|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Christian Atheism
|
HughWillRidmee
Shipmate
# 15614
|
Posted
Elsewhere Martin60 implied that I was declaiming to Christian atheists.
I admit that my first reaction was that I was being wound up and I decided not to bite. Then curiosity persuaded me to search the web. It seems that such terminology is used and, like most things Christian, appears to be open to a wide variety of interpretation.
So, can anyone explain what they mean by Christian atheism and why should its finest incarnation not be considered an oxymoronic euphemism for "Humanism"?
--------------------
The danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things.. but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them...
W. K. Clifford, "The Ethics of Belief" (1877)
Posts: 894 | From: Middle England | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
beatmenace
Shipmate
# 16955
|
Posted
I find Mark Sandin , founder of The Christian Left gets very close, although he defines himself as an 'agnostic Christian'
In this 'Heresies from a Southern Minister' article he explains his view that Jesus is not God and in the next one he decides he isn't Trinitarian either.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thegodarticle/2014/08/jesus-is-not-my-god/
I suppose the full blown 'Christian Atheism' would be to decide that there is no God and Jesus isn't him either, but the ethical teachings of Jesus are worth following, in a purely Humanistic way.
[ 12. February 2016, 12:00: Message edited by: beatmenace ]
--------------------
"I'm the village idiot , aspiring to great things." (The Icicle Works)
Posts: 297 | From: Whitley Bay | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
I knew someone who described himself as an atheist because he didn't believe in a supernatural God. He called himself a Christian as he followed the teachings of Christ, particularly in the human 'love one another' sense rather than in the 'love God' sense, and he had a strong sense of 'the divine' which to him was something within people, something that could be 'tapped into'.
Perhaps too spiritual a philosophy to be humanist?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
starbelly
but you can call me Neil
# 25
|
Posted
I think it's a term likely appeal to those who have moved from faith, to unbelief, but are reluctant/scared to leave some of the other trappings that the church/Christian community can offer. By having the world Christian in their own self definition they give themselves legitimacy to remain part of that community.
It is a position/label I would find hard to maintain, I don't really think it means a lot. I for instance like much of the philosophical and practical advice of the Stoics, but I don't go around calling myself a Stoical Atheist.
People can choose whatever title they like for themselves, but I would personally define a Christian Atheist as just 'an Atheist'.
Neil
Posts: 6009 | From: High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
There are a range of different beliefs that might fall under the title "Christian atheism" extending right up to Deconstructionalists like Robert Price - who believe that the whole religion is phoey that is a hodge-podge of different ancient beliefs glued together and then smoothed out by subsequent generations to make it sound coherent.
It seems to me that pretty much the only thing these people have in common is that their unbelief is couched in terms of Christianity - ie this, rather than anything else, is the faith they don't believe in.
Which sounds crazy, but I think just means that the religion has given them a worldview and a form of philosophical language to express their unbelief within.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
Elsewhere Martin60 implied that I was declaiming to Christian atheists.
I admit that my first reaction was that I was being wound up and I decided not to bite. Then curiosity persuaded me to search the web. It seems that such terminology is used and, like most things Christian, appears to be open to a wide variety of interpretation.
So, can anyone explain what they mean by Christian atheism and why should its finest incarnation not be considered an oxymoronic euphemism for "Humanism"?
I do not know the answer. Atheism is so clear and straightforward to me, especially in stark contrast to my faith in God as a child because I heard no alternative,that terms like 'Christian atheist' are fudges to put up a smoke screen between a person and the total absence of any actual God/god/s. Very interesting topic for thought and discussion though!
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
I have no idea what the intent was in this context, but I have heard other authors use the term "functional atheism" to describe those who claim to believe in God but act as if they are entirely on their own (which could encompass a wide variety of things-- from conventional sins, to my constant anxiety and micromanaging of life as if it were up to me to make everything turn out right).
