Tag: Christian faith

Losing my religion

~ K ~ 2 Comments

I’m trying to figure out when the deconstruction of my Christian faith began.

Was it as early as March 2011 when egalitarian seeds began to plant inside of me? Was it as early as April 2011 when I began to question the existence of a literal heaven and hell? (Was Rob Bell ahead of his time?)

What about December 2012 when Rachel Held Evans prompted me to read the Bible through the lens of a modern-day woman? Maybe April 2015 when I ruminated on my dalliance with Catholicism? Or perhaps November 2015 when my church foundation bottomed out and I felt adrift, with nowhere to hold on to?

Or even maybe as recent as October 2019 when I discovered the #exvangelical community on Twitter?

It is now January 2021. And I hold to 3 basic beliefs:

  1. I affirm a living, loving, and everlasting God.
  2. I affirm believe in Jesus Christ as the son of God.
  3. I affirm a belief in the Holy Spirit who serves as my conscience.

Yo. Everything else is now game. What a departure from when I first started this blog in 2009. And even more so, depression introspection in 2006.

Here I am. Standing at a road where I whole-heartedly agree with everything in this post. Don’t mind me while I quote some notables:

My leaving is not leaving God. It is leaving the people who claim to speak for him.

I believe…
1. God is love.
2. To show love is to be godly
3. If God is God he will reveal himself in his own way to anyone who seeks to love and through love know him.
4. Women deserve a seat at every table including the clergy and that separate but equal is not equal at all. Male headship is patriarchy and an unfair burden for both men and women.
5. I reject purity culture, and any form of spirituality that forces an individual to choose between their sexuality and their spirituality. Wholeness and health does not come through cutting off one part of yourself to appease another.
6. I affirm all of my LGBTQ siblings fully and completely and without caveat.
7. I reject all efforts to use faith to gain or preserve influence and power.

I agree with all of this. In an era where people like Josh Harris, of I Kissed Dating Goodbye fame, comes out as no longer Christian, anything can happen.

The Evolution of My Christian Beliefs

~ K ~ 1 Comment

It’s not hard to put into words what I’m thinking and feeling—verbally. Writing it down is another story.

A lot of what I believed previously has changed and evolved. I no longer buy into the fundamentalist teachings of yore. I also don’t buy much evangelical teaching either. Apparently, there’s a group of #exvangelicals on Twitter. These are former evangelicals who no longer associate themselves with fundamental Christianity. Maybe some of them are still Christians, of which I am one. But others have become atheists, agnostics, or have decided to pursue a different religion altogether (eg, Buddhism). A friend who has become an agnostic exvangelical sent me a helpful link that defines who falls into exvangelicalism.

I’m a weird mix of Calvinism and progressive Christian beliefs. How do you merge Calvinism with progressive Christian beliefs? I actually don’t know. But I do it.

Continue reading “The Evolution of My Christian Beliefs” →

Managing My Drifting Boat of Faith

~ K ~ 1 Comment
Image from mysticalchrist.wordpress.com

I spent time with some friends today in which we were able to catch up on our lives after not seeing each other for a while but also discussing some theological issues. (Ah! I like this topic much too much!) After learning about their theological stance, I began to pour out my heart on theological issues too.

But it wasn’t theology. Or was it?

I began blurting out all of the things that I was upset about in my spiritual life and in my church. It became a few minutes of which I began airing my spiritual grievances against myself and the world.

The fact of the matter is that I am hunger for God. I read TONS of books on the Christian faith, Jesus, hell, desiring God, parables in the Bible, Reformed doctrine, and being Christ’s hands and feet to those in need. I want to do something. I’m also aware I need to spend a good bit of time being, but I’m also itching to do.

Day after day I’m torn up over my spiritual state because I am angry at myself for forgetting about Jesus when I’m working or not telling others about the freedom that he’s given me.

  • I want to do practical things to reach out to others in the name of Christ.
  • I want to be so earthly minded that I’m heavenly good.
  • I want to wake up on Sunday bursting at the seams to worship Jesus, the God-man who’s done amazing things for me.
  • I want to be joyously obedient to the Lord out of love and happiness.
  • I want to connect with other members of Christ’s family through Bible studies where we learn how to transform our lives by applying God’s word.

My husband always admonishes me that I’m too concerned with the big picture. I do want to be part of the big picture. I want to be one of the tiny puzzle pieces that fit to make a beautiful picture when it’s all put together. Right now, I don’t know what I’m doing or where I’m going. I’m drifting out to sea trying to manage this boat of faith all on my own.

The more I think about the church I visited last week, the more I think I’d like to go back. Maybe because it’s shiny and brand-spankin’ new just like a kid who gets a new toy and plays with it until he’s tired of it and wants something new.

I want solid doctrine, I want love and community, and I want to share my enthusiasm for a powerful, loving God (who, yeah, I have issues with at times) who cared enough about this earth to send his only begotten son to this earth to save sinners.

According to the title of a Rob Bell book, Jesus Wants to Save Christians.

I hope I’m not so far gone that he can still save me.

