Rachel Held Evans and “Faith Unraveled”

[Ginevra]

Wow. I wish I had read this book several years ago. The large majority of the questions she struggled with are identical to my own. A lot of her upbringing was extremely similar to my own. My “crisis of faith” was almost exactly like hers and I might have landed in a similar spot had I read this book earlier. As it stands, I feel like I went beyond rejecting the fundamental tenants of the faith, in part because it’s so confusing to be a non-labeled person who believes or hopes for a small number of things - I hope for a heaven, I hope there is a God who cares, I hope there was a Jesus who was worth following. So I don’t have any faith identity and I’m not sure if I believe *anything*. But it would have helped had I known RHE’s story. 

Now it really hits me how tragic her death was earlier this year; I was not familiar with her and paid little attention to that story. 

[ktgrok]

11 minutes ago, Medicmom2.0 said:

“Well,” he said in his simple way, “If God exists, I ‘spect he knows what to do with your doubts and it don’t bother him too much.”  That simple sentence made more sense than all the deep thinkers, philosophers, and theologians I had studied in college.  

Such wisdom. It has been expressed over and over again through the ages, but I think each person has to hear it in the way that hits them. Even in the bible you have, "I believe, please help my unbelief."

 

[fairfarmhand]

2 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Such wisdom. It has been expressed over and over again through the ages, but I think each person has to hear it in the way that hits them. Even in the bible you have, "I believe, please help my unbelief."

 

You beat me to it.

that was exactly what I was going to say. 

 

[ktgrok]

Hugs, Quill. 

I can't remember, are you part of the Progressive Christianity club? There is a video linked in the thread about what to read that I think you would really like. I'll link it here too for anyone interested. 

 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Hugs, Quill. 

I can't remember, are you part of the Progressive Christianity club? There is a video linked in the thread about what to read that I think you would really like. I'll link it here too for anyone interested. 

 

I’m not, mostly because I have for a while now been thinking, “Who am I kidding? No Christian would be willing to call me a Christian if they really knew all I have unresolved within me...” But if you send me an invite, I’ll check it out. There may be hope for me yet. 

[PrincessMommy]

57 minutes ago, Medicmom2.0 said:

I love her writings.

My parents grew up in a small town. There’s a small church with a white steeple, and less than 30 people attend on a Sunday morning.  The preachers tend to be men and women who have been ordained later in life, mostly from the area. They have no book knowledge, some didn’t even complete high school. One was a truck driver, one a homemaker, one a former alcoholic with a wrecked family who now spends his time trying to give back. They’re simple, and no one really lasts more than a few years. But they’re all genuine people who care.

When my great grandmother died, I confessed to the pastor from that church that I wasn’t too sure about God anymore. “Well,” he said in his simple way, “If God exists, I ‘spect he knows what to do with your doubts and it don’t bother him too much.”  That simple sentence made more sense than all the deep thinkers, philosophers, and theologians I had studied in college.   I still doubt. I hope God exists and Jesus is real. I’ll never know in this life, but I trust that if God is there, he knows what to do with my doubting.

So beautiful.   We also talk about the Gospel verse "Lord I believe, Help my unbelief!"  a lot in my circles. In fact, my priest has gently reminded me of it numerous times in confession.     One priest I've heard speak several times  encouraged us to pray, "Lord, I want to want to believe." 

Quill, I've also enjoyed RHE's works, but I've not read that one.   It was a great loss when she passed away. 

[J-rap]

I love her theology.  She and our pastor seemed to be in similar theological circles, and often spoke at the same conferences together, promoted each other's books, etc.  I had the privilege of hearing her speak at our church a couple years ago.   It was such a tragedy that she died so young.

[livetoread]

I ended up a nonbeliever, but I would be thrilled to find out there actually was a loving deity after all (though there would be questions asked of this deity!)  I know how hard I tried to hang onto my faith, and I know how many times I prayed for help with my unbelief to no avail. I am at peace that if there is a loving deity out there, it knows all that and would welcome me.
 

However, my situation has caused much grief for my conservative Christian father who tells me over and over, “Out of all my kids, you are the most Christian-like in your values. I just don’t understand how you can reject God.” To which I reply over and over, “ I have never rejected God. I just can’t make myself believe a loving one exists anymore.” And round we go. I hate that his view of his deity makes him think I will be punished for my unbelief, and I have tried to gently point out that a loving deity would know how hard I tried, and who knows, maybe for unknown reasons that deity wants me in this position, but he can’t wrap his mind around that. It has to be my fault, because a loving deity would help me believe if I asked. And round we go. 
 

I did read RHE, and while I settled much further from her positions, I appreciated her stands. I think she did much to make some Christians kinder and gave hope to many who were struggling. Still does.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, livetoread said:

I ended up a nonbeliever, but I would be thrilled to find out there actually was a loving deity after all (though there would be questions asked of this deity!)  I know how hard I tried to hang onto my faith, and I know how many times I prayed for help with my unbelief to no avail. I am at peace that if there is a loving deity out there, it knows all that and would welcome me.
 

However, my situation has caused much grief for my conservative Christian father who tells me over and over, “Out of all my kids, you are the most Christian-like in your values. I just don’t understand how you can reject God.” To which I reply over and over, “ I have never rejected God. I just can’t make myself believe a loving one exists anymore.” And round we go. I hate that his view of his deity makes him think I will be punished for my unbelief, and I have tried to gently point out that a loving deity would know how hard I tried, and who knows, maybe for unknown reasons that deity wants me in this position, but he can’t wrap his mind around that. It has to be my fault, because a loving deity would help me believe if I asked. And round we go. 
 

I did read RHE, and while I settled much further from her positions, I appreciated her stands. I think she did much to make some Christians kinder and gave hope to many who were struggling. Still does.

This is a significant part of why I remain “incognito” IRL. I have not gone bravely forward in representing my loss of faith, my whatever-I-am now. My parents might be put in their graves for sure and some other friends would probably want to have an apologetics debate, which I’m not interested in. I already know the standard answers for my questions. I’m past wanting to debate it. I think that’s why I liked this book so much, because she wasn’t doing that; she agreed those “answers” are unsatisfying and untenable for her. 

