I Hope RA Forgives Me For This

RA has a great post at his site entitled Why I Am Not Christian. I'll respond to him eventually because his points invite discussion. If you're a Christian, you really need to read what he says. The self-examination and cultural critique is worth it. If you're not one of us, in the sense that you read this blog and think it's important to convert everyone you meet to some form of evangelical or fundamentalist Christianity, please don't wander over to RA's site to try to convert him. You'll feel a bit like a dunderhead in short order, although he'll be nice about making you feel that way.

Comments

[Ambrose]

It is actually refreshing to read somthing like this from an admitted atheist that is actually thoughtful and measured. Usually the arguments are more rooted in arrogance and intellectual sluggishness.

[Lance]

Help me out, here: what's so "must-read" about that post? Looking for the "self-examination and cultural critique," all I found was the expected "I just don't believe in God," the underwhelming "it's easier to relate to others if I don't have a creed to get in the way," and the obvious "it's easier to be a free-thinker if I don't have any belief system weighing me down." What was so deep and thought provoking about that?

[Resident Atheist]

Greg,

You're forgiven. Thanks for the recommendation.

Ambrose,

You're spot-on about a lot of the conceptual noise in most of these discussions. Some people attribute this to the fact that so many atheists are ex-fundamentalists who never really recover from their dualistic indoctrination, but nobody really has the stats to back that up, and it's sort of a "blame-the-enemy" tactic anyway. I want to blog on that at some point, but not this week.

Lance,

As I mentioned in the first paragraph, I make no claim to universal relevance, nor do I assert any claim that I think ought to be binding on others. If you don't know me there's a good chance you won't find it interesting.

Cheers,
RA

[greg]

Lance,

I don't think I was recommending it as an overwhelming intellectual arugment. RA is more than capable of that when necessary. I liked his post because it laid out his reasons succinctly and honestly. Additionally, he mentions some issues Christians never think about: the degree to which we are part of a social, rather than doctrinal, construct; the degree to which tradition affects what we believe and how important that is; and, to what degree do claims of exclusivity really belong in the life of a Jesus-follower. (I avoided the term Christianity, because it is dependent upon claims to exclusivity.)

[Lance]

Ok, I see. Perhaps I read more into your post than was fair. Nevertheless, why all the apprehension about exclusivity? I don't see that as the problem, but rather the arrogance that is assumed to go along with it.

(I understand the reticence in using the name "Christian" because of the silliness of others who do the same. For me, though, I believe the name accurately describes the lordship of Jesus in my life; it is not I who should be ashamed of the label, but those who violate its spirit. I, unlike RA (?), feel no compulsion to be responsible for the behavior of anyone else but myself, regardless of what they call themselves.)

Whatever you call the life spent following Jesus, it is an exclusive path. Jesus' words make that clear. The path is exclusive against all other paths, but it is inclusive of all who want to walk it. THAT's where many people's disenchantment with "Christianity" finds its root: in the misguided efforts of some to either coerce others through guilt and shame to walk the path (which violates people's sense that this should be a personal, free decision) or to exclude others through arrogance from experiencing the freedom and joy of walking the path (which violates people's sense of what "love" is supposed to look like).

It is a good thing to remind fellow followers that Jesus reaches out to us in love, not guilt; that He reaches out to each of us personally, and our responsibility is limited to how WE respond to this call, rather than whether others join us or not; and that the walk has no room for arrogance. Though we possess the exclusive Truth of Christ's divinity and message, we are still to move through life in meekness and humility - not because we don't know that what we believe is true, but because it is simply the right, Christian way to conduct oneself. Just because there may be only one way into a building, that doesn't mean that only a select few can enter. Unfortunately, many Christians confuse the two concepts, thinking that the exclusivity of Truth is meant to divide the favored from the damned here on Earth.

