say that ALL denominations believe in the literal, revealed word of God. If you want a more accurate statement to make in this place, it would be that all denominations believe in God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, or the Holy Trinity. All denominations believe that and that's more accurate to be a root truth.
2. Your Mark 3:6 (which is actually 3:32) quote isn't entirely taken into proper context. What you are assuming, and possibly with good cause but not entirely with factual basis, is that Joseph and Mary had children before Jesus. What we don't have any proof about is whether Joseph had children before Mary or whether Mary and Joesph had children after Jesus.
If you are speaking ONLY of the book or Mark when saying that Jesus never calls himself divine, then yes I think I can agree to this. However, we both know that Jesus asks people who he is, and someone tells him he is the Messiah and then Jesus says to keep that quiet. Also, aren't you neglecting to recall John 3:16 where he claims to be the son of God?
Now the rest of what you say I can pretty much follow. And I also think that the Original Sin is a falsely stated and quite negative way to come into the world. I believe we're born with a clean slate. And why is there evil in this world? God gave us free will. Plain and simple. We choose to be who we want to be and do what we want to do.
One of the best examples of the kind of God we all should believe in is a God who loves us like our parents. God gave us life and the freedom to choose what to do in life, just as our parents brought us into this world and taught us about the things we need to know to live. If we are God's children, we have been sent out into the playground of life and we know what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is bad, and it's our choice to make these decisions because no one controls our actions but ourselves. God is always gonna be there, however, when we fall or make mistakes and he will help us heal.
Whether Jesus's story was real or made up, I believe there's a lot of positive and enlightening teachings from his life that we should pay attention to. Whether it means we're going to live an eternal life in heaven (or whatever you wanna believe about that), that's a personal choice.
Fuzface,
Dude, chill. Don't freak out or change your life beliefs because of what I've written here. I put things that are true here, BUT, like Chris and I were commenting yesterday, you have to find it for yourself. Take what I've written, take what you know and have been taught, and then go out and do some research on it. I suggest reading James Walters (really an expert on Paul), John Shelby Spong (slightly liberal Christianity), and Paul Tillich (very tough reading, but worthwhile). That ought to get you started.
In the meantime, just chill. ;)
ok, woah, fuzzy... calm down. deep breaths.
questioning isn't a sin, by the way. questioning leads you to make up your own mind. and that's not only healthy, it's what God desires. there's a muslim saying that i resonates with me so strongly. it basically says that faith without freewill is worthless. God wants you to follow Him because you thought about it and decided it worked for you. please question what you've been taught. and seek knowledge that you don't have and views that you may not have been exposed to already.
ok, where was i? oh yeah...
first lemme say that i think that faith really IS simple. that's the point of faith. it is intellect and the way that it interacts with faith that is complicated.
second, (and i don't usually say this for the same reason that i don't tell the people i work with that they should go get drunk on the weekends) i don't believe that the words used in the bible are a literal transcription of God's will. as someone who is capable of and does manipulate the english language and who has a firm understanding of communication theory, i honestly think that's impossible. language is, by its very nature, experiential. we hear or read words through the filters of our own experiences and often ascribe meanings or nuances to words that may not have been meant by the generator of the message.
my favorite example is from the movie "high fidelity" when cusack's character is fretting over his ex's phrase "no, we haven't had sex yet." does she mean that they haven't had sex, or that they haven't but they are planning on it? it's the filter in effect, man. language is too imprecise.
and let's not even get into translations! oi vey.
suffice it to say that core belief numero uno doesn't stand for me. let me qualify it, however, by saying that i believe that the messages conveyed by the imperfect words are from God. the overall context and content i do believe were God-inspired. i'll get to why here in a sec.
the other core beliefs, i have to say i, for the most part, hold to, and, rather than have a go at each one, i'll save time by tackling them all in one go...
i believe in God. i believe in God's existence on a logical, and not just a faith level. i look around at the world, i see what science has shown mankind about the world, and i know that there's no way in hell this all "just happened." i think to believe that it DID is purest of blind faith. it's too complicated... too perfect. even if popular scientific belief in the age of the world is wrong and the world is TEN TIMES older than currently thought, there's not enough time for things to just happen to click into place this way. it doesn't work out. so, i do think that God exists. and, if God exists, and has the power to put together this awesome puzzle we call the universe, i believe that virgin births, resurrection from the dead, talking livestock, balancing the national budget, democrats and republicans agreeing, and transmutation of water to wine (one of my favs) are all within God's power to make happen. sure thing, why not?
that said, jumping from a belief in God's existence and belief in the judeo-christian version of God and in Christ's divinity is something else. and here i don't have any great, amazing answers with logic that will stun the pants off of you and make you swear off swearing. for me, it's as simple as this: of all the religions i've encountered, and all the theologies i've studied, christianity makes the most sense to me. the main message is so simple and so powerful that it resonates with me: God loves you... and everyone else... all he wants you to give Him is your devotion... all he wants you to do is to love and serve mankind. the rest is just details... and details are of lesser importance. it really IS that simple for me, seth.