I do wonder where RHE might have eventually landed (all the way to deism? Agnosticism? Atheism?) had she lived. I feel like I was in the space she discusses in the book a few years ago, but now wonder if there is any real point clinging to the last vestiges of a faith just because...I guess, it is a way to have my cake and eat it too. 

[J-rap]

43 minutes ago, livetoread said:

I ended up a nonbeliever, but I would be thrilled to find out there actually was a loving deity after all (though there would be questions asked of this deity!)  I know how hard I tried to hang onto my faith, and I know how many times I prayed for help with my unbelief to no avail. I am at peace that if there is a loving deity out there, it knows all that and would welcome me.
 

However, my situation has caused much grief for my conservative Christian father who tells me over and over, “Out of all my kids, you are the most Christian-like in your values. I just don’t understand how you can reject God.” To which I reply over and over, “ I have never rejected God. I just can’t make myself believe a loving one exists anymore.” And round we go. I hate that his view of his deity makes him think I will be punished for my unbelief, and I have tried to gently point out that a loving deity would know how hard I tried, and who knows, maybe for unknown reasons that deity wants me in this position, but he can’t wrap his mind around that. It has to be my fault, because a loving deity would help me believe if I asked. And round we go. 
 

I did read RHE, and while I settled much further from her positions, I appreciated her stands. I think she did much to make some Christians kinder and gave hope to many who were struggling. Still does.

I sure do agree with that.  If we are searching for truth and doing the best we can, I have to believe that that is enough for a loving God.  I think he of all beings can understand that a complicated brain can get in the way sometimes!

[happi duck]

I've read her book about the Bible (Inspired) and loved it.  It was a relief to read.

 

 

[ktgrok]

5 hours ago, Quill said:

I’m not, mostly because I have for a while now been thinking, “Who am I kidding? No Christian would be willing to call me a Christian if they really knew all I have unresolved within me...” But if you send me an invite, I’ll check it out. There may be hope for me yet. 

I will! And to me, someone who finds inspiration in the teachings of Jesus, and wants to follow his ways, can call themselves a Christian. 

[livetoread]

2 hours ago, Quill said:

This is a significant part of why I remain “incognito” IRL. I have not gone bravely forward in representing my loss of faith, my whatever-I-am now. My parents might be put in their graves for sure and some other friends would probably want to have an apologetics debate, which I’m not interested in. I already know the standard answers for my questions. I’m past wanting to debate it. I think that’s why I liked this book so much, because she wasn’t doing that; she agreed those “answers” are unsatisfying and untenable for her. 

I do wonder where RHE might have eventually landed (all the way to deism? Agnosticism? Atheism?) had she lived. I feel like I was in the space she discusses in the book a few years ago, but now wonder if there is any real point clinging to the last vestiges of a faith just because...I guess, it is a way to have my cake and eat it too. 

Yes, I try hard not to discuss it. I never bring it up. (Editing to add with those who are hurt by it). My mother, also a conservative Christian, finds it much easier to shrug and say she doesn’t know but she trusts in a loving God. 
 

People who wrestle deeply with the problem of evil and the problem of the hiddeness of God nowadays often end up agnostic in my experience, but I quickly acknowledge my bias there. When you can see that the traditional answers believers often give to those problems no longer work for the questioner, and they aren’t able to just shrug and say I don’t understand but that’s okay, it’s not looking good for belief. Then again, RHE had a entire career built around her faith, which can be a lot of incentive to go so far and no further. Though my loss of faith was personally tough, my costs outside of that were few. My dh had already lost his, and my children, despite my huge efforts, were not really believers. My community of friends were very diverse; they loved me for me and couldn’t care less about my religion or lack there of.  I had no income source based on it. My folks watched me struggle for years, and though I didn’t process much with them and certainly never made an announcement or anything, they knew and had time to gradually deal with it. We are also otherwise close, so that helps. My outcome may very well have been different if my costs were higher. I don’t know.

Also, nothing wrong with having your cake and eating it, too! 

Edited November 5, 2019 by livetoread

[J-rap]

24 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

I will! And to me, someone who finds inspiration in the teachings of Jesus, and wants to follow his ways, can call themselves a Christian. 

For me, when I had nearly lost my faith, I kept asking myself, "Is there anything in this that I truly believe 100% in my very core?"  And actually, I found that there was one thing.  I believed in the type of love that Jesus exhibited.  I believed in his philosophy.   Whether he was God or not was kind of irrelevant.  I decided that simply believing in the Jesus philosophy was good enough for me, for starters.  So that's where my own faith reconstruction began.   Re-learning faith again through that lens was a very different and beautiful journey for me.   It brought me to a very different vision of God and life, one that felt a lot more believable, honest, and beautiful.   Reading works by theologians such as RHE and Greg Boyd and many others have been a big part of that journey for me.  

Some of my conservative Christian friends believe the church I attend teaches heresy, but I'm okay with that.  🙂 

[lauraw4321]

2 hours ago, J-rap said:

For me, when I had nearly lost my faith, I kept asking myself, "Is there anything in this that I truly believe 100% in my very core?"  And actually, I found that there was one thing.  I believed in the type of love that Jesus exhibited.  I believed in his philosophy.   Whether he was God or not was kind of irrelevant.  I decided that simply believing in the Jesus philosophy was good enough for me, for starters.  So that's where my own faith reconstruction began.   Re-learning faith again through that lens was a very different and beautiful journey for me.   It brought me to a very different vision of God and life, one that felt a lot more believable, honest, and beautiful.   Reading works by theologians such as RHE and Greg Boyd and many others have been a big part of that journey for me.  

Some of my conservative Christian friends believe the church I attend teaches heresy, but I'm okay with that.  🙂 

I’m pretty much the same. 

[Pam in CT]

RHE wrote so gorgeously -- open, funny, generous-hearted, accessible. She made religious journey-ing seem like the most natural human progression in the world, a simple manifestation of *caring.*  No more, no less.

 

Quill, if her writing resonate with you, but wonder if the worldview she arrived at could possibly be *stable* over a long haul -- like she'd arrived at a way station but not an equilibrium--  you might look to any of Bishop J Shelby Spong's writings.  He was good friends of good friends of ours when we lived in New Jersey, and I met him a couple of times, and can honestly say that he affected (for the better) my own journey, even though I started in a very different place and was largely headed in an opposite direction. There was one... suggestion? re-framing? exercise? in one of the early books that I return to even decades later.  He found a permanent landing  in a space I can envision RHE inhabiting as well.