[Resident Atheist]

Lance,

Kevin in my comments makes some of the same points you do, and in my reply to him I explain what I really ought to have written in order to be clear. I'll go into a bit more detail here on one particular point--

Taking responsibility for other Christians is one particular neurosis programmed into me in the church I grew up in; it isn't exclusive to me, but it also isn't universal to everyone. I grew up in an environment where I never knew any non-Christians until my late teenage years, and much of the propaganda handed to us was how everyone in the world recognizes that Christians are gentler, kinder and morally superior to everyone else (by their accounts, even persecution comes about as a result of jealousy). Isolation and extreme ethnocentrism are a dangerous combination. Coming out of this shell in college, I still reflexively held to the ideal of better-than-everyone-else Christians, but it was colored with the reality that Christians, statistically, are immoral, hateful and hurtful just as often as everyone else. Hence the desire to take responsibility: I was trying to bring about that which I "knew" should be true in the teeth of the observation that it wasn't and probably couldn't be true.

I think a much more common Christian approach to the problem of Christian misconduct than what I tried to do is just what you mention--they tend to define a standard of Christianity and when self-professed Christians violate it, it's no big deal; they're not really Christians, or they're not acting in a Christian way, etc. Depending on your view of corporate guilt this may or may not be viewed as a good thing to do, but it does strike me as the most popular way of dealing with the problem.

As I mention to Roger in my comments, I don't think that the gospels are verbatim accounts of the words of Jesus, so proof-texting isn't going to lead me to conclude anything in particular about the claims of Christianity.

Best,
Leighton

[Joe Kendrick]

Greg,
Dude, I was totally having to fight that evangilical upbringing of mine to read RA's post. Man that is a difficult thing to do. But thanks to you and others I find myself being very balanced in my faith and I thank you.

RA,
I think I was drawn to your comment "there are atheists (in the sense of belief) who are also Christians (in the sense of community ties)." Because I see that in a lot of adults but more so in kids because they are looking for answers to their questions and do not want mom and dad's view. Which is great on one hand and bad on the other because it makes us ministers have to actually work (wink, nudge, laugh) but what can we do except show the way they have to actually walk it. But nice post, liked it very much.

[Fat Calbert]

Regarding atheists in church, my friend recently told me "I think the bible is a bunch of shit" and two sentences later he said "I really like going to "X" church because of the social aspect of that community."

RA,
I really liked the post on your blog but I doubt that your interest in theology are primarily sociological.

(If that does not make sense its because I am drunk)
Peace to you,
Fat Calbert

[Resident Atheist]

Thanks, Joe, I appreciate it.

Calbert, you're right about my views on theology--people who like to play with ideas know how much systems of thought can exert their own unique coercive power. This is one reason why I'm leery of the "consequences" of substitutionary atonement. But besides the fact that most people don't perceive philosophies as having substantial normative power, I think this phenomenon applies to cognition in general, and not just theology.

Cheers,
RA

[cheek]

The problems with claims of exclusivity are imbedded much deeper than in the overt arrogance that many people derive from such claims. More important I think is the more subtle arrogance that necessarilly accompanies any attempt to claim exclusivity. In claiming that you know what you believe is true, you rely on your own experience and bias. You might appeal to scripture, but to establish the authority of scripture in the discussion, you must eventually forsake rationality or appeal to some aspect of your personal experience that has revealed that authority to you. So in claiming the exclusivity of the Christian faith you imply a superiority of your own personal experience over the experience of someone else. William James, in his Varieties of Religious Experience, argues that while one's own experience is sufficient for supporting his own commitment to certain aspects of theology, such experience can never retain its authority beyond the confine of the individual mind. So while I personally accept the teachings of the Christian faith as I have come to understand them, I cannot reasonably exclude the possibility that someone else's experience points to the truth of another faith or of no faith at all. While one might act in every way humble while holding exclusivist beliefs, he could never actually be humble because he values his own experience above the experience of billions of other people.

[Jon]

Greg,

Having read your posts for some months, I sometimes find myself asking the question, "Why is this guy a Christian?" I realize that this question stems from my own biased, evangelical, fundementalist, "there's only one way" experience with Christianity. But I would really love to see you make a similar post to RA:

Why I AM a Christian.

Maybe give it a shot if you run out of stuff to talk about?

Thanks,
Jon

[greg]

Jon,

I'm a Christian because I believe God raised Jesus from the dead. That allows me to be a Christian in some very non-evangelical ways.

[Jon]

Greg,

I look forward to hearing about those ways as I continue to read your posts. You do a good job, so thanks.

Jon