Finding Faith, Losing Faith

It sounds to me like you lost your faith in traditional evangelical theology because it affirms such things as biblical inerrancy and eternal conscious torment but not necessarily in the person of Jesus Christ. Which makes me wonder, who (or what) exactly you were serving those 46 years.

In any case, there is a very important lesson here for all of us who claim to be followers of Jesus Christ. If we make the foundation of our faith anything other than the person of Jesus Christ (e.g., our pastor/family/church/culture, a particular theology, the Bible, etc.) then we run the risk of that foundation coming undone after nearly a lifetime of service to that faith.

I want to address your “missing Jesus”… an important point. It’s complicated to speak to briefly, but my experience has been fairly similar to that of Thin-ice. From long and careful hearing/reading of other Christians’ “personal relationship” with Jesus and/or The Father, I’d say mine was pretty typical, suffice to say for brevity. About 4 of the 5 pts. above played into my slow, carefully considered “de-conversion” from Evangelicalism but I never ceased to believe in God; I set about, around 13 yrs. ago now, to look closer at the historical AND spiritual reality of Jesus.

I remain “unorthodox”; “apostate” to certain relatives and probably most Evangelicals/traditional believers. But I have re-committed to Christian community and worship in a very Progressive setting (a United Church of Christ church). This, Process Theology, and the awesome, mature perspective of the developing “Integral Christianity” (I just glowingly reviewed a book by that title by Pastor Paul Smith of KC) have well satisfied that sense of wanting to still be demonstrably and emotionally connected with Jesus/God. I never felt I left God at all or “lost my faith”!

I appreciate the reply. I’m wondering if you explored very much of Process philosophy/theology (Whitehead and Hartshorne, then Cobb, Williams, Griffin, and others)? What they, particularly Griffin that I’m aware, point out is that the reductionism of science is it’s own kind of irrationality…. It systematically has come (esp. in the last century or so) to set aside strong evidences challenging to what Griffin calls naturalism “sam” – sensationistic, atheistic, materialsitic. The “sam” approach was set up primarily in reaction to standard “supernaturalist” theism, along with appropriate limiting of territory via measurement, experimentation, repeatability, etc. The point is reaction against the simplistic, reductionistic prevalent theism.

This is just now beginning to be corrected for, such that some “respectable” scientists can begin (tho not go very far, very fast) to explore the mystical via more sensitive measuring systems and a theoretical physics which allows for such within a unified view of reality that is both somehow “spiritual” and matter/energy. (Christian and other mystics would be saying “I TOLD you so”). This is where Process “resides”, emphasizing truths, as equally as possible, that come via scientific endeavors and via those often called spiritual… or long traditions of wisdom and truth not obtainable “scientifically.” Integral Christianity is in a similar position, a more recent development along the same lines.

I can see that your current interests would leave you with little or no motivation to explore something different of a religious or even “spiritual” nature — even a sort of “Golden Mean” like Process. I have no problem with that… I don’t think it affects either your eternal destiny (I do believe in the evidences for continuation of consciousness, but not traditional “heaven” or “hell”). Nor does it your ability to be moral, compassionate, etc., as you mention.

My q. came out of you saying how Progressive Xnty was unsatisfying; and you rightly cited how folks there often make up whatever they feel like, with little or no solid reasoning. The reason I asked about Process specifically is that that problem mostly does NOT pertain to Process. Rather, it is carefully thought-through and intellectually rigorous (one of the reasons not many people even know of it, let alone explore it much, besides it being “heretical”). Maybe just something for the “back burner” in case a philosophical/spiritual interest ever re-emerges for you.

Actually, I CAN point you to “scientific evidence of life after death” in more than one form. Issues of consciousness and the “mind-body problem” are interlinked, so actually it is tough to isolate just “soul” existence or continuation of consciousness. So the following resources tend to be broad or varied and cover various aspects or combos of the related issues involved. Most of them are not real recent, as I encountered them around 5-12 or so years ago while I was looking into these areas particularly. (I still do a bit, but am not up on what may be the better sources that are more recent.) There are several things I could say to introduce them individually, but in the interest of time/brevity, I will let you explore about the authors/titles mainly on your own, via Amazon, the direct website (in 1 case), etc.

