What kind of Christian am I?

[aTOMiC]

No this isn't new game in Mallorys although it would be entertaining to try I guess.

Without getting too personal about this (I'm a big boy and can handle commentary and criticism but I'm not soliciting a debate about which Christian denomination or sect is the best one or why I'm a goof for believing what I believe) I'd like to offer some basic facts about my spiritual point of view in order to narrow down just what kind of Christian I seem to be, based upon the known groups and denominations.

First a short explanation. The reason all this came up was that I have recently had several lengthy conversations with family members that centered on my religious point of view and though I've been fairly stable in my beliefs for most of my adult life I've only recently been asked to state them plainly for the benefit of a serious conversation. And also that I've been looking for a new church home and am finding it difficult in that all of the churches I've looked into have mission statements that I don't seem to wholly agree with.

Let me start with a couple of things that will help you help me. (Some of these statements may be hard for other believers to read but I assure you I mean no disrespect to anyone else's faith).

1. I believe the Christian bible was written by authors that were inspired by God however the authors themselves were not God and therefore are prone to error and misstatement just as you and I are. I was once asked by an Atheist family member about the obvious contradictions that have been found in the Bible and said family member went on to cite one issue after another expecting me to have no way to defend them. I remember smiling the entire time though I patiently waited for the case to be laid out. I then responded in this way "I don't disagree with the points you have made and I am aware of them. The simple truth is that the Bible isn't what you believe I think it is. It is entirely written by flawed, normal, ordinary human beings, even the red letter accounts of the words of Jesus Christ himself are just that...accounts. Jesus did not write the document it was not translated out of thin air by the Holy Spirit or God himself. It is the product of the best efforts of those who believed what it contains should be documented and preserved for the coming generations. In addition the Christian Bible contains an assemblage of books and letters that were chosen to be included for a number of different reasons. The fact that the book of Revelations was included, without establishing the true identity of the author, is a perfect example of the potentially flawed construction of the book". Obviously I don't agree with many Christian denominations in the strict belief that the Bible is a direct, infallible work by God and that every word should be followed to the letter no matter how illogical or inaccurate it may seem. I believe in the central message of Jesus Christ and I accept that the Gospels try their best to convey that message as accurately as possible. Pretty much everything else contained in the Bible, IMHO, is resource material and should be treated as such. What that means to me in regard to how I live my life and how I treat my friends and family is an important distinction.

2. I believe that God created the universe however that universe is governed by the established laws of creation which cannot be broken and in that I find no contradiction with the established scientific understanding of reality. Big Bang, Evolution, the Multiverse, Dinosaurs, Aliens you name it. To me its all fits perfectly together and my faith is in no way affected. The only problems that pop up come from taking the Old Testament of the Christan Bible too seriously and or grossly misunderstanding the meaning behind what the book is trying to say. I can say with absolute confidence that the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old and that it took longer than 7 Earth days to create the cosmos.

There are more layers and nuance to mention but by now you probably see my problem. I really don't have a label for my belief system in the sense that I fit into an obvious group. Catholics, Baptists, Evangelicals, Fundamentalists all have core beliefs that I find hard to abide. Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists derive much of their faith from Revelations which I tend to disregard as contradictory and out of canon.
Finding a denomination that is inclusive, logical, tolerant, loving and bases its doctrine on having both feet squarely upon modern reality would be quite a find indeed. As I have Atheist family members I am accustomed to raised eyebrows when I describe a Christian church as rooted in reality but this is what I am searching for in any case.

I'm not really looking for help answering questions as the title of this thread seems to imply. I am however curious about your general opinions. And whether any of you have similar points of view.

Tom

[Hashi Lebwohl]

You appear to be a rational Christian, one who doesn't try to explain or "prove" every nuance of theology to those who don't belive as you do.

