Changing the Face of Christianity Introduction
We recently received a letter from a “reasonable” non-theist, that we thought was worth sharing with our readers. When I say “reasonable”, I mean he is simply sharing his opinions on the topics we are passionate about.
After reading this letter, share what you can relate to and what WE can learn from his perspective.
I think there are things we can learn from him about negative Christian stereotypes and how WE create them. It’s also important to note that he doesn’t claim to represent all of atheism/agnosticism/non-theism, similar to how our site doesn’t pretend to represent ALL of Christianity or Christian opinion.
If you choose to comment on this article, and we hope you do, PLEASE remember this is NOT a debate. Instead, let’s read/listen with an open mind and a humble heart. I encourage you to share what you can relate to and most importantly…what WE can learn from his perspective. Now, his open letter to Christians:
Open Letter to Christians from a Reasonable Non-Theist
Author: Anonymous for family privacy concerns we respect.
You are right about the negative stereotypes associated with Christianity in secular America. Some of it is deserved, some of it is undeserved. While I don’t agree with some of what you say on your site, I do believe I grasp the spirit of your intentions.
I have a confession: Last week, when Congresswoman Giffords and several others were shot in Arizona, the first thing I said to my wife was “I bet the shooter is a conservative fundamentalist.” My thoughts were wrong, however private I kept them. Regardless of his theology, or lack there of, the man is clearly insane. Clearly, you are not a violent fundamentalist, so this isn’t an apology.
Equal Rights and Freedoms
If one man’s rights are denied, then all of our rights are vulnerable.
This is where I see the biggest gap between Christians and Atheists. If freedom of religion were taken away, and you were not allowed to congregate in a church, or pray to your god, most atheists I know would have a serious problem with that, and we would willingly stand up for your rights, even though we think your beliefs are incorrect.
On the other hand, it seems that Christians are very fast to contribute to the denial of our own rights to not acknowledge a god. You won’t see many Christians fighting for separation of church and state. You will be much more likely to see Christians redefining the phrase to fall in step with their beliefs. This is nothing unusual for Christians, as Christians seem pretty consistent in forming an argument around a predetermined conclusion: “God is the source of all that’s good, therefore nothing that promotes god can be bad,” or “God loves his children, so there’s nothing wrong with a public school teacher leading the class in a prayer.”
Prayer in School-Be Consistent
Had the Principal led the school in an Islamic prayer the Christian teachers would have had a fit. This mentality and interruption of consistency and reason is what bothers Atheists about Christians the most.
On the issue of school prayer, there is not an atheist I know who feels that kids don’t have the right to private prayer with their god. It is a different matter entirely when a public school teacher leads the class in a public prayer. This is wrong, and it’s equal to the state promoting one religion over the other. I think you can probably agree with this.
However, during a friend’s first day teaching at her new public school this past summer, the Principal decided that he would lead the teachers in an open prayer. Being that we’re in North Carolina, I’m fairly certain that most of the staff is Christian of one denomination or another, but my friend is agnostic. She was afraid of objecting to the prayer, and I can’t blame her. Her job was hard to find, and she didn’t want to put a target on herself. But none of her fellow Christian teachers seemed to mind in the least.
I am willing to bet that not a single one of them saw anything wrong with what they were doing. However, had the Principal led the school in an Islamic prayer, my friend would have been equally as uncomfortable with the prayer, and your Christian teachers would have had a fit. This type of mentality, this interruption of consistency and reason is what bothers Atheists about Christians the most.
Belief or Disbelief in God is Important
Feelings and thoughts on god are very, very important to us.
Former Christian, Now Atheist (non-theist)
I grew up attending church, sometimes 4 times a week.
Grandfather (Wesleyan Minister) Was Great Influence
My grandfather was a Wesleyan minister, and he was and continues to be one of the greatest influences on how I live my life. When I was a kid, my grandfather represented Jesus to me, and even though he’s been dead for 20 years, I still hear people say that about him. He was a great man. And he was a great man because he was a servant. He was kind, he was gentle, he was loving, he was giving, and he was genuine. He wasn’t a perfect man, but he was as close as I’ve ever known. He was also a reasonable man.
Jesus gives no exceptions when he tells people to be gentle and kind.
Not Many Christians To Admire Anymore
I don’t see the love and the gentleness and thoughtfulness that defined my grandpa.
What I see instead is justification of exclusion, and often celebration of Prosperity Theology. What we perceive from the outside is that you’re saying to us, and to everyone who isn’t already in your group “we know you’re flawed, we know you’re a sinner, we are too, join us and we’ll help you find salvation.” What I’m not hearing or seeing is “we love you, and we care about who you are and we want to know you and what you have to say.” Christians aren’t interested in what anybody has to say, they’re only interested in telling everyone “how it is.” That’s not conversation, and it’s rarely helpful.