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
It certainly seems like having your cake and eating it, or rather not having your cake, and not eating it. Seems pointless to me. I think a ayahuasca church atheist sounds more fun, except for the vomiting.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
As I understand it, formal Christian Atheism is a theological framework related in some ways to Death of God theology, that holds that God as traditionally understood by theists (transcending the world and intervening in the world) either has never existed, is "dead" or is currently absent, and that holds that Jesus is the model for true humanity—that by following Jesus we learn to be truly human.
Some self-described Christian Atheists, such as Thomas J. J. Altizer, would say that Jesus was indeed divine, and that God, through a process of self-annihilation beginning at creation and culminating in the crucifixion, essentially emptied himself totally into the world.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
Some self-described Christian Atheists, such as Thomas J. J. Altizer, would say that Jesus was indeed divine, and that God, through a process of self-annihilation beginning at creation and culminating in the crucifixion, essentially emptied himself totally into the world.
Interesting. Sounds a bit like Oneness Pentecostalism, with a generous dose of kenosis in the mix.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025
|
Posted
Heard about this minister from the United Church Of Canada, a mainline protestant denomination. She decided to come out to her congregation as an atheist, and to her surprise she was not fired. Today she remains a minister in that church and openly atheist:
http://www.grettavosper.ca/about/
quote:
My congregation belongs to The United Church of Canada, probably the most progressive Christian denomination in the world. It ordained women over seventy years ago and has been ordaining openly LGBTQ leaders for decades. But theologically it remains in the closet about the human construction of religion and all its trapping. I couldn’t stay in that closet.
I came out as an atheist in 2001.* After I spontaneously preached a sermon in which I completely deconstructed the idea of a god named God, rather than fire me, the congregation chose to step out on an unmarked path. With them, I’ve laboured, lamented, lost, and loved. It’s hard road but a worthy one with no finish line in sight.
It´s interesting how she refers to mainline churches as being "in the closet". It´s interesting how "progressive" views are also linked to the crypto-atheism of the denomination.
Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
Some self-described Christian Atheists, such as Thomas J. J. Altizer, would say that Jesus was indeed divine, and that God, through a process of self-annihilation beginning at creation and culminating in the crucifixion, essentially emptied himself totally into the world.
Interesting. Sounds a bit like Oneness Pentecostalism, with a generous dose of kenosis in the mix.
With a huge dollop of process theology and a generous scoop of neoplatonism. To give credit where credit is due.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
Yes. A curious blend.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
The problem with Christian atheism is that if one claims to follow the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and not believe in a God, or not believe in a God intimately involved in creation, then one has to erase the huge role of God in Jesus's own teaching.
Jesus of Nazareth did not teach an ethical humanism. He believed and preached from the depths of his Jewish heritage, that the God of Israel was not only as real, as the reality of a father's soft embrace of his infant child, but that the God of Israel was at work in the redemption of the world. To erase God from Jesus of Nazareth would be akin to draining water from a fishbowl with a fish in it. Jesus of Nazareth's teaching was saturated and grounded in faith in God. To pretend not would require logical gymnastics.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
It´s interesting how she refers to mainline churches as being "in the closet". It´s interesting how "progressive" views are also linked to the crypto-atheism of the denomination.
It's typical of a certain sort of atheist to think that those in a similar position to themselves but who have reached different conclusions about God must be simply pretending to have faith. I presume it's reassuring for them to not have to think that maybe they've rejected something real and important.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
...formal Christian Atheism is a theological framework ...
I'm sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense. Christianity, by definition, requires a belief in a God who exists. The concept of a theological framework requires a God to exist. However, atheism requires there to not be any God.
I don't see any way to wrap your head around that.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
On this thread and the Church without God thread, there have been a lot of ideas that seem philosophically dubious. Posters have wondered about the existence of God as if it's something that might or might not be true. In traditional philosophical terms that makes it a contingent matter. Usually, God is thought to be above contingency. God's existence must be necessary, not contingent, that is, something required by God's nature, not a matter of fact that might turn out this way or that.