Hugs.

[ktgrok]

55 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

RHE wrote so gorgeously -- open, funny, generous-hearted, accessible. She made religious journey-ing seem like the most natural human progression in the world, a simple manifestation of *caring.*  No more, no less.

 

Quill, if her writing resonate with you, but wonder if the worldview she arrived at could possibly be *stable* over a long haul -- like she'd arrived at a way station but not an equilibrium--  you might look to any of Bishop J Shelby Spong's writings.  He was good friends of good friends of ours when we lived in New Jersey, and I met him a couple of times, and can honestly say that he affected (for the better) my own journey, even though I started in a very different place and was largely headed in an opposite direction. There was one... suggestion? re-framing? exercise? in one of the early books that I return to even decades later.  He found a permanent landing  in a space I can envision RHE inhabiting as well.

Hugs.

Ha! I just posted the other day in the Progressive Christian thread about what to read that his book Why Christianity Must Change or Die was the one book I wouldn't recommend. I hated that book so much I literally threw it across the room. As a progressive Chritian but still a Christian I found him incredibly offensive - he seemed to just assume that no intelligent person could ever actually believe the stuff of the Creed, etc. Meanwhile, I DO believe a lot of it, so therefore I'm some kind of idiot? Blech. 

That said, I'm very glad to hear someone DID find it helpful or inspirational. That's better than it out there making anyone who reads it miserable like it did me, lol. 

I think A More Christlike God is my next read, or his newer one. He's featured prominently in the video I linked and it really resonated with me. Especially how he focuses on how no, one does NOT need to treat all Scripture with the same importance, and that it was normal in the early church to NOT do that. As someone who has a REAL hard time giving the words of Paul the same importance as the words of Jesus, that was refreshing. That, and the saying I came across recently - something about how Paul would turn over in his grave if he knew we'd turned his letters into Torah. 

Also, that video does touch on suffering, Quill, which I know is one of the things that you struggle with. And his analogy about the waterfall has stuck with me for weeks now. Very simplistic but the best analogy I've come across for how our actions don't change God's love for us, even our actions DO impact how our life plays out. 

[Pam in CT]

re wildly different responses / hurling books across the room

3 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Ha! I just posted the other day in the Progressive Christian thread about what to read that his book Why Christianity Must Change or Die was the one book I wouldn't recommend. I hated that book so much I literally threw it across the room. As a progressive Chritian but still a Christian I found him incredibly offensive - he seemed to just assume that no intelligent person could ever actually believe the stuff of the Creed, etc. Meanwhile, I DO believe a lot of it, so therefore I'm some kind of idiot? Blech. 

That said, I'm very glad to hear someone DID find it helpful or inspirational. That's better than it out there making anyone who reads it miserable like it did me, lol. 

I think A More Christlike God is my next read, or his newer one. He's featured prominently in the video I linked and it really resonated with me. Especially how he focuses on how no, one does NOT need to treat all Scripture with the same importance, and that it was normal in the early church to NOT do that. As someone who has a REAL hard time giving the words of Paul the same importance as the words of Jesus, that was refreshing. That, and the saying I came across recently - something about how Paul would turn over in his grave if he knew we'd turned his letters into Torah. 

Also, that video does touch on suffering, Quill, which I know is one of the things that you struggle with. And his analogy about the waterfall has stuck with me for weeks now. Very simplistic but the best analogy I've come across for how our actions don't change God's love for us, even our actions DO impact how our life plays out. 

The landing place he arrives at *is* rather universal (little u); and I can understand how even the title of WCMCoD could push buttons.  (I truly don't, FWIW, think that Spong views folks who remain Christ-centric in their worldviews are "idiots"... but that is neither here nor there.)  Have *definitely* thrown books across rooms myself!

And where I was personally when I encountered him an his work, I wasn't Christ-centric either where I was starting nor where I was headed, so his little-u universalism wasn't an obstacle for me... I can see how it would be for others.

I can't even remember which of the early books it was in -- it may not have been WCMCoD, I read a slew of them packed into a short time and they all sort of mashed together -- that so affected me was to encourage the struggler to identify -- to label -- manifested acts of love, as God.  You witness a mother picking up an tired & cranky toddler, and responding not in kind but rather with tenderness: name that as God.  You see a person handing over a $10 bill to a homeless person, name that as God.  You see a middle-aged woman patiently waiting for a frail elderly man to make his way with his walker, speaking slowly and calmly and smilingly as though she had all the time in the world, name that as God.

The first couple of days I tried this I felt perfectly ridiculous, fraudulent even, like it was a semantic trick, a sort of human gaslighting of the divine, an effort to overwrite millennia of complex received tradition of the super sensory expansiveness what God was into a secular and -- seemingly -- rational and finite box.  Well gracious, anybody can "believe" in God if we redefine God down to *that* dot...

And then a few days in something clicked, and I realized that -- semantics aside, all my in-the-head-critical-analysis aside -- if I suspended that critical editorial voice and just went with the exercise for the duration of the exercise something magic happened: it rendered God visible.  If for the purpose of a segment of your journey you're willing to go -- just for a segment of the journey -- with a working definition of God as "God is love," and you then walk around the world looking for concrete manifestations of love, all of a sudden you see God every day, in all sorts of odd corners of ordinary life.  You also see God not as an externalized Being but in *the spaces in between people,* in encounters and actions and behavior *between* us.

For a person long wandering in the desert, thirsty for even a glimpse of God, this was a gift beyond measure. God Made Visible.  Available to us all whenever we look.

 

My worldview has continued to evolve since then, and in some respects has settled around more traditional God-imagery (and I will forever be shaped by traditional text... though I  -- and Judaism broadly -- grapple with those texts pretty differently than most Christians).  But there was an inflection point there that shifted -- and eased -- my journey substantially.

And I can understand how that central imagery could be a stable, solid equilibrium that has sustained Spong, and could have sustained RHE, over the very long haul.