The main comment I’ll make is about David Ray Griffin, as he is a remarkable scholar and one of the key recent developers of Process theology. I’ve heard him and briefly met him on a couple occasions, as I have his comparably talented and caring, “relatable” mentor (originally as an academic) and colleague, John B. Cobb, Jr. (Both are still writing, last I knew, while retired, at ages 73 and 88 or so.)

I’m citing 2 of Griffin’s many books as esp. pertinent to our conversation: “Parapsychology, Philosophy and Spirituality” (’97). This is addressed more toward a skeptical scientific audience than a religious one and gives a good summary of the key issues pertinent to the idea of a “mind” and/or “spirit” distinct from physical bodies. While it touches on NDE’s as one aspect, it is far from as detailed as some works re. them (some of which have taken on the skeptics you seem to refer to, and the alternate explanations, of which there naturally are many). Nor does it reflect, of course, the significant research in the 15 yrs. since it’s publication.

The other by Griffin is, I think, a classic, and more readable as a “summary” type book of short length (just 114 pp. of text): “Two Great Truths: A New Synthesis of Scientific Naturalism and Christian Faith” (2004). It lays out what I consider a very clear and accurate picture of how and why we’ve gotten to the silly stand-off between “religion” and “science”, as to any meaningful collaboration and cooperation (or even mutual respect in many cases).

A few other great sources on various aspects of consciousness, the soul, etc., all from people either with scientific credentials or a self-taught scientific mindset:

1. “Miracles of Mind” by Russell Targ and Jane Katra

2.“The Way of the Explorer” by Astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell

3. “The Soul Genome” by Paul Von Ward and the related and more up-to-date website: http://reincarnationexperiment.org/ . On this website, if you read the Eliz. Barrett-Browning case, it gives examples and some summary info on the methodology of Von Ward and his collaborators. The book, though from an earlier stage, develops it further also… This is a quite different approach than earlier (or current) mere examples/stories of even supposedly corroborated cases of reincarnation (as I believe some have been, but not to rigorous standards of typical science). I wouldn’t say refutation of this kind of work is impossible, but I’ve not seen it done… and the work is still evolving and the data being further compiled under relatively new standards and approaches, as Von Ward readily admits… you’ll note he repeatedly is careful to say real PROOF is a high standard not yet reached. However, to me, his work, combined with others like Dr. Ian Stevenson and his successor, already reaches “beyond reasonable doubt.”

Christy, thanks for the extensive sharing! I think you’re right about the variation of experiences influencing concepts of hell, etc. Similarly, how logically and systematically one thinks. You sound high on that scale. Thus, I think you rightly see that WITHIN a traditional Xn theology (esp. but not only Evangelicalism) punishment for sin (“original sin” with its inevitable sinful thoughts/acts) is central… core. “Systematic theology” as worked out trying to harmonize diverse teachings in the Bible requires it and requires (in the predominant systems) atonement, generally considered “substitutionary” (if not “ransom” or “moral influence”).

All that “inside” language to affirm that the more serious, studied and “biblical” (per the predominant theologies) one is, the more critical is a belief in some kind of eternal punishment (via not accepting atonement, by faith). No one seems to be able to define exactly what faith (or faith with some level of attendant “works”) saves one from it. That is, when pressed for specifics or with possible exceptions, it gets very murky, giving good cause for thinking people to question the entire “system” (which is way too systematic–and exclusive– for its own good, or ours)!

I could not agree more, Christy

ajginn,

The problem with this sort of argument is that it assumes that God must be revealing everything written in the Bible if he is revealing anything at all through the Bible, including details about obscure battles in Joshua-Judges. However, there are other ways of understanding God’s revelatory purposes in the Bible. In my opinion, God is not revealing everything written in the Bible so much as a religious narrative that sees the story of Jesus as the eschatological continuation of the story of Israel. On this understanding, would-be followers of Jesus are invited to locate themselves within a larger narrative that provides needed context for their lives. In particular, this allows me to see the problems you raised as relatively minor/incidental features of the biblical text that don’t count against the main narrative of the four canonical gospels, which informs my personal devotion to Jesus.

