Am I a Christian or lost? --a bit more about me.

[gordsd]

Am I a Christian, or am I lost? Please tell me what you think? Let’s roll!

After being involved in an evangelical denomination and communicating with many people from different Christian denominations for some time, I have realized that there are some harmful and good aspects of common Christian belief. The common Christian practices, beliefs can make a person better in some ways and worse in others.

So this is about being a better person. This is about being true to what seems to me to be true. This is about what is real to me against some of those things which I have been told are true but which there is no evidence. I have been told that certain unbelievable beliefs are required in order to be right with God. After some time of being true to the unbelievable, I have realized after considering all that has been real to me that there is no reason at all to believe in unreasonable things, and that, whatever God or spirit which is out there, if just, would never judge or condemn the doubtful for doubting that which is extremely doubtful! To be better, to me, is to realize that false hopes are no hope at all, and to subject reason to faith is to destroy the greatest gift we have: the ability to think for ourselves.

My Christian background is substantial. After my wife and I committed ourselves to what we thought was God and the church at the age of eighteen, I taught Sunday school for several years, after that I attended and graduated from Bible school and then Seminary, and then served in the ministry for ten years (two years as an associate pastor and eight as a senior pastor). For the most part, my history is some-what common knowledge to my family and friends, so I thought it would be good for me, for those who are curious and for my kids and grandkids, to explain why I left the ministry and why I now live a secular life. For a few years I accepted the notion that I am no longer a Christian at all, but then I read an article about a leading atheist, Richard Dawkins, who claimed to still be a Christian after denying that anything supernatural existed. I was also moved by an interview I listened to on-line as Chris Hedges claimed to be Christian after denying belief in miracles. After reading and listening to those two, I thought to myself, “Well, maybe I am still a Christian!�

The main reason why I left the ministry, church and faith was to be a better person for myself and family, and I want to explain why. In order to be a better person I am not a Christian in the orthodox sense at all, and in a couple of ways I am a Christian in contradiction, and, in one sense, which I believe is the main meaning of being a Christian and the most important, I am totally Christian. Let me explain below:

First of all, In order to be a better person, I am not a Christian in the orthodox sense at all.

I do not believe that whatever it is that is out there should be referred to in the masculine sense as “father� as the Apostles' Creed does. I do not believe in things like the Virgin Birth or that Jesus descended into hell, was dead for three days and then rose from the dead. No one can walk on water or ever did—unless they simply know how to swim. I do not believe in prophecy, or fate, or that God controls history, or that God answers prayer in miraculous ways. I do not believe in the resurrection of the body in the traditional sense. There may be life after death and there may not be. However, we can still live meaningful lives by enjoying the precious life we have with each other by recognizing that our lives are so precious.

I can no longer in any sense affirm a belief in any kind of miracle at all. Although I believe that there might be something out there watching over us, I do not believe God created the world in the traditional sense in which many Christians believe: six days or sixty thousand years. I believe like most scientists that the world is billions of years old and humanity has only existed for a small fraction of that time.

I do not think belief in God is needed to be moral or that we need some kind of absolute somewhere in heaven to keep us good. There are thousands of atheists who live moral, enjoyable lives full of gratitude. Too, just as all kinds of people are able to come up with rules for sports like football and basketball and consider the fairness of play, so people are capable without any outside help to consider the fairness of life and how we should treat each other. The concept of fairness and the knowledge to rule over our communities with certain laws, which are just, is completely within our natural nature and ability regardless of faith or lack of it.

To require people to believe in things which I consider unbelievable is hurtful and dangerous. So that is why I am not what is commonly referred to as an orthodox Christian. Further, I do not think anyone should be orthodox! As I wrote in the introduction: a just God could not condemn a doubter for doubting things which are highly doubtful! If being orthodox means accepting that which is outlined in the Apostles' Creed and some of the other common Christian beliefs I have mentioned, no one should be orthodox. It is ridiculous. The problem is, if a person is convinced such fantastic tales are true, they are gullible enough to believe anything. So in order to be a better person I think it best not to force myself into believing what I consider unbelievable things in order to call myself orthodox.

Second of all, In order to be a better person, I am a Christian in contradiction in two ways: the use of prayer and the Bible.