(And I don't -- FWIW -- think the framing of God-is-love is *mutually exclusive* from a more Christ-centric set of imagery.  If God is infinite and eternal, and we're mortal vessels of limited cognitive capacity (AND THIS MUCH, I BELIEVE), there's a sense in which we're ALL using our respective images and texts and teachings as conduits, models, representations of an ineffable that is beyond our finite capacity to grasp.)

 

[ktgrok]

See, that idea of God manifest in loving actions I can totally agree with! It was his other stuff that was so upsetting. 

Also, given how much you like the imagery I bet you'd love this children's book we read recently - https://www.amazon.com/Maybe-God-Like-That-Too/dp/150642189X/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?crid=YDAODBFOWBLE&keywords=maybe+god+is+like+that+too&qid=1573000428&sprefix=maybe+god+i%2Caps%2C241&sr=8-1-spons&psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUEzTFlCNDRETlJTQTUmZW5jcnlwdGVkSWQ9QTA1Mjc3MTkxMEw2RFc5WERGSjA1JmVuY3J5cHRlZEFkSWQ9QTAxMjI1NzAzMVRGMkNSSVRVTzJHJndpZGdldE5hbWU9c3BfYXRmJmFjdGlvbj1jbGlja1JlZGlyZWN0JmRvTm90TG9nQ2xpY2s9dHJ1ZQ==

[Pam in CT]

25 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

See, that idea of God manifest in loving actions I can totally agree with! It was his other stuff that was so upsetting. 

Also, given how much you like the imagery I bet you'd love this children's book we read recently - https://www.amazon.com/Maybe-God-Like-That-Too/dp/150642189X/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?crid=YDAODBFOWBLE&keywords=maybe+god+is+like+that+too&qid=1573000428&sprefix=maybe+god+i%2Caps%2C241&sr=8-1-spons&psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUEzTFlCNDRETlJTQTUmZW5jcnlwdGVkSWQ9QTA1Mjc3MTkxMEw2RFc5WERGSjA1JmVuY3J5cHRlZEFkSWQ9QTAxMjI1NzAzMVRGMkNSSVRVTzJHJndpZGdldE5hbWU9c3BfYXRmJmFjdGlvbj1jbGlja1JlZGlyZWN0JmRvTm90TG9nQ2xpY2s9dHJ1ZQ==

Yes, that book looks very much like how I received Spong's experiment.  Thank you.

[MercyA]

Quill, I don't mean this in a trite way at all, but maybe the vestiges of your faith are worth clinging to because they're true.

I prayed so many times for so many years as others have: "I do believe, help thou my unbelief." I feel for you. It's hard but worth it to keep seeking truth.

Love and respect. ❤️

[J-rap]

Speaking of faith and doubt...

Our pastor often speaks about faith and doubt, and about how we can know very few things 100%.  Yet we make decisions everyday based on a feeling or past experience or likelihood or philosophy.  That even includes our decision to marry someone, or take a certain job.   And since we have to make some kind of a choice about faith, why not choose what aligns with our gut about what rings true.   For me, it was the way Jesus lived his life and loved.   It doesn't mean you accept everything the church teaches, or know anything for sure, at all.  But you "lean toward it" anyway, because at the end of the day, we have to lean toward something.  

I'm reading Bonhoeffer:  Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy right now.  What strikes me is that Bonhoeffer didn't seem to have a powerful personal belief in God in the early days.  It seemed kind of vague and hazy.  But he believed Jesus had something to teach him.  He believed in Jesus' philosophy, and he based his life on that because the way Jesus lived his life and loved others made more sense to him than anything else.  He never seemed to expect God to "prove" himself to him, but he opened himself up to God anyway.  In the process, God revealed himself in many ways, and Bonhoeffer grew to have a powerful faith in God.  

(It's a great book, by the way!  I'm only halfway done with it, although I've read others about Bonhoeffer.  If you don't know about him, he was a Lutheran pastor in Germany who spoke against Hitler and was eventually sentenced to death -- and killed -- because of his beliefs and actions.)

[Pam in CT]

re does this teacher have something to teach me:

1 hour ago, J-rap said:

Speaking of faith and doubt...

Our pastor often speaks about faith and doubt, and about how we can know very few things 100%.  Yet we make decisions everyday based on a feeling or past experience or likelihood or philosophy.  That even includes our decision to marry someone, or take a certain job.   And since we have to make some kind of a choice about faith, why not choose what aligns with our gut about what rings true.   For me, it was the way Jesus lived his life and loved.   It doesn't mean you accept everything the church teaches, or know anything for sure, at all.  But you "lean toward it" anyway, because at the end of the day, we have to lean toward something.  

I'm reading Bonhoeffer:  Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy right now.  What strikes me is that Bonhoeffer didn't seem to have a powerful personal belief in God in the early days.  It seemed kind of vague and hazy.  But he believed Jesus had something to teach him.  He believed in Jesus' philosophy, and he based his life on that because the way Jesus lived his life and loved others made more sense to him than anything else.  He never seemed to expect God to "prove" himself to him, but he opened himself up to God anyway.  In the process, God revealed himself in many ways, and Bonhoeffer grew to have a powerful faith in God.  

(It's a great book, by the way!  I'm only halfway done with it, although I've read others about Bonhoeffer.  If you don't know about him, he was a Lutheran pastor in Germany who spoke against Hitler and was eventually sentenced to death -- and killed -- because of his beliefs and actions.)

 

I believe the bolded is actually the basis of all deep and fruitful interfaith encounter.  Whether or not participants "believe" in the Whole Megillah * of one another's worldviews, they are able to listen sufficiently deeply that they are able to extract lessons from one another.

This is how Thomas Merton deepened his own faith through extracting lessons from Buddhist teaching, how the Dalai Lama extracted lessons about surviving diaspora from Orthodox Jews, how Thich Nhat Hanh gleaned lessons about compassion from the life of Christ, and a thousand other etc.

It's not that participants attach to the *entirety of the other person's worldview*; it's more that they say:  You, too, have gifts to impart.  I, too, still look to learn more.  I can learn from you.

 

I personally believe that such open-ness -- softness, willingness to receive from folks who hold difference-- is a gift. I believe that gift actually derives from the Divine.  

 

 

 

 

*  google it!  