Indeed, existence may not be the best word here. Lions exist, unicorns do not, because there are examples of lions in the world, but no unicorns. When a dentist shoots the last lion then lions will no longer exist. Existence means, usually, 'there is an example of this in the world,' but that won't work for God who is not an object in the world.
Most modern atheists of the Dawkins variety are objecting to the existence of a supernatural being, by which they seem to mean something like the Loch Ness monster but spookier. They are objecting to a contingent God or god.
I think the Christian God is not a being whose existence can really be in question, because it isn't that sort of existence. It's more a question of the truth of God, whether we can speak of and address God in a way that leads us to want to worship.
Such a God is not likely to be falsified by some surprise discovery, but by the problem of suffering.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
The truth of God clearly cannot be falsified by the question of suffering, as Christianity demonstrates. The resurrection of Christ illustrates the truth of God through suffering.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
Posters have wondered about the existence of God as if it's something that might or might not be true. In traditional philosophical terms that makes it a contingent matter. Usually, God is thought to be above contingency. God's existence must be necessary, not contingent, that is, something required by God's nature, not a matter of fact that might turn out this way or that.
I think you're confusing de dicto might or might not and de re might or might not here.(*)
Whether there is or is not a rhinoceros in my room is a matter of de re contingency: there isn't, but there could have been, and it is only through observation that the question is settled.
By contrast: when we say that Goldbach's conjecture (that every even number greater than 2 is the sum of two prime numbers) might or might not be true, it is a matter of de dicto contingency but not de re contingency. That is, we don't know whether or not it's true; but if the statement is true it's necessarily true and if false necessarily false.
God might or might not exist de dicto, but the truth of the matter is a necessary truth de re.
(*) De dicto: according to the way we speak; de re: according to the thing itself.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
On this thread and the Church without God thread, there have been a lot of ideas that seem philosophically dubious. Posters have wondered about the existence of God as if it's something that might or might not be true. In traditional philosophical terms that makes it a contingent matter. Usually, God is thought to be above contingency. God's existence must be necessary, not contingent, that is, something required by God's nature, not a matter of fact that might turn out this way or that.
Hang on a second.
When people wonder about the existence of God they are wondering whether God *exists*, i.e. whether there is any entity conforming to the description you give. That has no bearing on the question of whether God exists necessarily or not. It's a question about whether certain human beliefs are justified, not a question about the nature of God.
Compare a mathematical question to which we don't know the answer. The answer to that question obtains necessarily, it's not "a matter of fact that might turn out to be this way or that". That doesn't mean mathematicians don't wonder what the answer is.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
It´s interesting how she refers to mainline churches as being "in the closet". It´s interesting how "progressive" views are also linked to the crypto-atheism of the denomination.
It's typical of a certain sort of atheist to think that those in a similar position to themselves but who have reached different conclusions about God must be simply pretending to have faith. I presume it's reassuring for them to not have to think that maybe they've rejected something real and important.
Maybe she doesn´t just "think" others are pretending to have faith. As a member of the clergy, she certainly talks with other people in the clergy. And after all, if she manage to remain in ministry after "coming out" as an atheist, this clearly show that this is not an important subject for that denomination (United Church Of Canada).
Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
We can be uncertain about a necessary truth, but it's not going to be overturned by some fact that someone announces one week. That would be a contingency.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I believe in Jesus, Son of God, Son of Man, as writ. Nowt else. Apart from all that follows from that, from Him. All I can make up in conjunction with all others making up GOOD news. Not making up magic. So I'm atheistic of the God of the Bible, including Jesus' PSA one, but not in Him and most, i.e. nearly all, Gods since.
So I'm a Christian atheist. And theist. Of the best case God that fits with, shares meaningless, contingent suffering of evolving complexity.
[ 12. February 2016, 22:34: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
Martin, please take this not as an insult but as a bemused aside: I sometimes feel like you are playing a drinking game I'd really like to play but I don't know the rules.
And why isn't there a "drink a shot" emoji?