Prayer

I have practiced prayer since I was very young. I have prayed to whatever it is that is out there, in secret, sense I was about twelve. Again, I do not believe in the supernatural per-se, so I think it could all just be in my head, but I sense another presence when I pray—like there is something listening, but that is all that it is. I do not believe that there is a God that is going to do something for me, although from time to time I do ask! After denying the existence of the traditional Christian God, my wife has asked me several times, “If you don't believe in God, why do you still pray?� The answer, prayer makes me a better person.

There is something about confessing my faults which make me think about change, and I have changed as I have grown and aged. Too, it helps me to pray for other people. It makes me more fond and affectionate towards others if I spend time praying for them. Jesus said that we should pray for our enemies. I have made it a practice to pray and think about those I do not like. However, since I do not believe in miracles, I never tell people I will pray for them to heal; I do not believe God does miracles, and it is wrong to give people a false hope. I am not sure if there is a God who listens to me or not. While I pray (It may just all be in my head. I don't know, and I don't think you know either) it seems like someone listens. Although I do not believe in a God who works miracles, there might be something out there listening, and I am sure that my prayer life makes me a better person; that is why I still do it.

However, as a Pastor leading prayer groups, I have witnessed prayers by people which reminded me of the passage in Luke 18:9-14. When some pray for others, they pray for them in a condescending manner. I have heard prayers like open “their� eyes (Matthew 7:2-4) without a prayer for their own possible blindness. For prayer to work, participants must humble themselves. Prayer is not about doing your duty (doing what you are told to do by some God). Prayer is about expressing who you are in a real situation and asking for help to be better—because you want help to be better.

The Bible

Reading the Bible has changed my life (but many things do)—especially the teachings of Jesus, especially in his “Sermon on the Mount.� An example is Jesus famous instruction to his disciples that when struck on the cheek to turn and offer the other cheek. But there is one not so famous teaching in the sermon that moved me very emotionally as a young person. Somewhere around nine or ten years old, I was reading the words of Jesus, printed in red, in our big white family Bible at home when I read how Jesus instructs us to never lower ourselves to the point of referring to others as fools (Matthew 5:22). If we do so, we are in danger of fire and hell—he teaches! I asked my mother at the time if that meant that I could not call people stupid as well? She told me that it certainly meant that and I should never refer to anyone as stupid—which had been my practice from time to time! The meaning of the instruction and sermon was and is obvious to me. We are to love all: even those who seem like fools to us or try to take advantage of us. We are to be lights to a world in darkness. To me this is the greatest meaning we can give our lives: as we learn to love others, others will learn to love from us. We must transcend the tendency to judge by trying to understand and show compassion. That is, the kind of love which the Jesus of the Bible teaches us is the hope of the world—not the belief in fantastic miracles. Such teaching has truly made me a better person. To me, it's not so much about believing things about Jesus; rather, it is about believing in the way he taught all of us to live.

I do not believe the Bible is the word of God as many Christians do. I believe the Bible has some powerful life changing teachings in it, but to look to the Bible for all the answers and to try and interpret history through prophecy as many Christians do is dangerous and hurtful. More often than not, believing in prophecy, fate or predestination in the sense that God is in control of history is a barrier to responsibility. People will sometimes say, “If it happened then it was suppose to happen,� or “It is God's will.� Such language and thinking relieves those from taking responsibility for whatever happens or from trying to take measures for preventative change in the future. “It's just all in God's hands,� the cliché teaches us. Such belief is a cop out. The truth is there are things we can do—some things are in our hands, and there are things we can do nothing about—which are out of our hands.

One of my particular rants is on the use of the word “blessed.� My mom and others have often referred to me as blessed. I usually do not say much in return, but I have thought about it. To me, it is ridiculous that God would bless me more than someone else. I certainly do not deserve any favors from God more than anyone else. There are plenty of unfortunate people who need God's help more than me, and to think that God simply over looks some in order to bless others would make God out to be some kind of cruel joker. The truth is life is not fair, and it is commonly cruel to the best of people! Some people are fortunate and others unfortunate; life has nothing to do with God blessing some and withholding blessing from others. Too, what some people call receiving God's blessing from reading the Bible is simple math. If you live well and stay out of trouble you will be better off than one who lives badly and is in trouble often.