Evangelicals often celebrate the most cynical pundits and celebrities who sound and act the opposite of gentle, kind, and genuine. Sarah Palin criticizes Michelle Obama for promoting healthy exercise and eating habits in children (a Presidentially encouraged idea since 1956), and the next thing I know I’m hearing conservative Christians praise and support her crazy words about how “the government can’t tell me how to raise my kids.”
Glenn Beck villanizes half of the American population, speaks about apocalyptic-like hard times, and how everybody should be prepared and purchase a product that he advertises called “Food Insurance.” The next thing you know, the Mormon owned company “Food Insurance” gets a massive boost in sales by the Evangelical community, thanks to Beck’s fear mongering sales pitch (btw, you can assemble the contents of a Food Insurance package yourself at about 1/3 of the cost). I’m saying this as somebody who doesn’t like Keith Olbermann either. These aren’t good people.
A History Lesson (Segregation, Slavery, Gay Marriage)
Thirty years down the road, these opponents of gay rights are going to be looked at the same way as the racist segregationists.
Are you going to say “well, it was complicated,” when it will be abundantly clear to you that gays with equal rights doesn’t hurt society? In fairness, there were also plenty of Christians and churches who supported civil rights all along. I know the Wesleyan Church has always stood against slavery and mistreatment of African Americans. But the point is, several denominations of Christians were absolutely wrong, and they did so much damage to so many people. That fact still hasn’t changed, and it continues today.
Conclusion
We both seem to agree that being a good Christian starts by striving to be a good person.
Thanks for your time, and best of luck to you. I certainly appreciate what you’re trying to do.
CFC Response:
Thanks SO much for sharing your story and experience in and out of the Christian faith. You raise some very important things for us to consider and work through. And yes, we love Dan Merchant’s work. His book/DVD is on our Recommended Reading List. His movie is also an “instant play” on Netflix…so anyone with Netflix can watch it now! Thanks again and we hope you continue to engage with us as we continue to engage with non-Christians and repair the damage that has caused so much animosity and mistrust between us. Peace to you and your family.
Dear Anonymous, I understand what you are saying. I have said pretty much the same thing about myself and my theology until my 50s. (Except maybe I was cowardly because I always hedged my bets by being agnostic.) I have since come to a position which I think is probably best described by Marcus Borg’s concept of post-critical naivete. I probably don’t understand it completely or reflect it well, but for me it means that my Christian beliefs don’t have to be based on a literalist reading of scripture. For a long time I said, “Hey, Jesus, the mustard seed isn’t the smallest seed” and thought I was saying something theologically significant. And it was, so long as I believed scripture had to be true as that concept is rationally advanced. I can now see that, literally taken, one has to do some pretty fast talking and hand waving trying to deal with some aspects of scripture, but I chose to be ‘naive,’ I’ll read that stuff as poetry, not as logical discourse. I now believe/understand that much of scripture is poetry,and that the truths of poetry address life in ways that rationality simply isn’t concerned with. It is written that Doubting Thomas needed to see to believe. (I read John 20:19-20 as showing us that the other disciples also needed to see to believe, but that’s another discussion….) The key point here is that Jesus then said to Thomas: “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” I believe he was saying, “religious belief is a different inquiry that rational, ‘scientific’ experimental belief.” I now think that whether the mustard seed is the smallest is a complete non-issue. (Except for the amusement one can derive from reading literalists attempts to justify that tid-bit in attempted rational discourse! Who says Christians are never any fun!) I have come to embrace Christianity – as the Holy Ghost has taught it to me on the level that I can understand it – as the best explanation of and answer to the existential questions. My Christian beliefs and understanding give many conservative Christians fits, no one would accuse me of orthodoxy. I have come to read John 14:6 as the metaphor it is: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” and read as saying “emulate the lessons I have taught and the human values I have modeled.” I do not read it as saying “You have to accept Jesus as your personal savior to get to the father,: See, most orthodox folks are sputtering right now! I suspect it is obvious, I am a pluralist: my God can’t (won’t) beat up anyone else’s God. (It turns out my grade school wasn’t t the best in the world, nor was my high school – or, at least, I came to question that belief in college when I realized my new college friends also went to “the best high school.” My fraternity was pretty good – in fact it was the first integrated fraternity in the country – and my many dogs over the years haven’t been the fastest, biggest and strongest. My point here is that I use my rationality and concrete experience to help shape my religious beliefs, but I don’t stop there.) One more thing. I believe there are two primary views of how we integrate Christ into our lives: (1) how does he relate to our salvation, our reunion with God, and (2) what did he teach us about how to live our lives. For me, spending a lot of time emphasizing questions of salvation is the very sort of ego-centric orientation Jesus warned us against time and again: “Whoever wants to save their life[a] will lose it”. At this point in my spiritual journey, I think that in seeking to emulate Jesus, one is better off focusing on what he taught us about living our lives, about living the golden rule, and de-emphasizing what we think we have to believe to “be saved.” But that’s just me. I admire your thoughts and especially your openness and honesty and open engagement with your readers As a truth seeker, I can see that you are prepared to change your mind – a pre-requisite for seeking truth. Perhaps you might change your mind again, perhaps not. Your mileage may vary, Regards….