Edited November 6, 2019 by Pam in CT
"gleaned." Not "cleaned." LOL

[J-rap]

16 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

re does this teacher have something to teach me:

 

I believe the bolded is actually the basis of all deep and fruitful interfaith encounter.  Whether or not participants "believe" in the Whole Megillah * of one another's worldviews, they are able to listen sufficiently deeply that they are able to extract lessons from one another.

This is how Thomas Merton deepened his own faith through extracting lessons from Buddhist teaching, how the Dalai Lama extracted lessons about surviving diaspora from Orthodox Jews, how Thich Nhat Hanh cleaned lessons about compassion from the life of Christ, and a thousand other etc.

It's not that participants attach to the *entirety of the other person's worldview*; it's more that they say:  You, too, have gifts to impart.  I, too, still look to learn more.  I can learn from you.

 

I personally believe that such open-ness -- softness, willingness to receive from folks who hold difference-- is a gift. I believe that gift actually derives from the Divine.  

 

 

 

 

*  google it!  

That is such a great point!!

I follow a Christian theologian (who blogs) who said that sometimes people get very nervous (even downright mean) when they see what he's reading -- writings about other philosophies, even by atheists!  😮  But he learns a great deal from them, too.  It can help to build a very robust, compassionate, humble faith.

Also, I like your term "softness"....

(And I did look up Megillah.  :D) 

[Guest]

Quote

Our pastor often speaks about faith and doubt, and about how we can know very few things 100%.  Yet we make decisions everyday based on a feeling or past experience or likelihood or philosophy.  That even includes our decision to marry someone, or take a certain job.   And since we have to make some kind of a choice about faith, why not choose what aligns with our gut about what rings true.   For me, it was the way Jesus lived his life and loved.   It doesn't mean you accept everything the church teaches, or know anything for sure, at all.  But you "lean toward it" anyway, because at the end of the day, we have to lean toward something.  

I am similar as far as revering Jesus (at least, what we read about Jesus and what I was taught). But here’s where it gets sticky for me: of course if I have any spiritual warm fuzzies at all, it’s going to be towards Jesus. The time, place and people I was born to make that the most likely belief I will have, if I have any at all. So, it’s not really anything surprising about me having a gut feeling of right-ness towards the teachings of Jesus. 

I accept practically nothing the church teaches about Christianity, yet it is because of my upbringing and what I was taught that I ever believed *anything* about the Christian faith at all. So there is a part of me that feels like I’m just kidding myself. It actually seems as though atheism (or at least agnosticism) is the more courageous and honest position. Because if I’m saying, “Oh yes, I’m a Christian! Just a very liberal interpretation out there on the edges!” then that sounds like I’m just afraid of the bad fallout - and there would be some - from boldly saying, “I am not a Christian by the measure most anyone I know would apply. I revere Jesus; I hope there is a God. That’s pretty much it.” I know there are some people who would view this as a Very Bad Thing and I find I don’t want to experience that. So I keep the status quo, which means mostly relying on what people know about my past. 

[J-rap]

3 minutes ago, Quill said:

I am similar as far as revering Jesus (at least, what we read about Jesus and what I was taught). But here’s where it gets sticky for me: of course if I have any spiritual warm fuzzies at all, it’s going to be towards Jesus. The time, place and people I was born to make that the most likely belief I will have, if I have any at all. So, it’s not really anything surprising about me having a gut feeling of right-ness towards the teachings of Jesus. 

I accept practically nothing the church teaches about Christianity, yet it is because of my upbringing and what I was taught that I ever believed *anything* about the Christian faith at all. So there is a part of me that feels like I’m just kidding myself. It actually seems as though atheism (or at least agnosticism) is the more courageous and honest position. Because if I’m saying, “Oh yes, I’m a Christian! Just a very liberal interpretation out there on the edges!” then that sounds like I’m just afraid of the bad fallout - and there would be some - from boldly saying, “I am not a Christian by the measure most anyone I know would apply. I revere Jesus; I hope there is a God. That’s pretty much it.” I know there are some people who would view this as a Very Bad Thing and I find I don’t want to experience that. So I keep the status quo, which means mostly relying on what people know about my past. 

Well I personally think that's a great place to start!

What are some of the things your church teaches about Christianity that you don't accept?

[ktgrok]

1 hour ago, Quill said:

I am similar as far as revering Jesus (at least, what we read about Jesus and what I was taught). But here’s where it gets sticky for me: of course if I have any spiritual warm fuzzies at all, it’s going to be towards Jesus. The time, place and people I was born to make that the most likely belief I will have, if I have any at all. So, it’s not really anything surprising about me having a gut feeling of right-ness towards the teachings of Jesus. 

I accept practically nothing the church teaches about Christianity, yet it is because of my upbringing and what I was taught that I ever believed *anything* about the Christian faith at all. So there is a part of me that feels like I’m just kidding myself. It actually seems as though atheism (or at least agnosticism) is the more courageous and honest position. Because if I’m saying, “Oh yes, I’m a Christian! Just a very liberal interpretation out there on the edges!” then that sounds like I’m just afraid of the bad fallout - and there would be some - from boldly saying, “I am not a Christian by the measure most anyone I know would apply. I revere Jesus; I hope there is a God. That’s pretty much it.” I know there are some people who would view this as a Very Bad Thing and I find I don’t want to experience that. So I keep the status quo, which means mostly relying on what people know about my past. 

I don't think being a Christian has to mean that Christianity is the only truth, and that all other religions are wrong. Because you are right, most of this is an accident of birth - where and to whom you were born. But I do believe that various faith traditions are all seeking the same truths and feeling their way toward them as best they can - all getting some things right and some things wrong. And if that is the case, than there is nothing wrong with continuing that seeking from within the tradition you are already part of. Like, I wouldn't tell a Buddhist they are being silly to continue to seek wisdom in Buddhism because they are only buddhist because of where they were born. I'd think that it is a normal, even beautiful thing for them to dive in and explore via the conduit of their own culture/traditions. And if that is the case, than it follows that it makes sense for me to embrace my culture/traditions as the vehicle of my exploration. I don't HAVE to - nothing wrong with me finding another path if I need to for my growth, but there is nothing silly or dishonest about staying without my tradition to do so. 

I wouldn't tell a traditional weaver from some society that makes amazing art via weaving that well, they aren't really an artist if they just weave - that weaving is just what they happened into and they need to give up weaving and do oil paints to be authentic. 