Anyway, I do not believe that the Bible was put together in some miraculous sense. It was written and put together by fallible people. And because it was created by people, there are teachings which are just wrong, and there are contradictions in it as well. The contradictions can be explained by admitting that what we would call the original manuscripts have been added to and taken away from over the years by others, (before the Council of Hippo or later at Nicaea), or the original writers had contradictions in their minds which they never resolved. I think the former and latter is accurate to some degree.

I can think of four contradictions in the Bible which I think are important to mention. The first is Jesus stating that, “Until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished� (Matthew 5:18). Just after saying these words Jesus adds his own spin on the law: telling the people in several ways to go further than the Law by living lives of love. He changes the Law himself (5:38, 43). Too, this statement is contradictory to the whole flow of Jesus ministry and his discourse which follows this verse. Jesus is continually antagonistic in his relationship with the Scribes and Pharisees who are the keepers of the Law. Jesus says and emphasizes throughout his ministry that it is the “spirit� of the Law and not the letter which matters. So I do not think Jesus said those words at all if there is any truth to the rest of the gospels. The passage was probably added later.

Another contradiction is the teaching of the early apostles and Paul's main teaching. In the passage in Acts, it is said that all one has to do to be saved is to believe and be baptized. However, adding religious rites like baptism would go against Paul's main teaching which emphasizes complete freedom from religious ordinances. Making baptism or any other religious ordinances a big deal would go against Paul's emphasis that God's love and salvation is completely a free gift. Baptism or a belief about Jesus is not it; it is the release from slavery to a religious ideology which became a barrier to love. The main emphasis is not about religious rites, like baptism or duty; it is about becoming free to love.

Another contradiction which I think is important concerns the human nature of Jesus. In the Epistle to the Hebrews the writer writes that Jesus was made like his brothers (like a human, Hebrews 2:17, 4:15) in every way, but in the gospels, Jesus seems more than human because he works miracles: he heals the sick, he walks on water, he commands the winds to die down, he raises the dead, etc. I have never seen a human being perform any kind of miracle at all. If Jesus was completely human, he could not perform miracles, so he was not made like his brothers in every way as the writer to the Hebrews puts it. I have thought for some time that the story of Jesus would be better without the miracles. If Jesus had more power than a common human, then he was not made like his brothers in every way. The point of pointing out the contradiction, to me, is that the important thing for us is the meaning of what the gospel writers were trying to say about what Jesus accomplished. Believing in miracles or fantastic myths is not important. The point is the point of the writers of much of the New Testament: the expression of God’s love for all, and, if God is like that, then God, more than anything else, wants us to love unconditionally as well—as humans, limited as we are—without fantastic miraculous powers.

The last contradiction I will mention is the way the “spirit� of God is taught. Jesus talked about the “spirit� of the law and those who blaspheme against the holy “spirit� as though every common person could understand what the will of the spirit is. However, in the book of John and the book of Acts the Holy Spirit is something which people receive later as a special dispensation or gift, and then there are gifts of the spirit too. To me, the latter is nonsense—maybe because I do not believe in miracles in the first place. Paul deals with this contradiction. Paul mentions those gentiles who have the law of God written on their hearts (Romans 2:14-16). Paul says circumcision is of the heart by the spirit of God (Romans 2:29). The contradiction comes about because the seemingly unconvertible hard hearts Paul talks about he explains in a theology of predestination. So if some understand the life of the spirit and others do not, Paul reckons such a life as a gift of God. Paul has a great insight but he does not have modern psychological language to describe what is going on. In modern psychological language, the ego gets in the way of love. Once a proud mind is made up, it is hard to change it. Jesus and the Pharisees is an example. So, if there is a judgment day as the Bible says, how could God judge those God did not give the Spirit to? Only those who know the right thing to do can be judged! So do some have the spirit and others do not? God gives the spirit to some but not to others? Yet people will be judged for not recognizing what the spirit wants? Is God just? All of this makes no sense at all!

I think that a careful study of the Bible can turn up several more contradictions, but I thought these four were worth mentioning.