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
It's the Mornington Crescent Drinking Game.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I feel that Dafyd has the logos edge, but hatless had the pathos one.
It's all about the justification of contingent suffering. De dicto there isn't any. De re there HAS to be.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
yeah, nup.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Macrina
Shipmate
# 8807
|
Posted
Well how about this thought...
Someone who has grown up in India with all its particular history and culture might come to reject Hinduism and Hinduism's ideas about the divine and the spiritual. They will still be culturally Hindu and may even join in the festivities on some major religious holidays. They may not accept all of what the West sees as progressive and post modern but they don't believe in God or Gods plural. They are a Hindu Atheist.
I grew up in a (nominally) Christian country. My laws, politics and culture were shaped by Christianity. Our working week and our bank holidays are shaped by Christianity as were until quite recently many of our trading laws. I join in with the cultural trappings which surround Christianity's holy days. I accept the Humanism which arose out of the Christian West's Enlightenment but I reject the God and religious elements that go with that. I am a Christian Atheist.
Posts: 535 | From: Christchurch, New Zealand | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
...formal Christian Atheism is a theological framework ...
I'm sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense. Christianity, by definition, requires a belief in a God who exists.
Traditional, orthodox Christianity, yes. But clearly what we are talking about here is a reinterpretation of Christianity and of Christ. Traditional, orthodox Christians would likely say Christian Atheism is not true Christianity—just as they might say Christian Science is not Christian (nor science). But traditional, orthodox Christians do not have a trademark on the designation "Christian."
quote:
The concept of a theological framework requires a God to exist.
No, it doesn't really. At most, it requires concepts or understandings of God to study and consider. My dictionary includes the study of religious ideas as theology. Such study can certainly include critiques of various concepts of what is meant by "God," and whether such a God exists.
quote:
However, atheism requires there to not be any God.
While it may not matter in this context, I'm not sure about that either. As with most things, there are varieties of atheism, ranging from the strict denial of the existence of any deity or divinity of any kind whatsoever, to more particularized rejection of a particular (and likely familiar) concept of God—for example, "the Christian God," or a "personal god"—without necessarily rejecting all concepts of the divine. (Ietsism comes to mind.) Even with atheism, one has to ask exactly what is meant by "God."
[ 13. February 2016, 12:40: Message edited by: Nick Tamen ]
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
Is it just me, or does Christian Atheism sound a bit like having your cake and eating it?
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
... But traditional, orthodox Christians do not have a trademark on the designation "Christian."
You are right, of course. Jesus, that is God incarnated, does. It is His name on the door. Any person or group who does not accept Jesus as God is not Christian, thus the term Christian Atheist is absurd.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Is it just me, or does Christian Atheism sound a bit like having your cake and eating it?
Cherry picking, perhaps. The Christianity that makes demands can be jettisoned, to leave those feel-good aspects.
Enlightenment is surely about finding God, not losing God.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
The Christianity that makes demands can be jettisoned, to leave those feel-good aspects.
I think that is unfair. Christians find ways to jettison the demands whatever their position on the theological spectrum.
Adherence to Christianity, or any religion, consists of intellectual assent, an aesthetic commitment to stories and symbols, a devotional practice, and an ethical practice. A Christian atheist has either ditched or more likely reinterpreted the intellectual assent component. But that doesn't mean they've also ditched the ethical practice. The link between the aesthetic commitment and devotional practice, and the ethical practice, may be what keeps them calling themselves Christian.
(Speaking as someone who doesn't personally find the position stable.)
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I think those I have known who describe themselves as Christian Atheist are best summed up be Raptor Eye
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I knew someone who described himself as an atheist because he didn't believe in a supernatural God. He called himself a Christian as he followed the teachings of Christ
So it is a position that rejects the supernatural aspects of faith, the belief in a Divine being. However they believe that Jesus was a teacher of truth, and seek to follow his teaching. As a whole they are people who have come from a more traditional Christian background, but have rejected some aspects of this, for all sorts of reasons.