There is nothing "cheating" about finding the beauty and goodness in your own tradition and spring boarding from there. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, J-rap said:

Well I personally think that's a great place to start!

What are some of the things your church teaches about Christianity that you don't accept?

It’s a lotta things. Are you sure you want to hear? 

Of course, we can start with the usual ones, like God’s will vs. Free will; what is the point of petitionary prayer (other than it can provide stress relief for some people); pain and suffering. Move on to some of the issues that are not really rare, but are considered heretical by large numbers of Christians: I reject that there is a hell; I don’t believe the Bible is “God’s Word”, nor that it is inerrant and divinely written and assembled. I do not believe God or divine beings intervene in human lives, either in the corporeal sense - “...and then an angel pushed her out of the way of the speeding truck...” - nor in the more vague sense - “...and it’s a good thing I didn’t get that job after all, because two months later, the CFO was jailed on embezzlement charges...” And we can end at things that seem pretty much the actual point of Christianity: that Jesus is simultaneously God’s Son and God himself...oh, and also the Holy Spirit; that the Spirit impregnated a nice, Jewish teenager named Mary in order to fulfill a prophecy; Atonement - that the death of something unblemished “pays” for the sins of someone else; really, just the whole calculus of God creating fallible humans whom he can’t possibly abide without looking through his Jesus-colored glasses. When people say Christianity is having “a close, personal relationship with God/Jesus,” honestly? That has never made sense to me pretty much my whole life, even when I was the most sincere Christian you ever saw. How does one have a close, personal relationship with someone they can never audibly converse with? Or touch, hug? Or do something caring for and be the recipient of caring from? 

It’s easier to list what I do believe: I believe the point of life is to love others and receive love and to do the kinds of things Jesus purportedly did. The Sermon on the Mount of Olives is a good starting point. I believe in striving for goodness, kindness, gentleness, compassion and mercy. I believe in turning from the opposites of those things. That makes me very spiritual but not very Christian by the standards of most people I have known as a Christian. My own parents, if they read this, what I wrote above, would fall into despair that I am not saved. I am actually pretty nervous about who might be reading this....

[Guest]

58 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

I wouldn't tell a traditional weaver from some society that makes amazing art via weaving that well, they aren't really an artist if they just weave - that weaving is just what they happened into and they need to give up weaving and do oil paints to be authentic. 

Nicely said. I like that. Thanks! 

[PrincessMommy]

Just now, Patty Joanna said:

There's a lot in here that matches what I believe.  Not all of it, but a lot of it.  

I was thinking the same thing. LOL

@Quill - your beliefs sound very similar to most of the sacramental traditions I am familiar with.  What you are describing, in what you don't believe, I pretty much don't believe either- and haven't believed since I left Evangelicalism.    Please don't put all Christians into one box... because we just don't all fit in that.

[ktgrok]

Quill, you'd probably like some of Richard Rohr's stuff, although he gets a bit mystical for my practical brain 🙂

And you very well might like Spong.

But do watch that video when you can, or try some of the Liturgists' podcasts. 

[Chris in VA]

Quill, I can only offer you two things-- One, that the opposite of faith is not doubt, but certainty...

and two, that belief is not necessarily a matter of intellectual assent, but more a matter of "putting your trust in"  (something/someone). 

I don't remember where I heard those. 

And maybe a fourth? I could never worship a god I found completely understandable--too small for me. But a god who was completely un-understandable? I would never want that either! 😁 Guess I'm picky. 

Oh, and a 5th-- The Sermon on the Mount refers to a place in Galilee. The Mount of Olives is a different place, just down the street from me here in Jerusalem.  (But I think you knew that, and I'm only correcting you because I'm petty like that🙄😉😊)

[Guest]

I thought it sounded wrong...

The Sermon on the Mount. Blessed are the peacemakers and all that, right? 

[MercyA]

2 hours ago, Quill said:

When people say Christianity is having “a close, personal relationship with God/Jesus,” honestly? That has never made sense to me pretty much my whole life, even when I was the most sincere Christian you ever saw.

Me either. I think that is an extra-Biblical, man-made idea. Sort of like getting people to repeat the sinner's prayer. 😉 

I'm more of a trust and obey kind of believer. 

Thanks for being open with us. We love you! 

Maybe more later, have to run!

[lauraw4321]

2 hours ago, Quill said:

It’s a lotta things. Are you sure you want to hear? 

Of course, we can start with the usual ones, like God’s will vs. Free will; what is the point of petitionary prayer (other than it can provide stress relief for some people); pain and suffering. Move on to some of the issues that are not really rare, but are considered heretical by large numbers of Christians: I reject that there is a hell; I don’t believe the Bible is “God’s Word”, nor that it is inerrant and divinely written and assembled. I do not believe God or divine beings intervene in human lives, either in the corporeal sense - “...and then an angel pushed her out of the way of the speeding truck...” - nor in the more vague sense - “...and it’s a good thing I didn’t get that job after all, because two months later, the CFO was jailed on embezzlement charges...” And we can end at things that seem pretty much the actual point of Christianity: that Jesus is simultaneously God’s Son and God himself...oh, and also the Holy Spirit; that the Spirit impregnated a nice, Jewish teenager named Mary in order to fulfill a prophecy; Atonement - that the death of something unblemished “pays” for the sins of someone else; really, just the whole calculus of God creating fallible humans whom he can’t possibly abide without looking through his Jesus-colored glasses. When people say Christianity is having “a close, personal relationship with God/Jesus,” honestly? That has never made sense to me pretty much my whole life, even when I was the most sincere Christian you ever saw. How does one have a close, personal relationship with someone they can never audibly converse with? Or touch, hug? Or do something caring for and be the recipient of caring from? 

It’s easier to list what I do believe: I believe the point of life is to love others and receive love and to do the kinds of things Jesus purportedly did. The Sermon on the Mount of Olives is a good starting point. I believe in striving for goodness, kindness, gentleness, compassion and mercy. I believe in turning from the opposites of those things. That makes me very spiritual but not very Christian by the standards of most people I have known as a Christian. My own parents, if they read this, what I wrote above, would fall into despair that I am not saved. I am actually pretty nervous about who might be reading this....