Again, the greatest gift which we have is our ability to reason. Why would God give us a mind to consider and evaluate if God did not expect us to use it when someone or thing claims to be the ultimate authority in our life. When someone claims to be from God or claims that a book is the word of God we cannot exaggerate the need to think critical of such assertions. “The most destructive result of subjecting reason to faith is the loss of respect for our highest power, the logical human mind with its ability to problem solve responsibility. . . .Once reason is de-based and not considered man's highest power, any extreme faith can be reached: popes become infallible; virgin births become possible; logical contradictions do not pertain to the Holy Trinity; and, dying defending your faith against another defending his faith against you is eternally meritorious� (Stephen Uhl). The list could go on: believing people can walk on water, float up into the sky, believing in curses and blessing, etc. It seems to me and thousands of others like me that the only people who believe such unbelievable assertions are those who demand no evidence at all.

So I am a bit contradictory when it comes to the use of prayer and the Bible, but both, used in the proper way, has made me a better person.

Lastly, In order to be a better person, I am totally Christian in one sense: according to, what seems to me, the “main� teaching of Jesus and the Apostle Paul

What is that one main teaching? Always to Jesus and Paul, the moral thing to do is love. According to Jesus and Paul, doing what you are told or following the law is not good enough. The good and right thing to do is to go beyond the law and love people from the heart. The ministry of Jesus could be summed up in the words, “It is the spirit of the law and not the letter.� This is what Jesus meant when he challenged the Pharisees with these words, “Why don't you judge for yourselves what is right?� (Luke 12:57). Paul said, “There is no law against love� (Galatians 5:22-23). For the most part having that “agape� love is what they meant by having the spirit. The question makes the point, “If you have to be commanded to love someone, is it love?� It’s like telling someone to say thank you. If someone says thank you because they are told to or they say it out of a sense of duty, are they really thankful? Of course not! So it is with having love in your heart for those you run into from day to day. No one puts love in your heart: charity, good will or a loving disposition. Love just happens in some of us. In my view, this is what Jesus and Paul means by being filled with the spirit. Love is not a command or duty or it would not be love.

Now, one of the greatest barriers to the life of love, according to the apostle Paul's main teaching, is trying to establish your own righteousness by living according to the law. For the most part Paul, in most of his letters, is not writing to people who a burdened down with a sense of guilt or to a people worried about missing out on heaven in the afterlife. Paul, for the most part, is writing to people who are spiritually blinded by their own religious life, and Paul several times accuses these people he is writing to for using that oppressive religious life as a standard of measure in judgment against others. One of Paul's favorite rants is against the practice of circumcision. Paul also mentions other practices which he says are alright for conscience sake but should not be used as a measure to judge others: eating meat, acknowledging certain days as special, baptism and especially demanding that people follow the Old Testament—Law of Moses. Paul says that the death of Jesus releases us from all of that--nailing it to the cross ( Ephesians 2:15; Colossians 2:20)—Paul identifies such a lifestyle as slavery (Galatians 4:3, 8-10). The point is that we live in the new way by the spirit--not by the old way by the law.

It is interesting to me that the formation of the Bible was originally called the canon of scripture. The word canon means “measure� in Greek. The Canon is/was the new measure. What are measures used for? They are used to measure—to judge. Do you measure up? Talk about defeating the whole purpose of Paul's main teaching—using religious ordinances or literature in which one uses to measure or judge another is what the apostle Paul wrote against! Ironically, many religious people (not all) become the most judgmental people of a community. Rather than calling it the canon, they should have called it God's unconditional love for all! Too bad so many Christians, like many of our ancient church fathers, miss the main teaching of Paul!

Paul's main concept of sin is that it holds the people in its power. In the Greek it can be defined as hubris—a pride which blinds. This is why he uses the people of Israel as examples in Romans chapters 9, 10, and 11 (They were enslaved and oppressed by a religious ideology). They stumbled over the stumbling stone which causes men to stumble (Romans 9:31-32). That is, religious observances do not gain anyone favor with God—whether they are Jewish, Christian, Muslim, or anything else. The only thing according to Paul is faith in what God did for us through Jesus Christ: that is, Jesus death releases us from the requirements of the law. (Notice, that faith in God's free gift is not the same as believing certain things about God, Jesus or the Bible!)