Personally, I struggle with this. I understand why some people would want to describe themselves in this way, and (as a whole) I don't have a problem with them using the term Christian, because to a large extent, they are following Jesus teachings.
The problem is, I don't think you can take Jesus teachings without an acknowledgement of God. This doesn't mean you have to accept a particular, orthodox, view of this divine being, but that the reality of the spiritual realm and someone known as God exists seems to be core. I think they are probably kidding themselves, but I know that for many, this is just a stage in their journey, and it may take them somewhere else.
I think it is a little like Christian Anarchism, taking two apparently incompatible ideas and seeking to find what you can from them both. But it is a process, and having paradoxes can be a positive part of the process.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
The Christianity that makes demands can be jettisoned, to leave those feel-good aspects.
I think that is unfair. Christians find ways to jettison the demands whatever their position on the theological spectrum.
Adherence to Christianity, or any religion, consists of intellectual assent, an aesthetic commitment to stories and symbols, a devotional practice, and an ethical practice. A Christian atheist has either ditched or more likely reinterpreted the intellectual assent component. But that doesn't mean they've also ditched the ethical practice. The link between the aesthetic commitment and devotional practice, and the ethical practice, may be what keeps them calling themselves Christian.
(Speaking as someone who doesn't personally find the position stable.)
Agree on all points. And I'd add that those who do subscribe to this way of seeing things might say that the reinterpretation of the intellectual aspect and devotional components is what enables the ethical and aesthetic components to make sense to them. Wouldn't work for me, but I'm not them.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Adherence to Christianity, or any religion, consists of intellectual assent, an aesthetic commitment to stories and symbols, a devotional practice, and an ethical practice.
The chief word here is "consists." Christianity is all of those. Take out any one and you are left with something else.
A chair consists of something to sit on and something to hold it up. Take away the thing to sit on and you have vertical sticks (or the like). Take away the support and you have a floor mat (or the like).
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I knew someone who described himself as an atheist because he didn't believe in a supernatural God. He called himself a Christian as he followed the teachings of Christ
Or at least the ones he chose to follow. But not the ones that instruct us to love God, or to believe in Him who sent Jesus, or believe that Jesus is from God. Those teachings he didn't follow.
[ 13. February 2016, 18:06: Message edited by: mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
Adherence to Christianity, or any religion, consists of intellectual assent, an aesthetic commitment to stories and symbols, a devotional practice, and an ethical practice.
The chief word here is "consists." Christianity is all of those. Take out any one and you are left with something else.
A chair consists of something to sit on and something to hold it up. Take away the thing to sit on and you have vertical sticks (or the like). Take away the support and you have a floor mat (or the like).
If you take away one of four legs, the chair may still be able to stay up. Or you can replace the leg with a pile of bricks.
I think there are two intellectual routes available to Christian atheists. The first is to argue that religious language doesn't work in the way that factual descriptive language works. It has superficially the same grammatical form, but some other function. (It is actually expressive, or constitutes a way of life, or a metaphor for matters of 'ultimate concern' or for human love, or for the human being fully alive, or some such.) The second route is to press heavily upon the idea of apophatic theology, while probably throwing around the word 'kenosis' a lot.
I think both approaches are half-truths (as are most heresies). In this case, I'm not even sure they're the wrong half-truths.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
IconiumBound
Shipmate
# 754
|
Posted
after a long absence I venture back with a brief exception to the topic.
Having left the church I find myself in a sort of self-imposed limbo. I do not want to be called an atheist (Christian or otherwise) since it seems that a lot of atheists are really "anti-theists" and militantly opposed toward any church. I regard all religions as being primarily a means of establishing a moral code with appropriate rewards (Heaven, eternal life) and punishments (Hell). And there is an authority (God, Allah etc.) to prosecute or reward the adherents. When practiced with reasonability, I find religions to be acceptable to the general good.
I have chosen to call myself a humanist and have made a few ventures into the Humanist Association in my former home and expect to meet with the local branch soon to see if they meet my needs for sociability.