For another take on biblical authority see NT Wright’s “The Last Word” if you’re still interested in this sort of thing.

“Which makes me wonder, who (or what) exactly you were serving those 46 years.”

Your question implies that it is impossible, or highly unlikely, that if one’s belief is correct enough, that it will ever change. And by further implication, my faith for 46 years was faulty or incomplete. I get this all the time from evangelical christians.

On the contrary, I’ll bet you could have found almost no qualitative differences between your faith now in Jesus Christ, and what mine was before I de-converted. The only difference, is that I threw the prohibitions away for honestly confronting doubts (“don’t listen, it’s Satan trying to destroy your faith”, among other things). I unshackled the rational side of my brain and let it go free and unfettered. I followed wherever it led me. I did not want to leave my faith family, the most wonderful and supportive group of people I have ever known. I had no bad experiences in the church. But I just could not deny where the path of rationality led me. I refused to live any more according to a discredited belief, even if it was painful to leave it behind. The truth was more necessary to me than emotional comfort and support.

Ditto, ditto, ditto. I’ve said your exact words many times as a Christian myself, to people who seemed to be doubting. I’m sure you by now have studied and examined the weak, nearly non-existent body of evidence that the person depicted as Jesus in the gospels (and there are hundreds of discrepancies between them concerning important details in his biography) actually existed. Virtually NO extra-biblical references exist – and those that Christians posit exist are almost certainly forgeries and interpolations by Christian scribes and copyists, including the most notable, in Josephus. I myself had a love affair with Jesus which lasted decades. Don’t give me this BS about my faith being based in a particular theological system: Jesus was at the heart and core of my faith for 46 years. How dare you posit what my belief was like! You’re just like all the others: “he couldn’t have had a faith as genuine as mine, because if he did, he never could have left his faith.” You’re denying the free will of man, if you think that once a belief is correct, it is immutable and frozen in place. That smacks of Calvinism, in a perverted sort of way.

“I will concur with the reasons given above, but add one more.”

I guess you missed this. Hell was only the icing on the cake for Thin-ice. He clearly had issues with all the other problems of Christianity. He finally decided, as did I, that there was no “there” there anymore.

You’re correct, but the OP seemed to indicate that his only issue was hell (which is a pretty big one I might add).

archie primarily
because we are commanded to try to love others even more than ourselves, and
that implies we should care about their fates even more than we care about our own.

Also Matt 25:31-46 seems to say God’s so connected to humanity that caring-for/neglecting people is compared to caring-for/neglecting
Him. Why wouldn’t His compassion and connection continue into the next age?

It doesn’t have to be extremes of “Just let everyone in as they are” or “Only let a few in special ones in”. I believe Jesus is the only way but I don’t put any limits on when & where someone finds that way (with the Spirit’s help).

After looking at these ‘5 points’ above, they appear to be matters of the “head” overtaking the “heart”. As someone immersed in the ‘scientific method’ for several years due to my college degree, and then being born-again just 2 months shy of my 29th birthday, I understand the battle of head vs. heart. Especially after the new-birth. But God doesn’t live in the ‘head’ of man, He lives in the ‘heart’ of man.

There were several statements in those points that I would like to disagree with: about “implausibilities in the biblical story, irrelevance for life (its ancient context), and the fact that the Bible is just plain confusing.” Come on, are you kidding us? To be born-again is to be indwelt by God’s Spirit and to allow Him to teach us; He speaks at the spiritual level, the Bible makes PERFECT sense then, and we get an understanding that’s completely ‘logical’, yet, transcends the logic of the natural mind (1 Co.2). Those statements are simply ‘head-talk’. They make cognitive reasoning skills “king” when we use terms about the Word such as “implausibilites”, “irrelevance”, and “confusing”.