 

Food for thought #6: A New Kind of Christianity

~ K ~ 6 Comments

The God Question

McLaren starts out this section by—what seems to me—as apologies for God’s atrocities:

Now, I am in no way interested in excusing or defending divine smiting, genocidal conquest, or global quasi-geocidal flooding; I’m just saying that even if these are the crimes of Elohim/LORD, they are far less serious crimes than those of Theos. (p. 99)

Then McLaren starts in on explaining how God isn’t actually violent but since people see God as violent, they act out how they see God. (Conversely, if we all saw God as loving, we’d all be loving to one another.) He uses an analogy of math concepts revealed in textbooks during the course of a person’s schooling as an example of how humans understand God: at first we learn very basic concepts since we are so immature but then we learn very complex concepts because humans have matured in their understanding of God. And as icing on the cake, McLaren takes a cheap (and distasteful) potshot at Christians who eat meat, subscribe to a just-war theory, and use fossil fuels. (For someone who talks a lot about being humble and mild-mannered, his snark and disdain for Christians who think differently than him is quite apparent in this book. I’ll admit, however, I am guilty of the same toward him now.)

The more I read McLaren’s theories, the more I cringe. The God of the Bible is loving, merciful, gracious, and slow to anger. But the God of the Bible is also a just, righteous, and jealous God. He is not McLaren’s caricature of a bloodthirsty “Theos” but McLaren’s happy-go-lucky description of Elohim is neither the full picture. McLaren often attacks Christians in his book, painting them as fundamental extremists or right-wing Republicans. It’s like saying all Democrats are treehuggers. It’s tough to be open-minded to other people’s opinions or “new” ideas when they brand you with a scarlet letter just for identifying yourself with the same religious group. I am neither a fundamental extremist nor a right-wing Republican yet McLaren often makes me feel as though my view of the Bible makes me part of that group. He couldn’t be more wrong.

I’m easily getting tired of McLaren now. He worries that Christians will use the story of the flood (Noah) to justify genocide [insert eyeroll here] then comes up with this:

Yes, I find a character named God who sends a flood that destroys all humanity except for Noah’s family, but that’s trivial compared to a deity who tortures the greater part of humanity forever in infinite eternal conscious torment, three words that need to be read slowly and thoughtfully to feel their full import. (Endnote: For this reason, I would grimly prefer atheism to be true than for the Greco-Roman Theos narrative to be true. And for this reason, I joyfully celebrate the narrative centered in Jesus as a better alternative to both.) (p. 99, 272)

[insert facepalm here] The ironic thing about the “narrative centered in Jesus” was that Jesus is the one who introduced the concept of hell, or “eternal conscious torment,” as we know it today. What Bible is McLaren reading? (Is he reading one at all?) Continue reading “Food for thought #6: A New Kind of Christianity” →

Food for thought #5: A New Kind of Christianity

~ K ~ Leave a comment

The Bible Authority Question

Not too long ago, I wrote this:

I’m excited about reading through A New Kind of Christianity. I have an open mind about this and am totally willing to transform my Christian faith and live it in a new way with only one caveat: it must remain true to the Bible. If McLaren argues something that goes against what the Bible says, I’ll point it out. We know very little about Jesus apart from the Bible. And we would know nothing about Jesus’ teachings without the Bible. So holding McLaren and his questions and responses to a Biblical standard is neither unreasonable nor unfair since he is talking about the the Christian faith.

In Part II of McLaren’s book, he attempts to address the kind of authority the Bible should have in people’s lives. Considering the Bible is the standard I’m holding him to, I wanted to see how he’d address this issue. First, he addresses how the Bible has been misused. He lists three problem areas:

1. Scientific Mess

Fundamentalism… again and again paints itself into a corner by requiring the Bible be treated as a divinely dictated science textbook providing us true information in all areas of life, including when and how the earth was created, what the shape of the earth is, what revolves around what in space, and so on. (p. 68)

He goes on to say Christians constantly end up “on the wrong side of truth” because of this and talks about how Christians who use the Bible as their scientific standard were wrong in Galileo’s time (heliocentric theory), were wrong in Darwin’s time (evolution), and are even wrong now (climate change/”ecological crisis”). [Note: In a sense, I agree with McLaren—the Bible was never designed as a science textbook and to treat it as such, I think is wrong. I believe what the Bible says on how everything was created but beyond that, the Bible doesn’t get into scientific specifics and to try to deduce things that aren’t there isn’t wise.]

    2. Ethical quandaries

    The Bible, when taken as an ethical rule book, offers no clear categories for many of our most significant and vexing socioethical quandaries. We find no explicit mention, for example, of abortion, capitalism, communism, socialism, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, autism, systemic racism, affirmative action, human rights, nationalism, sexual orientation, pornography, global climate change, imprisonment, extinction of species, energy efficiency, environmental sustainability, genetic engineering, space travel, and so on—not to mention nuclear weapons, biological warfare, and just-war theory. (p. 68-69)

    He goes on to say that Christians have misused the Bible to support unethical positions such as segregation and preventing interracial relationships. [Note: The Bible is not a socioethical rulebook nor I do believe it is intended for that purpose. However, the Bible is very much a moral book—it gives people basic rules to live, clearly saying what should and should not be done. Moral standards influence ethical decisions, hence, why some people refuse to tell even a “white” lie (because God says “do not bear false witness”).]