The Bible is not supposed to be an infallible book that contains no internal inconsistencies and it certainly isn't meant to be something with which you beat people over the head; rather, it is supposed to be a partially-allegorical roadmap about how one should live life. One could even make the case that the inconsistencies are there on purpose to make us study and ask questions that will lead to the truth.

Even if it were infallible and we were supposed to follow it literally, we would fail and fail miserably. Have you ever read through the Old Testament in detail? I doubt anyone could ever follow all the rules that are listed there and that was the point--we cannot attain perfection or recover our relationship with God through any action on our part. It is impossible and all we can do is our best.

Speaking of the Old Testament, the fact that you are a Christian means that the Old Testament doesn't apply to you. At all. Sure, Proverbs has some good advice in it but you do not live under Mosaic Law; rather, you live under grace through the Resurrection. The only Law that applies to you is stated simply: love God with everything you are then love your neighbor as much as you love yourself.

Now...that whole "young Earth" mess was thought up by one guy more than 150 years ago (Archbishop Usher, I think) and no one outside of those poor folks who have a fanatical belief system, or one that lacks any sohpistication, believes in it. Why people want to think that all Christians believe that way is beyond me. It must be because they spend too much time on the Internet, seeking out the fringe elements and then painting the rest of us with a really broad brush. *shrug* The Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, as far as we can tell, and although I don't subscribe to the "Big Bang" theory, I do suspect that M-Theory is more correct--this universe came into existence when two or more membranes collided. It doesn't matter how the universe was created by God; it matters only that it was.

Always be careful that you do not fall into the trap of thinking you have to prove your beliefs or that God exists or whatever. Faith is accepting something wihtout the need for proof. We do this all the time. "My car will start when I turn the key" or "I won't get sick on my vacation" or any of a hundred other things we tell ourselves on a daily basis. Sure, it would be nice to have some concrete examples today but God doesn't work like that. In early times true miracles were needed to show people new things; unfortunately, the bar is higher for us because we are expected to believe without being shown anything.

Revelations...ah, that. Revelations is an allegory on Rome, Nero, and the "end of the world"...but not the end of the world, only the end of the Roman world. Anytime you hear anyone talking about how they can fit things described in Revelations to today's times, events, people, or whatever immediately quit believing what they are telling you because they are incorrect. Continue listening so you can figure out how they are wrong but make no mistake about it--they are wrong. That whole "number of the Beast" business is because 666 in Roman numerals is DCLXVI, which some believe was an acronym for...something, it escapes my memory at the moment. A quick Internet search will figure out what it was....oh, here it is: Domitianus Caesar Legatos Xti Violenter Interfecit, or "The Emperor Domitian violently killed the envoys of Christ". I, myself, believe that "the beast" was Nero, whose name/title Neiron Kaiser when transliterated into Hebrew would, through Kabbalistic tradition, add to 666. Anyway....

Scientists who are also Christian do not abandon their beliefs because they see no evidence of God. On the contrary, the harmonius workings of the universe, the beauty and intricacy of its design and its expression mathematically, serve only to show God's handiwork. With that in mind keep studying, keep learning, and through knowledge you can appreciate Creation more fully. I do.

[SoulBiter]

That's a tough one.

One things that's stuck out for me over the years when I talk to people that are too hung up on the legalism.

“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

[Orlion]

Interesting topic. It should be noted that the 'obvious' groups you do not fit into are what I would consider conservative Christian groups (they're established, and have been so for a while, and you better forget about any change!)

Which is probably something else you ought to consider: where does tradition stand in your belief? Exactly how does Jesus fit into your view? Is he a mere teacher, or is he a Redeemer? Do you believe in a personal relationship with him or not? How does God interact in the world? Does he interact with the world? Does he have rules to judge? What are those rules? Is it set down anywhere or is it a more general 'do your best to be good and just'? Can your belief system stand without the Bible? Can it stand without Jesus?

Just some more questions to try and narrow down some things

[aliantha]

I think Orlion is on to something, TOM. You might try looking for a church in a more liberal denomination. You might fit pretty well in the Episcopal church, for one example. The Unitarians also come to mind, but they're probably a little *too* out there for you.