“Scientific models are verifiable, widely accepted, and likely correct, thus consigning the Bible to something other than a reliable description of reality.” They may be “widely accepted” but that has NOTHING to do with many of them being “likely correct” or always “verifiable”. It all depends upon with scientist you’re talking to. To say the bible isn’t a “reliable description of reality” is nonsense (again, the head is getting the better of them). The Word of God doesn’t concern itself with attempting to explain all of the details about nature because salvation isn’t found there. It’s found in an understanding of the development of covenants and God’s progressive dealing with man. It keeps the main thing the main thing.

You talked about many of the emails you’ve received “that would tax to the breaking point anyone’s faith in a living God who is just, attentive, and loving God.” My negative experiences aren’t an indication of God’s love; His sending of His Son does. I’ve had kidney failure (now have a transplant), had a threatening blood clot, and cancer in the past 13 years (now cancer free). What’s that got to do with God not being loving? He didn’t do those things to me. We live in a fallen world, with a fallen system, around fallen people, doing fallen things. Stuff happens! Remember, there’s also a satan (adversary) out there who is stealing, killing, and destroying. Let’s put the blame where it belongs, not on God.

Scot, I agree with you when you said, “practically speaking, commenters experienced that Christians too often exhibit the same behaviors as everyone else, which is more than simply an unfortunate situation but is interpreted as evidence that Christianity is not true.” The Body of Christ isn’t where she should be– for many reasons– and it’s said that her testimony isn’t stronger. It’s time our leaders began teaching the Word of God under the anointing of God, and demonstrating both it’s character and it’s power.

You transparently made this statement, ” My personal top challenges–those nagging back seat issues that keep forcing their way to the front seat–are: various issues of intellectual implausibility, few and far between “God moments,” random suffering, and the fact that Christians can be complete jerks to each other and everyone else.” For me personally, those aren’t difficult issues at all. I would love to know more details about the “intellectual implausibility” you’re referring to, but I live continually with “God moments” due to what some would call the ‘Charismatic experience’ and experiencing the anointing of God flowing into others bodies in physical healing and various other gifts of the Spirit mentioned in 1 Co.12-14. One of the things giving people so much “intellectual” difficulty today is that they ‘haven’t’ experienced what Jesus said when he stated, “I will endue you with power from on high.” (Lu.24:49)

My new-birth experience transformed my life mentally, emotionally, and spiritually. I saw the futility of human reasoning vs. revelation from the Holy Spirit almost immediately. As I’ve spent many years now walking with God, experiencing His presence supernatually on a regular basis, and living according to the principles in God’s Word, my life has been forever altered. I don’t live in a world of ‘illusion’ where I ignore what’s plainly right in front of me in the way of physical/natural evidences; but neither do I look to those things to explain ‘reality’ to me. I’m more than a mind and a body; I have a spirit. And the Holy Spirit has plugged me into that reality that is true reality– which is Christ Jesus. “In Him”, Paul said, “are hidden all the tresures of wisdom and knowledge.” (Col.2:3) Once our eyes are opened to this reality in a sufficient measure, a person will never go back to the other way of living again.

Thanks for the post, Scot. These are definite problems/challenges we are confronted with today from people; but they’re not without an answer. His name is Jesus! I realize that that’s too ‘simple’ for some; but in order to get help we have to come to him simply because, as Paul wrote, “If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise.” (1 Co.3:18)

I missed that, Scot. I apologize. Thanks again for this re-post from Enns.

Did someone do that here?

Wow, Larry. Your inferences abound: “Immune to ANY intellectual ambiguities”; “superior insight into the the biblical text.”

What I find interesting is that it ISN’T when people’s “faith” is challenged that they become upset; it’s when we challenge their “unbelief” that they become angry. Many people seem to ‘look’ for excuses to not believe the simple truths of the Bible. I don’t know if that fits your scenerio or not; but no doubt it’s common.