RJ, I certainly respect your point of view. And I appreciate you acknowledging my own. While you admit to a level of “naivety” in your faith, you cerainly don’t display it in your reasoning. You have come to the conclusion that you have needed to come to, in the way that you needed to do it. You own it, it’s yours. To me, that’s how Christianity (or any belief system) should really work. You can’t hope to be your best until you know yourself and what you believe. That requires independent thought. Looking back through the history of Christianity, and looking at the canonical scripture and the noncanonical scripture which is credited to the disciples, it’s clear to me that Christianity was diverse from the start. Obviously the noncanonical books were excluded because they did not help to advance an orthodox view of Christ. That’s good in some ways, and bad in other ways, depending on perspective. Good (for Christians) because the religion likely wouldn’t have survived without an Orthodox voice. Bad because I think it de-emphasized the personal relationship aspect. The noncanonical scriptures show that god emphasized different things to different disciples. This can be viewed as either contradictory, or it can be used as an argument to support personal conviction. I agree with you about John 14:6. I don’t think it was intended to emphasize that we follow a specific, orthodox religion with the intention to acheive a place in heaven. I think it was intended to inspire us to live a good life. I think good people live a good life because they want to do the right thing, not because they want to go to heaven. It is almost this exact idea that reinforces my nontheism. Even if there is a god, which I personally don’t believe there is (not in the sense that we can know), it shouldn’t even matter to me. What matters is that I do good for the sake of it. I know what is good, mostly because I can recognize what is bad. I acknowledge that something is built in, perhaps because of society, perhaps naturally, perhaps even spiritually, that allows me to determine right from wrong. I look at some scripture and say “this is good.” I look at other scripture and say “this is aweful, I won’t accept this.” I don’t have to accept what is destestable. This is my problem with claims of literal interpretation. The bible was assembled by men, with books excluded because they didn’t contribute to the overall goal. It’s been translated from a language that not everything translates literally to English, or any other language. In some bibles it says “peace on earth, good will toward men,” and in others it says “peace on earth, good will to all in God’s favor.” There are contradictions at times within the bible. I cannot take any claims seriously that the bible is followed literally, and I consider it completely useless to attempt to. And any attempts to claim that a scripture is taken out of context infuriate me. If one is to follow it literally, and believe it literally, how can one quote a random scripture about “loving thy neighbor,” yet when a scripture that explains how people should be stoned to death is quoted, it’s considered “taken out of context”? Christians, whether they admit it or not, are always picking and choosing which parts of the bible to emphasize and which parts to leave behind. And picking and chosing is the right thing to do.
There are several topics here that we will address over the long term, because I think there is a lot of misinformation out there and misunderstanding about the canonization process and the translation process…which is altogether different than the interpretation. So, big topics are 1) how were the books of the Bible canonized, 2) which scrolls/letters were not included in the present Bible and why?, 3) an overview of the translation process and a 30,000 foot view of the many translations on the market, and 4) various ways to interpret the Bible and some pro’s/con’s of each. Another topic would be the apparent contradictions of the Bible. There are explanations for the one’s I’ve seen, and it would be up to each individual to decide if those explanations are valid or not. My picking and choosing is always in light of the grander/wider context of the entire Bible. e.g. if there is a book/chapter which has an overall theme of how to “correct” a fellow Christian inside of a Christian community, the verse might be about stating a judgment/correction. Some people take the verse “out of context” and try to apply it to non-Christians. That’s wrong. It’s just as wrong to take an entire section dealing with things God considers sinful, and attempt to argue that one of them God doesn’t really consider sinful because you don’t agree, or attempt to argue that that one sin was misinterpreted whereas all the others were interpreted correctly. The most typical problem I see is taking a verse written for a particular group of people, in a particular situation, and then applying it to another group in a different situation. That only works if there are many other verses that start to point to a guiding principle…and you GET that it’s a universal lesson that warrants applying it more broadly. Anyway, great comments either way. We don’t have to agree completely. This is fun!