 

I struggled a lot with this one. One thing that made me more open to the idea of petitionary prayer was learning more about physics. Physicist know that if you split an atom and send sub-atomic particles in opposite directions, whatever you do to one, immediately, and with no apparent flow of information, happens to the other. As if they are connected. In other words, all things (as in all matter) in the universe is connected. So how can we say what I do has no influence on a butterfly in Thailand? 

The fact that this idea is held by other religions makes it more likely to be true, in my mind. The more religions stumble upon and support the same ideas, the more likely it is to be true, in my estimation.

The same holds true for some form of incarnation. The idea that God became human to communicate with us without terrifying us to bits has been a part of human mythology for a long time. So much so, that it seems to be more likely that it happened (or has happened more than once). 

The  idea that Jesus's death and resurrection is the ultimate flipping of the scapegoat narrative also makes it more true for me. If God could make the whole world right and just, and God came to earth to declare that, wouldn't humans kill God? 

Anyway, doubt and faith. And in the meantime, trying to follow Jesus the best I can. 

[lauraw4321]

Oh, and I'll throw out there - check out a PC USA church sometime if there's one near you!

[Guest]

Quote

The  idea that Jesus's death and resurrection is the ultimate flipping of the scapegoat narrative also makes it more true for me. If God could make the whole world right and just, and God came to earth to declare that, wouldn't humans kill God? 

I have a problem with the whole scapegoat narrative in the first place, whether we’re talking about the Israelites sacrificing a lamb or God sending Jesus here to be THE sacrificial lamb. To me, it’s so convoluted. Like with, “without the shedding of blood, there can be no remission of sins.” Well, says who? It reminds me of that funny line in Night at the Museum when the miniature Owen Wilson character says, “Somebody’s gotta pay!” And the other character says, “pay for what?” And he says, “I don’t know! Just pay!” So I think it’s nonsensical to say that God requires a blood payment to pay for sins, so God has to kill his Son (except that’s really God, too) so ever after, God can apply Jesus’s blood to any future sin, so longer as people accept that payment for their sins. See? Convoluted. 

I don’t buy into the punishment model at all, so maybe that’s never going to work for me. When my kids do something wrong, I don’t make them “pay.” We work through the problem and try to make it right with love. Jesus as the Atonement for all sounds like he’s the Whipping Boy. 

[ktgrok]

8 minutes ago, Quill said:

I have a problem with the whole scapegoat narrative in the first place, whether we’re talking about the Israelites sacrificing a lamb or God sending Jesus here to be THE sacrificial lamb. To me, it’s so convoluted. Like with, “without the shedding of blood, there can be no remission of sins.” Well, says who? It reminds me of that funny line in Night at the Museum when the miniature Owen Wilson character says, “Somebody’s gotta pay!” And the other character says, “pay for what?” And he says, “I don’t know! Just pay!” So I think it’s nonsensical to say that God requires a blood payment to pay for sins, so God has to kill his Son (except that’s really God, too) so ever after, God can apply Jesus’s blood to any future sin, so longer as people accept that payment for their sins. See? Convoluted. 

I don’t buy into the punishment model at all, so maybe that’s never going to work for me. When my kids do something wrong, I don’t make them “pay.” We work through the problem and try to make it right with love. Jesus as the Atonement for all sounds like he’s the Whipping Boy. 

There are plenty of Christians that don't agree with the scapegoat model of Jesus either. I believe it is often referred to as Incarnational First theology? It is also briefly addressed in the video I linked I think - and he agrees that the idea of a God that would kill his own son is just too appalling to consider. 

[Pam in CT]

re I believe...

2 hours ago, Quill said:

...

It’s easier to list what I do believe: I believe the point of life is to love others and receive love and to do the kinds of things Jesus purportedly did. The Sermon on the Mount... is a good starting point. I believe in striving for goodness, kindness, gentleness, compassion and mercy. I believe in turning from the opposites of those things... 

....

 

That is a very solid foundation, certainly enough to go on within most any big-tent religious tradition.

And concur with Katie, whose weaver analogy I     , that there's nothing "cheating" about working within the tradition you happened to be born into.  

3 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

I don't think being a Christian has to mean that Christianity is the only truth, and that all other religions are wrong. Because you are right, most of this is an accident of birth - where and to whom you were born. But I do believe that various faith traditions are all seeking the same truths and feeling their way toward them as best they can - all getting some things right and some things wrong. And if that is the case, than there is nothing wrong with continuing that seeking from within the tradition you are already part of. Like, I wouldn't tell a Buddhist they are being silly to continue to seek wisdom in Buddhism because they are only buddhist because of where they were born. I'd think that it is a normal, even beautiful thing for them to dive in and explore via the conduit of their own culture/traditions. And if that is the case, than it follows that it makes sense for me to embrace my culture/traditions as the vehicle of my exploration. I don't HAVE to - nothing wrong with me finding another path if I need to for my growth, but there is nothing silly or dishonest about staying without my tradition to do so. 

I wouldn't tell a traditional weaver from some society that makes amazing art via weaving that well, they aren't really an artist if they just weave - that weaving is just what they happened into and they need to give up weaving and do oil paints to be authentic. 

There is nothing "cheating" about finding the beauty and goodness in your own tradition and spring boarding from there. 

 

One (of several) ways I think of religious traditions is as languages, different grammars and rhythms and component parts we use to convey concepts and ideas that (IMHO) lie beyond our cognitive grasp.  Christianity is your mother tongue, the spiritual language you were raised in... much as weaving is the visual language Katie's weaver was born to.  We work with the tools we have; what's the alternative?

[ktgrok]

Found what I was looking for! (and it appears incarnation theology is a term that has been taken over by a different movement entirely since back when I learned it a long long time ago - not what I was thinking of at all). 

https://cac.org/incarnation-instead-of-atonement-2016-02-12/

"In Franciscan parlance, Jesus did not come to change the mind of God about humanity; Jesus came to change the mind of humanity about God. "

Man does Father Richard Rohr give me the warm fuzzies sometimes. And goosebumps. HE and those like him are why I converted to Catholicism. And part of what I miss the most. He's also the one that said all the best Catholics he knows left the church for a least a decade before coming back, so maybe there is hope for me, lol. 