Did the Apostle Paul talk about his constant battle with unbelief in God or His Word year after year? How about Peter or any of the other NT writers? None of them did. I’m sure someone could argue that ‘they’ got to see Jesus and hear him either in person or in a vision. But Jesus said, Jn.17:20 I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word.
I’ve definitely had my share of mental battles over the years (expecially during the first year after being saved), but the renewing of the mind has become a progressive reality. Actively pursuing it pays great dividends.
I certainly didn’t mean to sound “arrogant” as you stated, but I am ‘confident’ in the ability of the Word through the power of the Holy Spirit, to renovate the mind, bring close intimacy with God, and to empower us to be demonstrators of Jesus in both Word and supernatual deed.
In fact, this empowerment was the ‘normative’ expectation of the early church– and should be ours now. I’m so simple-minded that I just expect those things to be true for my life; and they ‘have’ been. And according to God’s Word, yes, we can all expect what the Word says is ours.
We come into salvation from all kinds of backgrounds. And those backgrounds, whatever they may be, have shaped our minds and have to be overcome by the Word. If we get caught up in ‘questioning’ the validity/ dependability of the Word, then we’ve just destroyed the foundation for our hope. All sorts of problems result from that.
Bottom Line: I’ve found the Word to work itself out into the experiences of my life as I grow more and accept it at face value. I make no apologies for that. I believe God is able to take us wherever we are when we come to Him and bring us in to an incredible intimate walk with Him.
Larry, you sound very ‘defensive’ at my comment. I certainly don’t mean to offend anyone and if I came off that way to you, then please accept my apology. But again, I am confident in my walk with God and am enjoying the fruits of that.

Sam, I agree that systems (religions, philosophy, etc.) that do not contain exclusivist claims, or improperly reduce-down reality are hard to find…. But they DO exist. To examine much, they do require both openness and some real thought: two I have found greatly helpful are closely related and intertwined: Christian Process theology and “Integral Christianity” (the latter the more developed in worship/”practice”)… I have some personal knowledge of a few of the recent developers/”explainers” of both and they are people of “heart” as well as “head”, tho the thought can be intellectually challenging.

I find that people deconvert because they stop listening to God and start disobeying by listening to those who do not believe God. People also forget that love disciplines and has rules and breaking those rules means that punishment is coming.

It is not like God kept the lake of fire a secret or who would be going there. Jesus’ life, death and resurrection would mean nothing if people got to go to heaven no matter how they lived. It would be unfair to those who lived good lives to see sinners, rapists, false teaching believers enter into heaven.

People get caught up looking at a very minute part of the whole picture and do not think about the broad picture. They can’t bring themselves to accept the fact that nice people will be sent to the lake of fire but they forget that God made the rules and the majority of people on earth don’t follow them. they want their own way.

In other words, people deconvert because God doesn’t do things their way.

I really do not care what Manning says. it seems you are jealous. Of course, sinners will be in heaven it is because they repented of their sins and followed Christ’s teaching.

i was referring to unrepentant sinners. Those deconverted people I have read, all do the same thing –they list how good they have been and how unjustly they were treated by God.

Yet not one lists one thing from God’s perspective or says that they failed him.

Insulting me is no way to have a discussion. i am not naive. I just love it when people list their ‘credentials’ as if that means that God owes them something or it puts an end to any contradictory point of view.

Are you through with your pity party? You taught the Bible for 20 years and you were an evangelical for 35 and you are saying in all that time God never showed himself to you, never answered your prayers, never did anything for you?

Then God is supposed to jump at your call just because you do what is the right thing to do? What were you looking for when you pleaded with God? Something unrealistic?

How do you know he abandoned you? Maybe you stopped following him? Why is it always God fault? i am sure there is more to your story than the perfect picture you paint of yourself.

I’ve come to terms with some of these over the years, but #3 is the one that is toughest for me right now. I’ve honestly never felt like I’ve felt the real presence of God. But I also struggle with things like the seeming futility of prayer, suffering, etc. The other things I struggle with are the “various issues of intellectual implausibility.”