Guys you will not get much aggreement from the creators of this site. They have stated that they believe the bible is inerrant. Really enjoyed the comments and loved the letter. Dan from The Skeptics Testament Podcast
We don’t seek 100% universal agreement on our site. We are happy to create a place where dialogue can happen and learning and growth can happen. So, our agreement with opinions and comments is not a requirement for involvement. I’m glad you are here along with the others. People can read your thoughts and draw their own conclusions. It was a very good letter. 🙂
Yours is a point of view where real intelligence shines through.
“I expect people who claim to have “the answer” to live a life that’s worth striving towards.” This was a key point to me. When I found myself disagreeing with many of the teachings and personal statements of my fellow Christians, I at first questioned my own thinking. After I while, it occurred to me that even the church leaders I respected might be wrong. As I pondered the lives of my friends and teachers, I told my wife I wouldn’t trade places with any of them. In spite of the admirable qualities that had gained them my respect, I realized that I couldn’t think of anyone I respected more than I respected myself. At that point, I felt free to accept my own conclusions and express my own opinions.
As citizens of the U.S. and the world we should not have to fight for homosexual rights b/c all homosexuals are either female or male. This means that what we need to really focus on is human rights. We have to fight for women’s rights when women are treated less than human. We had to fight for civil rights for black people because they were treated as less than human. Both civil rights, human rights, and the rights of women should cover all the rights that are needed. Christians or gays should not have to fight for rights as Christians or gays, but as citizens. Our problem is that all of us have our allegiance to our individual causes and we want other people to see us in a respectable way more so than we desire for equality itself. Some of our sense of insecurity or injustice is because we don’t operate out of the right consciousness when we are experiencing life and we fight the wrong battles. I am not gay but if I were, I would spend more time trying to fight from the angle that any 2 consenting adults should be able to adopt a child or get benefits on insurance. Any 2 could be a man and his brother or 2 non gay best friends or a gay couple. The fight is harder because we want to experience the “win” under the banner of our cause. Human rights will go further and benefit all if we take the divisive elements out of our struggle.
“Thirty years down the road, these opponents of gay rights are going to be looked at the same way as the racist segregationists. Your grand children are going to come home after civics class and ask you if you were for or against gay rights.’ As Bible believing, professing Christians we are called to not support or condone sin. And this is really the crux of the matter, isn’t it? These issues are relative for non-believers, but set in stone for believers. We can love the sinner, but hate the sin. That means we can support the person, but we don’t have to allow things that further the agenda or elevate the sin to any type of acceptable behavior. We view the family as a reflection of God’s plan. From the beginning, it was a man and woman come together to have children and create a family. We see these symbols reflected in His Word to us over and over again. These are not random and certainly not unimportant. Scientific studies prove over and over again the importance of a mother (female) and father (male) in a child’s development. You have confused civil rights with sinful behavior. Homosexuality is sinful behavior. The reason I oppose “gay rights” is because two men (or women) living together in a sexual relationship does not constitute a marriage. Never has, never will. I do not oppose a gay partner being with his partner in the hospital or anything like that, but I cannot condone this behavior as natural or unsinful by allowing a partner to get the same benefits as a spouse simply because they are living together. Two sisters that live together cannot get those kind of benefits, so why should two of the same sex who are not related in any way get those benefits?? I think as long as their are Bible believing Christians in the world, we will always have to agree to disagree with the world. We are called to be IN it, but not OF it. In it means we try to live as Yahshua has taught us, but not live as a majority of the world does in unbelief and relativism.
All sin is sin, and there is no sin greater than another. Telling a lie is just as bad in the eyes of Jesus as homosexuality, and we have all told lies. Jesus instructs us to love the sinner, but hate the sin. I do not think it would be productive to totally ban all homosexual rights. This will not make gays think “Homosexuality is wrong, therefore I must be saved”, I think it would do the opposite, and push them further away from Jesus. However, here in England, Homosexuals are trying to get the government to force Churches into allowing them to marry in church if they so wish to. This is VERY wrong, for it goes totally against our biblical beliefs, and this I am against. Have your civil ceremonies in Register offices, but don’t get the church to sin by forcing us to go against the teachings of the very foundation of what we believe – that is against our Christian rights. Jesus has given me a real heart for homosexuals. I believe that by loving them as Jesus does – and Jesus DOES love homosexuals, (he just hates the act of homosexuality), they will want to know this Jesus whom we worship and serve. I know people who are homosexuals – I give them the same respect as I give any other human being, but I will not support gay parades, or gay charities. As of yet, I have not been asked to attend a civil ceremony, but if I did get invited, I would turn it down in a loving and gentle way, explaining that it would be against my christian faith.