My history with this search kinda goes like this: I met Alison, she was totally not the kind of preachy Christian that I've encountered, she was very sweet and genuine about it. And it made me want to know more. So I started going to church with her and asking my friends about it, and I discovered that I have a lot of friends who are Christians, and they're all pretty level-headed about it. I didn't run into too many wacky bible thumpers, and it was encouraging. I was actually kinda excited to discover god and find this happiness and peace that so many of my friends seemed to enjoy.
However over the last year and a half, the more I researched the history of the religion and the infallible word of god that is the bible, the more I learned that it is quite different than what I thought. For instance:
I'm learning about all the polytheism that actually exists in the bible and the early Israelites, even with the founding fathers of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. How their god was quite possibly the god El, the same god worshipped by the Caananites. And he had a wife called Asherah, and a son named Ba'al. And that god is actually the head of a council of gods, on which he regularly executed judgement, just like he did on people and nations in the bible.
I'm learning how the bible was written, and re-written and edited over the centuries, and how books in the bible were inserted or removed to reconcile the whole text with whatever the current beliefs happened to be. And it seems that the "infallible" word of god is actually a constant editing process that was at the whim of whatever king or bishop happened to strong-arm his point of view at the time.
The more I studied archeology and DNA evidence and such for the history of humankind and the history of life on earth, and the history of the earth and the universe, I discovered that it is very contradictory to what the bible says. Or a lot of what I'm finding out to be proven fact, the bible is either very vague and cryptic, or completely silent.
And now presented with all this new data that people didn't know 2000 years ago (or sometimes even decades ago), it seems more and more christians must practice a constant double-think: the bible is infallible, 100% accurate and all inspired by god; yet some of it is allegorical, but it's a personal decision which parts are literal or allegorical, and that changes depending on what argument is being presented, but all times god is 100% accurate. And the more science discovers things to be different than what the bible says, the more allegorical the bible must become, yet it's still 100% accurate and inspired by god.
And I am generally finding it uninspiring and fallacied when Christian apologetics ignores or re-shapes a lot of this data to fit into their one unchangeable answer: god. It's like they already have the answer, so whatever new data is discovered must be reconciled to fit their answer that can never be wrong, rather than letting the data and evidence determine what the answer could be. I'm not saying there's any 100% empirical evidence to prove god's non-existence or anything like that (in fact I admit there are plenty of things science hasn't proven – yet), but it seems to make Christians squirm to even consider that their infinite solid rock of a god may be a little different than they've always thought, so it gets shut out completely. And that thinking emotionally biases every bit of research they do.
All this stuff kinda makes the religion lose its validity to me. Or at least waters it down considerably. I didn't intend to discover all these things or feel this way at all – quite the contrary. At the beginning I was really looking forward to finding god and allowing myself to be swept up in the emotional experience of being loved by a god and a savior and all that bit. But I just can't do it yet, not with all this contradicting stuff I'm finding. I can't sing the songs and pray the prayers. And I admit I'm kinda disappointed. People keep telling me to just "ask god and see what he says." Well, I am, and these are the answers I keep getting.
So that's where I am.
Friday, August 19, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks for your openness and honesty.
ReplyDeleteI think "inerrancy" is difficult to defend based on what most people mean when they say it. I'm finding the term less and less useful. Instead I prefer to recommend reading each book of the Bible with its specific genre in mind. Read each book the way it was intended to be read by its original audience.
For example, I don't have any problem believing that the book of Jonah could be true, but I think it was written to be a religious satire, and that's the way the original audience read it. I for sure don't think that personal opinion is the final arbiter on what is literal and what is metaphorical.
As far as the attacks of Biblical Criticism go, I'd offer my own word of skepticism. Have you investigated what believing scholars have to say about these things? Regardless of the issue, I guarantee there is a top flight believing scholar who has a different perception on the evidence. 150 years ago scholarship said most of the New Testament was complete fairy tale because there was no archaeological evidence to support it. Today all of that scholarship has been overturned. I'm not saying, if the evidence contradicts the believers we should just wait it out indefinitely, but I can show you examples of how this kind of critique has been invalidated and the fruits of skepticism are appropriate for even reading skeptics.
As far as "going where the evidence leads", I think Christians have done this and continue to do it. Young Earth Creationism was THE dominant view 100 years ago. Christians have followed the evidence (including a closer look at what the Bible says) and many many Christians agree with the evidence that the earth is old. Part of this emerging view is the idea that we shouldn't make the Bible say things it doesn't say. Genesis 1 is not a science lecture.
For myself, the evidence for and against Christianity starts and stops with the resurrection of Jesus. If it really happened, it's THE most significant thing that has ever happened and all of our views about everything need to be wrapped around it. If it didn't happen, Christians are pathetic fools and we should absolutely be disregarded.
I certainly can sympathize with your skepticism. There are plenty of reasons to disbelieve. But I don't think Christians are a bunch of double-thinkers continually fighting off cognitive dissonance. I think we have many reasons to believe with confidence. (and unfortunately many Christians are unaware or uninterested with those reasons).
You're an intellectually honest person so I know that you've looked at both sides of the issues. Which books by believing scholars have you read? Earlier I recommend that you start with "The God Question" by JP Moreland. Did you get a chance to check it out? If you need a good book on the resurrection there is only one place to go, NT Wright.