Have any shipmates had contact with these associations?
Posts: 1318 | From: Philadelphia, PA, USA | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
IconiumBound: I regard all religions as being primarily a means of establishing a moral code with appropriate rewards (Heaven, eternal life) and punishments (Hell).
That's a very narrow view of religion.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
That's a rather odd description of Christianity, at least--the uniqueness of Christianity starts with Christ and "your sins are forgiven" and goes on from there. The moral laws and punishments thing exists, but it's almost pre-Christian, if I can call it that--it's shared with tons of other religions and philosophies, and the Christian distinctive is what happens AFTER that--the work of the Holy Spirit in and through us, re-creating us as children of God who lives in us and does his work using us.
There are also quite a few religions where morality has very little to do with the gods at all. Take the ancient Greek gods (not the philosophers' conceptions, I'm talking Zeus, Aphrodite, Ares, etc. here). None of them have any concern for right and wrong as such. Everything is centered around personal advantage--even wisdom in the person of Athena. The goal seems to have been to keep the gods off your back/get them on your side so you can have a happier life. Sort of like bribing the local officials to get stuff done, or to keep them from harassing you.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
A chair consists of something to sit on and something to hold it up. Take away the thing to sit on and you have vertical sticks (or the like). Take away the support and you have a floor mat (or the like).
If you take away one of four legs, the chair may still be able to stay up. Or you can replace the leg with a pile of bricks.
Did you read what I wrote? I didn't say "four legs" I said "something to hold it up." Which the other three legs, or the pile of bricks, in your examples neatly falls into.
[ 13. February 2016, 22:49: Message edited by: mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
... But traditional, orthodox Christians do not have a trademark on the designation "Christian."
You are right, of course. Jesus, that is God incarnated, does. It is His name on the door. Any person or group who does not accept Jesus as God is not Christian, thus the term Christian Atheist is absurd.
Tell that to Jesus.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IconiumBound:
after a long absence I venture back with a brief exception to the topic.
Having left the church I find myself in a sort of self-imposed limbo. I do not want to be called an atheist (Christian or otherwise) since it seems that a lot of atheists are really "anti-theists" and militantly opposed toward any church.
I think this is because, once an atheist, knowing that there are, nor ever were, any actual gods but only human ideas, you simply could not return to belief. I would say, though, that there is an acceptance that a greater move towards atheism will only happen gradually, frustrating though this is! I know how long it took me to erase the last vestige of belief, realising immediately then that I should have done it long ago.
Recent scientific discoveries, the knowledge being gained, available always to be challenged and either reinforced or updated, is doing an excellent job. Science will never run out of questions to ask but although they cannot explain yet in detail what dark matter is, they, and more and more people who are interested, do know that there is no heaven or hell there. quote:
I regard all religions as being primarily a means of establishing a moral code with appropriate rewards (Heaven, eternal life) and punishments (Hell). And there is an authority (God, Allah etc.) to prosecute or reward the adherents. When practiced with reasonability, I find religions to be acceptable to the general good.
Agreed! And things will, and must, only change slowly.
Since atheists know that all thoughts and acts of good progress and their opposites have, therefore, been entirely human,* this should much increase human confidence in humans and, perhaps, lessen the need** for any gods. quote:
I have chosen to call myself a humanist and have made a few ventures into the Humanist Association in my former home and expect to meet with the local branch soon to see if they meet my needs for sociability.
Have any shipmates had contact with these associations?
Yes! I joined the BHA and the local group about 20 years ago. I wish I lived nearer so that I could get to more meetings, but I keep up with what's going on. I do hope your local group have a good organising committee with interesting speakers. What we really need is a good strong song!
Atheists are far more vocal these days - viz. the increasing popularity of radio and TV programmes, Prof Brian Cox, the absence of a taboo about asking questions about religious beliefs; when I was young, it was the height of bad manners to do so.