Edited November 6, 2019 by Ktgrok

[ktgrok]

3 minutes ago, Patty Joanna said:

 

That was *the* tipping point for me.  Frederica dealt with it to some degree in this article:  http://frederica.com/writings/christs-death-a-rescue-mission-not-a-payment-for-sins.html

In about 2006,I was commenting on a former boardie's blog-conversation where the topic of penal substitutionary atonement was being discussed; I said something like what ktgrok said in the quote and I was called all sorts of names and thrown off the board.  But this view was not part of mainstream Christian discussion until Anselm, who riffed and expanded on one of Augustine's musings (not a teaching).

It's sort of like if you look at the Garden of Eden story (whether as story or history...I don't care) and hear God say these words, "Adam...what have you done?"

Do you hear God yelling, angry, see a scowl on his face, his arms akimbo, and know he is going to mete out punishment for willful offensiveness?
Or do you hear God moaning in sadness, see his hands covering his face, and know he wants to help deal with the consequences of a poor choice on the part of one He loves?

I'm with the latter.  

Yup. Our image of God is so important, and it also says a lot about how we see ourselves. 

And can I say, I have SO many bones to pick with St. Augustine when I meet him one day! That dude was trouble before he converted and trouble afterward, lol. There are times I wish Monica had just let him be. (of course, I have St. Monica as my confirmation name, so obviously I have mixed feelings on all that)

[ktgrok]

Honestly, SO much of what people think of as Christianity and what they cannot accept was NOT part of early Christianity at all. Nor is the idea that everyone has to believe the same thing and sing along true to the early church. Those apostles disagreed and talked and argued and probably got drunk talking theology late into the night, debating things passionately. Yet so many American Christians grow up thinking that they have to believe every word their church says as Gospel - which really is making an idol of the Church. 

The progressive Christians who still identify AS Christians put Jesus first, not the Bible, if that makes sense. (and I'm not trying to knock anyone else's view of Christianity - do what seems right!)

[ktgrok]

By putting what we know of Jesus (yes, which in great part comes via the Bible) first, but not saying that say, Paul's letters are just as important as what Jesus taught. That would be one way of worshipping Jesus versus the Bible. But also it means including liturgical traditions, the faith handed down orally, etc. To not be Sola Scriptura for sure. 

[Frances]

5 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

I don't think being a Christian has to mean that Christianity is the only truth, and that all other religions are wrong. Because you are right, most of this is an accident of birth - where and to whom you were born. But I do believe that various faith traditions are all seeking the same truths and feeling their way toward them as best they can - all getting some things right and some things wrong. And if that is the case, than there is nothing wrong with continuing that seeking from within the tradition you are already part of. Like, I wouldn't tell a Buddhist they are being silly to continue to seek wisdom in Buddhism because they are only buddhist because of where they were born. I'd think that it is a normal, even beautiful thing for them to dive in and explore via the conduit of their own culture/traditions. And if that is the case, than it follows that it makes sense for me to embrace my culture/traditions as the vehicle of my exploration. I don't HAVE to - nothing wrong with me finding another path if I need to for my growth, but there is nothing silly or dishonest about staying without my tradition to do so. 

I wouldn't tell a traditional weaver from some society that makes amazing art via weaving that well, they aren't really an artist if they just weave - that weaving is just what they happened into and they need to give up weaving and do oil paints to be authentic. 

There is nothing "cheating" about finding the beauty and goodness in your own tradition and spring boarding from there. 

This is very much the belief of my very Catholic mom. And I know that if I ever find my way back to religion, it will only be one (or at least a denomination within one) that believes this way. I simply can’t comprehend anyone believing only their particular way of knowing God is the one true way for everyone. I can understand why someone would want to believe it, I just can’t go from there to comprehending actually believing it.

[J-rap]

7 hours ago, Quill said:

It’s a lotta things. Are you sure you want to hear? 

Of course, we can start with the usual ones, like God’s will vs. Free will; what is the point of petitionary prayer (other than it can provide stress relief for some people); pain and suffering. Move on to some of the issues that are not really rare, but are considered heretical by large numbers of Christians: I reject that there is a hell; I don’t believe the Bible is “God’s Word”, nor that it is inerrant and divinely written and assembled. I do not believe God or divine beings intervene in human lives, either in the corporeal sense - “...and then an angel pushed her out of the way of the speeding truck...” - nor in the more vague sense - “...and it’s a good thing I didn’t get that job after all, because two months later, the CFO was jailed on embezzlement charges...” And we can end at things that seem pretty much the actual point of Christianity: that Jesus is simultaneously God’s Son and God himself...oh, and also the Holy Spirit; that the Spirit impregnated a nice, Jewish teenager named Mary in order to fulfill a prophecy; Atonement - that the death of something unblemished “pays” for the sins of someone else; really, just the whole calculus of God creating fallible humans whom he can’t possibly abide without looking through his Jesus-colored glasses. When people say Christianity is having “a close, personal relationship with God/Jesus,” honestly? That has never made sense to me pretty much my whole life, even when I was the most sincere Christian you ever saw. How does one have a close, personal relationship with someone they can never audibly converse with? Or touch, hug? Or do something caring for and be the recipient of caring from? 

It’s easier to list what I do believe: I believe the point of life is to love others and receive love and to do the kinds of things Jesus purportedly did. The Sermon on the Mount of Olives is a good starting point. I believe in striving for goodness, kindness, gentleness, compassion and mercy. I believe in turning from the opposites of those things. That makes me very spiritual but not very Christian by the standards of most people I have known as a Christian. My own parents, if they read this, what I wrote above, would fall into despair that I am not saved. I am actually pretty nervous about who might be reading this....

I think, as you've read from others here, that many of us have similar thoughts on some of this...  So much of our interpretations of Christianity is simply that -- our interpretations.  It could be that we're wrong on a lot of things.  I've always been more of a common-sense type person, and I personally think that God is too.  I've come to think that if it doesn't seem to make sense, then our interpretation is probably off.   And if it isn't interpreted through the lens of love, then our interpretation is probably off.    At the end of the day, I think it's totally fine if we don't get a lot of it.  I think Jesus' main message was really simply love.  That is the very essence of God, after all.  I can't imagine what could be more important than that.

I actually think that where you're at is a really solid place to start.