a few other notes though:
the reason i believe that Christ was God is also very simple. i've prayed to and followed the teachings of Christ and received blessings in His name. if God and Christ were not the same, i really don't think that God would have done diddly for me. He'd have said, "oh, well the kid ain't talking to me." He probably would have even gotten pissed that i wouldn't acknowledge Him on His own. i know that's really empherical and not terribly logical, intellectual, or scientific, but, like we discussed earlier, i gotta be SHOWN something and i gotta work through it myself. i learn from my own experiences much more than from what someone tells me is so.
my experiences show me that, when i follow the teachings of the bible, i always seem to come out on the top of whatever trouble i'm drowning in at the moment... and that happens all the time. struggle and trial are a huge part of the human experience. i love them even if the stress has made it so that i have to be put on blood pressure meds (as of today) because they make me actively participate in life and force personal growth. the struggles are a vital part of development and, by following the junk in the bible, i've always managed to end up on my feet or better.
it's not mystical or "spiritual" or magical or anything. it's just... my experience of life.
also, i understand the blood sacrifice of Christ on the cross. it's a simple idea, really... in order to receive something, something must be given. something of value. if something has value, someone's gotta pay for it. if you wanted to pick up the tabs for everyone in the bar, you're gonna be shelling out a lot of scratch (and you'll be everyone's hero because, honestly, who doesn't love free drinks?!). if the tabs in question are for the LIVES of not just everyone in the bar, but everyone in the world... ever... the cost will be REALLY high... you might even say unpayable. you're talking about buying the most valuable thing in the world, human life, and you want to get a bulk quantity of EVERYONE EVER... the cost would have to be the life of a God. doesn't that make sense? it does to me at least...
eugh... there's more, but that's more than enough... if i keep going, i'll sound like i'm preaching, and i just don't have the ego for that...
Micah,
I plan to read the book Conversations With God. I'm not sure that I'm comfortable with the idea of the book though... its written by a man that most would say is making it up, giving his own opinion, mixed up, or entirely schizophrenic. I'm willing to give it a shot though.
Now, to your points...
1. I would agree with you in saying that not all believe in the "literal, revealed word". Its simply not true. I got this list from a resource about fundamentalist Christian theology. I do have to disagree with you that it would be better to say that all believe in the Trinity... that is also not true. Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in the Trinity. They base this on the scripture where Jesus says something like, "but the Father is still greater than I". Also, many Pentacostal denominations do not believe in the idea of the Trinity. Some even take it as far as "Jesus ONLY".
2. My mistake... in my sleepiness last night I must have crept over to dyslexic... that should have been Mark 6:3. And that one should clear up what I was saying there...
3. Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah. John, as any scholar can tell you, is entirely different. John, believe it or not, is a Gnostic Gospel. Following along with the ideas of the Gnostics, those in search of knowledge or gnosis. The words of Jesus in John are kindof a redaction of everything else... and the earliest editions of it did not appear until the close of the 1st century.
And finally, I agree that Jesus is a great example. I try to follow that example. I fail a lot, but it doesn't mean that I should go to hell.
Thanks for reading! Glad you joined us here!
HA! I'm not sure I'm comfortable reading the Bible knowing that the Gospels were supposedly written by God, or with divine intervention of God, or inspired by God. That's blasphemy! In fact, Paul was a murderer! And these guys who wrote these accounts didn't even live to see Jesus but wrote based upon what they researched themselves, along with that whole God's hand thing. Trust me, the Conversations with God, although you must read it with a grain of salt, really makes so much logical sense. He's very thorough in explaining things, very practical in his deliverance and if nothing else, I've got another resource to use for helping other people. Also, if you compare what is said in Conversations with God with what is said in the Bible, it pretty much stays true to what you'll research. There's not that much discrepency.
1. Here's where we'll go to theology because you're sorta lumping all of these sects together when it can be argued otherwise. Jehovah's Witnesses do not consider themselves of one of three main groups of Christianity—Orthodox, Catholics, and Protestants. They consider themselves to be of First Century Christianity, which that in itself can be disputed. What you and I are talking about should only be referring to the three main groups of Christianity.
And Pentacostals actually do believe in the Trinity, but they focus on the 2nd person of the trinity: God the Son. You will hear them shouting over and over the Jesus is God and God is Jesus and that to go to Heaven we must accept Jesus as our savior. Very similar to how Baptists believe. In other Pentacostal churches, you'll hear some of God the Holy Spirit, which is the 3rd person of the trinity.
I believe if you argue with enough practicality and logic, you'll get any pentacostal to admit to the holy trinity.
2. In Mark 6:3, there's still no context as to whether they were referring to the fact that he was just a carpenter. It sounds like they're demeaning his trade and family rather than ratting him out by saying he's of a family of the same parents. I'd be curious to know how the original Hebrew text reads this sentence.
3. Jesus never denied to be the messiah either! If you read Mark 6:15, you'll see as they are talking to King Herod that they referred to him as Elijah.
In a similar sense, in Mark 8:28, Peter asks and then claims that he is the Elijah. Jesus never denied that but instead ordered them to stay quiet about this because of his impending resurrection.
Truly there was a big sense that this man was divine and of greater power than most, which refutes what you were claiming about the Council at Nicea.
Well, it wasn't just you. I have thoughts like this all the time. They were always there, this just stirs them up and makes me think about them.
Post a Comment