*always remembering the obligation to allow for the possibility that a God might appear one day
**not sure that 'need' is the right word here
P.S. SoF is the only place I know where interesting discussions and opinions such as this appear.
[ 14. February 2016, 06:16: Message edited by: SusanDoris ]
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
I think this is because, once an atheist, knowing that there are, nor ever were, any actual gods but only human ideas, you simply could not return to belief.
That's humbug, SusanDoris. Plenty of people who were atheists turn and return to being deists.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibaculus
Shipmate
# 18528
|
Posted
Back in the 1980s I knew a CofE priest who called himself a Feubachian Christian. he agreed with Ludwig Feurbach's view that God was just a prop which week people needed, with no objective existence outside the human mind. It seemed a bit odd, and rather 19th century, to me. But I guess that would count as Christian Atheism (though he didn't use that term for himself).
--------------------
A jumped up pantry boy who never knew his place
Posts: 257 | From: In bed. Mostly. When I can get away with it. | Registered: Dec 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
SusanDoris: Prof Brian Cox
The one who said "There is naivety in just saying there's no God; it's bollocks"?
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
That's a rather odd description of Christianity, at least--the uniqueness of Christianity starts with Christ and "your sins are forgiven" and goes on from there. The moral laws and punishments thing exists, but it's almost pre-Christian, if I can call it that--it's shared with tons of other religions and philosophies, and the Christian distinctive is what happens AFTER that--the work of the Holy Spirit in and through us, re-creating us as children of God who lives in us and does his work using us.
There are also quite a few religions where morality has very little to do with the gods at all. Take the ancient Greek gods (not the philosophers' conceptions, I'm talking Zeus, Aphrodite, Ares, etc. here). None of them have any concern for right and wrong as such. Everything is centered around personal advantage--even wisdom in the person of Athena. The goal seems to have been to keep the gods off your back/get them on your side so you can have a happier life. Sort of like bribing the local officials to get stuff done, or to keep them from harassing you.
It starts with Jesus, but He doesn't start with your sins are forgiven:
Luke 4:16-21:
And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. And as was his custom, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and he stood up to read. And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written,
‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives
and recovering of sight to the blind,
to set at liberty those who are oppressed,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.’
And he rolled up the scroll and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. And he began to say to them, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.” (Luke 4:16–21, ESV)
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by SusanDoris:
I think this is because, once an atheist, knowing that there are, nor ever were, any actual gods but only human ideas, you simply could not return to belief.
That's humbug, SusanDoris. Plenty of people who were atheists turn and return to being deists.
I have of course seen that argument presented often. However, when names are produced there are often much better explanations for their change of views than no belief in God to deism of one sort or another. And, no, I do not have names to put forward; do you?!! ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
There are plenty of examples of former atheists who have come to accept the existence of God, SusanDoris. A simple online search finds many a testimony. What other reason would someone come to faith than to come to believe that God is real?
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
So it is a position that rejects the supernatural aspects of faith, the belief in a Divine being. However they believe that Jesus was a teacher of truth, and seek to follow his teaching. As a whole they are people who have come from a more traditional Christian background, but have rejected some aspects of this, for all sorts of reasons.
Personally, I struggle with this. I understand why some people would want to describe themselves in this way, and (as a whole) I don't have a problem with them using the term Christian, because to a large extent, they are following Jesus teachings.
The problem is, I don't think you can take Jesus teachings without an acknowledgement of God. This doesn't mean you have to accept a particular, orthodox, view of this divine being, but that the reality of the spiritual realm and someone known as God exists seems to be core. I think they are probably kidding themselves, but I know that for many, this is just a stage in their journey, and it may take them somewhere else.
I think it is a little like Christian Anarchism, taking two apparently incompatible ideas and seeking to find what you can from them both. But it is a process, and having paradoxes can be a positive part of the process.
Yes, this. Deep thought helps faith to grow - even if for a while we fall away. The mistake seems to be to stop thinking when we reach a comfortable place. The next precipice is ahead of us.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