There's a thread stickied above that contains a link to a Beliefnet survey about what flavor of believer you are. That might help, too.

[Linna Heartbooger]

Ahh, Christian community is something close to my heart... glad you brought this stuff up.

...And also that I've been looking for a new church home and am finding it difficult in that all of the churches I've looked into have mission statements that I don't seem to wholly agree with.

Actually, I'd say what you've said about your views so far says very little at all about what kind of Christian you are!!
I think it speaks volumes about the climate of "Christian" culture in the place where you live, though.

The fact that you're saying this may say something important about you:
Sincerity and internal honesty are important to you.
You do not want to be two-faced, either portraying two images of yourelf to different groups of people, or holding one view inside yourself and showing another view to others.

Would it be accurate to say that these two issues you brought up seem to be "issues on which allegiance hinges" in many churches around you?
People who express viewpoints like yours get socially-censored / cut down?
...or the views are spoken against so strongly and so consistently that people who hold them don't dare to raise their voices?

I have a frustration that often people in churches are unwilling to tolerate others voicing their doubts... because they are afraid of their own doubts, and just burying it in denial.
Maybe you see the unwillingness of people around you to challenge themselves and each-other to seek answers ...because of the unspoken, well-understood code that you don't challenge these two things.

Please please contradict if I'm being unfair or inaccurate to the people around you in my characterization!
I don't know what it's like there cause I'm not where you are.

The thing is... some of these churches have a few people very loudly putting a lot of emphasis on the opposing viewpoint to you in the two things you mentioned... and lots of people throughout the church who are more open to dialogue - not to mention who would be a joy to walk alongside in your Christian walk - if you find them.
(But that takes time. And where do you get the encouragement from in the time-being?)

Finding a denomination that is inclusive, logical, tolerant, loving and bases its doctrine on having both feet squarely upon modern reality would be quite a find indeed.

Yeah, it's tough.
It's a sticky question... what is necessary for how healthy/strong/wise/sane the people of a church need to be in order for you to truly be "a part" of it and to be helped by it.

...and when does it come in that God would want to use -you- precisely because of the way that you are different from those in the church - to help imperfect people (them and you) receive grace?

There's a strand of un-Christian American individualism that you or I enable when we graviatate towards a church that is "like us."

As I have Atheist family members I am accustomed to raised eyebrows when I describe a Christian church as rooted in reality but this is what I am searching for in any case.

"rooted in reality" - beautiful. reality and sanity. exactly what we're supposed to be about.

[aTOMiC]

First off guys thanks for responding to this topic. It was difficult for me to share my POV with others in this way but I guess I felt as though it was important to reach out and get some feedback.

Hashi, thanks for your comments. I thought the first response would be the hardest one to read given the possibilities but your post was surprising in that you seem to get me and understand where I'm coming from.

Soulbiter, I agree that legalism is a difficult obstacle when relating to other Christians specifically which is why I felt it was important to mention my views on the Bible itself.

Orlion, to answer your questions I do believe that Jesus is the Redeemer and a personal relationship is possible with him. Jesus has been a bit of a wildcard in the context of my discussions with non-christians or non believers. They ask me how I can be so rational about my attitude toward the Bible yet still believe that Jesus is the literal Son of God? Doesn't his miracles and divine claims contradict the established laws that God formed in the creation of the universe? If you say there are many paths to salvation how is it that you believe in Jesus message that through Him you will find redemption?