    3. Trouble relating to peace

    Basically, McLaren paints a broad brush of Christians generally being more hawkish and too eager for war. [Note: I’d actually agree with him here.]

    We must find new approaches to our sacred texts, approaches that sanely, critically, and fairly engage with honest scientific inquiry, approaches that help us derive constructive and relevant guidance in dealing with pressing personal and social problems, and approaches that lead us in the sweet pathway of peacemaking rather than the broad, deep rut of mutually assured destruction. (p. 70)

    In an attempt to show how Christians have radically misused the Bible to support unethical positions, McLaren takes his readers through a historical account of slavery quoting sections of pro-slavery books defending the practice of slavery. While my heritage is not directly tied to American slavery, I found the quotes McLaren used to be painful to read. One or two passages might have sufficed to prove his point, but he devotes more than FIVE pages to pro-slavery writing—something I found needlessly excessive. Why does McLaren have to search so hard to justify his points by quoting idiots? I’m sure there were abolitionist books that quoted the Bible too but that would weaken McLaren’s argument so there’s none of that here.

    Then in Chapter 8, readers discover how McLaren really views the Bible:

    At every turn, we approach the biblical text as if it were an annotated code instead of what it actually is: a portable library of poems, prophecies, histories, fables, parables, letters, sage sayings, quarrels, and so on. (p. 79)

    There can be no argument with McLaren here—he’s made up his mind about how he views the Bible. To him, the Bible is nothing more than a beautiful piece of literary text. He thinks that the Bible should not be seen as an inflexible constitution or rule of law but rather as “a library of culture and community.” (p. 81) Continue reading “Food for thought #5: A New Kind of Christianity” →

    Food for thought #2: Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity

    ~ K ~ 2 Comments

    I have a slight problem with Brian McLaren’s graph from p. 34 of A New Kind of Christianity. His graph is shown above in the picture; my revised version is shown below.

    McLaren places Eden on the level of Heaven which basically equals perfection. That might bother some but it doesn’t bother me. The only difference between my graph and his is the direction of the “Hell/Damnation” arrow. While nitpicky, I have a fundamental disagreement with McLaren on this one.

    From a theological perspective, what bothers me is the downward direction of the arrow. Perhaps he drew it that way because we always think of heaven as existing above and hell existing below. I redrew it to make it a continuous straight line not only because I have semi-OCD tendencies but also because the destination as a result of condemnation is hell/damnation. It’s not a downward trajectory from condemnation but rather, a continuous path that is not separate from it. According to the Bible, this is the spiritual path that all souls are on as a result of the fall (Romans 5:17-19).

    I’d also like to add that I’m interested in reading McLaren’s response to the pluralism question: “How should followers of Jesus relate to people of other religions?” On page 21, he briefly summarizes what he’ll try to address:

    So we ask: Is Jesus the only way? The only way to what? How can a belief in the uniqueness and universality of Christ be held without implying the religious supremacy and exclusivity of the Christian religion?

    I think it’s an interesting question to posit and answer, oops, I mean “respond to.” (There are no answers according to McLaren, only responses in an effort to stimulate and continue conversation. For a great Biblical counseling perspective on this conversation, check out Bob Kellermen’s series in which he provides responses to McLaren’s questions.)

    So here are my initial responses before reading the chapter in which McLaren expounds on the pluralism question:

    • Is Jesus the only way? “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.” — John 14:6
    • The only way to what? God the Father and His house. Thomas specifically asks about this. See all of John 14.
    • How can a belief in the uniqueness and universality of Christ be held without implying the religious supremacy and exclusivity of the Christian religion? While I appreciate McLaren’s question here, I’d rather “lob back” in response, as he’d say, that there’s a supremacy and exclusivity that’s inherent in Christ rather than the Christian religion. I don’t think any system of belief is foolproof. I believe only Christ is. Religion muddies waters (how many Christian denominations are there?); Jesus Christ is crystal clear. That being said, I believe there is a uniqueness and universality of Christ that transcends all beliefs and religions but there is a supremacy and exclusivity that is inherent in the God/man rather than the religion. (I’m sure this is something I will clarify and elaborate on as I progress within McLaren’s book.)

    I’m excited about reading through A New Kind of Christianity. I have an open mind about this and am totally willing to transform my Christian faith and live it in a new way with only one caveat: it must remain true to the Bible. If McLaren argues something that goes against what the Bible says, I’ll point it out. We know very little about Jesus apart from the Bible. And we would know nothing about Jesus’ teachings without the Bible. So holding McLaren and his questions and responses to a Biblical standard is neither unreasonable nor unfair since he is talking about the the Christian faith.

    I hope you’ll join me in my journey through this book. If you don’t know who Brian McLaren is or what a little bit of background on what part of the Christian faith he comes from, please check out my series on the emergent movement.