In the first part of Romans Paul declares that the righteous shall live by faith. Then he uses the rest of the letter to explain what he means by that. The greatest manifestation of those who have “not� discovered what it means to live by faith is a judgmental attitude. This is the first indictment Paul declares against those in Rome (Romans 2:1). In the passage, his discussion against those addicted to sexual promiscuity he likens to those addicted to stroking their pride by judging others. This is Paul's insight into the blindness arrogance causes in those who rely on their own goodness.

Do not be misled. It is not what we believe about “who� Jesus is or was as many have misinterpreted the meaning of Paul's writings about faith. It is about believing in what Jesus “did.� For example, accepting the “Apostles Creed� or accepting certain articles of faith about Jesus is not Paul's “main� teaching. No, it is the faith that God has given us God's favor as a free gift. Having the right beliefs about Jesus is not what Paul meant by faith. Rather, it is accepting God's favor as a gift; this is to transform the disposition of our heart, so that we love as God loved us—freely giving love as God gave to us. To go one step further, one can accept the fact that our lives have always been a free gift. Jesus taught, “That you may be sons of your Father in heaven, Just as God [freely] causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and unrighteous� So we should freely give our love (Matt. 5:43-48).

This is the main teaching of Jesus and Paul: God's love is free and so our love should be free too. Now, it is true that Jesus and Paul taught a lot of other things, but the greatest of these is love (1 Corinthians 13:13). To make the message of love anything more or less is to miss the main point of being a Christian. Make love the most important thing you can do, and you will be a better person because of it.

Conclusion

So, to require people to believe certain things about Jesus or the Bible in this age is like requiring people to be circumcised. Such practices do not gain favor with God. It is the same with baptism. People get hung up with how a person is baptized or what is said. Such religious practices do little if they become more important than letting the free gift of God’s love transform the heart. To demand that people believe in miracles or that the Bible is “the� word of God or that Jesus walked on water or that the earth and all of its creatures were made in six days is to totally miss the main point of what Jesus and Paul taught.

So I am not an orthodox or fundamentalist Christian at all, and I am a contradiction when it comes to prayer and reading the Bible, but I am a total Christian when it comes to accepting the fact that God's love is a free gift to all, and my love is too!

[Monta]

[Replying to gordsd]


"Good point, but I do not believe in a literal hell. It is a "spiritual" one we create for ourselves."

I am trying to understand.

What is the difference being in the literal or the spiritual hell (or heaven)?

[gordsd]

[Replying to Monta]

What is the difference being in the literal or the spiritual hell (or heaven)?

I don't believe there is a literal hell where the condemned people are in ever lasting torment. Neither do I believe in a literal heaven in the sense of God being in the presence of those who are saved singing everlasting praises.

To me, the only hell and heaven is the ones we make for ourselves in this life mixed with beauty and pain. We make a spiritual heaven in two ways I can think of. 1) If we live according to conscience (what that is is for another debate), we will be at peace with ourselves and happy how we respond in certain situations. We may not have a lot of wealth but we should be happy with our self. 2) if we can learn to love others genuinely and live in relationships with others in truth, trust, empathy, etc--as we give genuine love our love will usually be returned by some (not all). Living in communities where love is given and returned can be a great source of joy--spiritual heaven.

A spiritual hell would be like people living their lives very thoughtless of others--with no conscience at all--with no genuine love at all. In the end, no matter how wealthy or poor, they are very lonely--no inner peace and no one to hang with who they really love--and sometimes no one knows them enough to love them either--genuinely.

I'm glad you asked the question. Many never get it but many do too!

[Monta]

[Replying to gordsd]



"I don't believe there is a literal hell where the condemned people are in ever lasting torment. Neither do I believe in a literal heaven in the sense of God being in the presence of those who are saved singing everlasting praises. "

Therefore no God and no life after (bodily) death.

[gordsd]

[Replying to Monta]

Therefore no God and no life after (bodily) death.

God--I think there may be something out there watching or listening, but not what most religious people think "it" is.

Life after death--if there is that would be the icing on the cake, but, like miracles, I don't think we should count on it.