I tend to think in terms of logical possibilities. I believe. Therefore within that context I am naturally curious about details and the mechanics of what I believe. Can I truly know what God is specifically? Can I really know what Jesus relationship to God is in a literal and scientific sense? No I can't. There are far too many variables. I don't have a fraction of the information or intellectual capacity to understand the minute details of what ultimately composes not only our universe but the planes of existence that are possible beyond it, within it or occupying the same physical space. The laws of the natural world, to the extent of what we genuinely understand, are immutable however what we don't or can't know we try to fill in the gaps with our best theories which we find on a regular basis to be flawed. In my belief system there is enormous space for Jesus' works and message that does not controvert our overall understanding of existence. This is all from my point of view of course. Another person's POV is made up of his or her own experiences and understanding and I also hold reserve the possibility that there are other truths that may be tailored for another POV that I wouldn't identify with.
I deeply believe there are many paths to salvation (define salvation any way you like, it means different things to different people) but the one that applies to me is unique to my beliefs and it begins and ends with Jesus.

As to the rest I find it interesting that SRD constructed The Land with his religious background in mind because I tend to believe similarly when it comes to God's interaction with Man and the universe he made. Like the Creator, God cannot physically interfere in the events and lives of humans for the simple reason that it would invalidate free will. However, as I stated before, that there are other possibilities that make it possible to influence humankind either through some subtle means or, in the case of Jesus, through a mediator who would not break the law. How all of that works I cannot say and will probably never truly know until such a time as it is possible.

Aliantha, I always look forward to seeing your posts. Heh. I certainly would find it uncomfortable to embrace a denomination that I thought was "out there". I'll take a look at the other post. I will certainly continue my search.

Linna, you understand my internal struggle pretty well. I've been involved in a Christian music ministry for many years that took me to many different churches and denominations. I have to admit that for the most part my interaction with others in this way have been largely positive with very few moments where I was forced to swallow my tongue in regard to my beliefs. However there have been times when I felt disingenuous because of the circumstances and I felt very uncomfortable indeed.

Tom

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Hashi, thanks for your comments. I thought the first response would be the hardest one to read given the possibilities but your post was surprising in that you seem to get me and understand where I'm coming from.

You are welcome. As far as my ability to understand your point of view...chalk it up to "been there, done that".

I recently saw a video clip online talking about the necessity of giving extraordinary support to back up extraordinary claims. The poster's view was, in essence, that because people cannot prove via logic and scientific principle that God exists then people should quit claiming that God exists and that continuing to have that belief was somehow causing us to linger in a figurative Dark Ages of scientific ignorance.
On the surface, this video seemed reasonable until I figured out the flaw in its position. That flaw is this: if I make a claim then I do not have to back up that claim with any evidence to you because I do not owe you any explanations. Who are you--not you, personally, but a figurative "you"--that I need to prove what I believe to you? If you don't like or agree with my beliefs then you are free to do so. However, just because you may think that something I believe is ridiculous or insipid doesn't mean that I cannot or should not believe it.

That being said, having religious beliefs does not mean that you ignore reason or scientific fact. As I have noted, scientists who are also Christian are constantly amazed at how wonderfully the universe works--by design--every time they uncover another fact. The entire "science versus religion" thing is a false dichotomy--the one does not preclude the other.

[Cambo]

From reading this thread the answer that springs to my mind is "the kind that I like."

By which I mean the open minded, inquisitive, reasonable and non-judgemental kind. Pretty much all the Christians on the Watch fall into this bracket for me .

Not being a Christian or well versed in Christian theology, the most I have to add to this thread is that in earlier years I didn't believe in that kind of Christian. This was during my poor attempts at being an "angry young man." Christianity was pretty much seen as my enemy, for no good personal reason, just because I needed something to be hateful towards and it seemed a good target. And it wasn't as if I wasn't in contact with cool Christians, but I was blind enough to see them as being good despite their faith. Sigh.

There's still a lot that I take issue with in Christianity. It's not a religion I will ever agree with philosophically or think to be true. But I no longer rail at it so much, because without it wonderful folks like yourself (and Linna, and Deer, and Furls) wouldn't be quite the people they are.

[Avatar]

From reading this thread the answer that springs to my mind is "the kind that I like."

Hahaha, me too. And that should be all you need TOM.

--A