Rational Christianity Requires No Apologetics

     I am a Christian because I discovered my own spirituality through the study and application of the lessons found within the teachings of Christianity.  My grandfather was a Methodist minister who served rural churches in Missouri. My mother had a master’s degree in religious education and both she and my father were active church members, teachers, and musicians. I have two brothers and our entire family attended church together until one after the other we boys left home after high school to start our own lives. Even then, we all continued, in our own ways, to attend church and expand our understanding of the spiritual reality of life.

     We had many spiritual moments together as a family, which I cherished then and still do in memory. Most every night we ate supper together and our family conversations covered everything. Any distinction between what was secular versus religious just never occurred to me during family activities inside or outside of home. 

     At an early age I realized that religious teachings always apply to some aspect of our daily lives. When interpreted and understood spiritually, they would result in a wisdom that would support us in living a good and productive life.  This would not only lead to a better life for us as individuals, but it would also lead to the better and more positive interactions with others. I see Christian teachings as really powerful metaphysical lessons.

     Yet, I never recall believing that God dictated the Bible or that the stories in the Bible were literal history, that Mary was actually a virgin, or that Jesus walked on water, changed water to wine, or arose from the dead. None of that was ever important to me, in any literal sense. Heaven and hell are states of mind and the results of the decisions we make, not physical locations. In fact, such literalist claims always appeared to me to demean the true spiritual message of Jesus’ life and teachings.

     Christian apologetics are meant to “rationally” defend “orthodox” fundamentalist Christian dogma. Two assumptions underlying this dogma are that if you do not believe these ideas as literally true, God (Jesus) will condemn you to hell for all eternity. However, if you do believe these concepts as literally true, you will spend eternity in heaven with God, Jesus, and all your family and friends who have preceded you there. There is nothing holy nor spiritual about this kind of thinking. It is fear-based nonsense.

     Of course, each of us is free to believe nonsense if we so choose. I choose not to. Plus, I believe there are many Christians in churches everywhere who agree with my perspective, but who are provided neither the opportunity nor the vocabulary to express what they really feel in their hearts.

     Strict fundamentalist orthodoxy parallels nicely the thinking, stories, and legends underlying the pagan, polytheistic religions of ancient Greece and Rome, but it clashes completely with Jesus’ prophetic message of accepting God's rule of love and justice. You don’t find hell-fire and damnation in Jesus’ parables. You do find in Jesus’ parables, love and practical examples of how to express that love in our daily lives. That is what God and truth and faith are really all about.

     Where did all this strange “orthodoxy” come from? It came from Paul and the members of various pre-Christian congregations who influenced the New Testament Gospel writers to write what they did. It developed further via Christian theologians and Roman law centuries after Jesus’ life. It surely did not come from Jesus. Most individuals in the first century were poor, uneducated, illiterate, pagan, and superstitious, so it was a real struggle for them to grasp Jesus’ surprising teachings of unconditional love.

     Even speculating that the actual Gospel writers were from  among Jesus’ group of poor, uneducated disciples, is absurd. The real Gospel writers are unknown, but, they were certainly literate religious specialists who wrote synagogue liturgy in Greek for their particular Jewish communities. The scriptural topics, particularly in the Synoptic Gospels, line up perfectly with the topics for the annual cycle of Jewish worship liturgy. 

     These writers drew on characters and events from Hebrew scripture to create liturgical stories about Jesus for the purpose of defining him as the long awaited Jewish Messiah.  These liturgical segments were read at the end of the appropriate weekly synagogue worship services. Eyewitness histories, they are not.

     The Gospel writers’ purpose was to insert Jesus and his teachings into the worship traditions of Judaism. Their efforts were, apparently, effective until the mid 80's CE, when the more conservative Jews succeeded in ejecting followers of  “The Way” from synagogue membership. The community for which the author of the Gospel of John wrote, probably experienced this purge. This explains his excessive criticism and condemnation of "the Jews."

     When you read the full contexts of the Old Testament passages which are used by the Gospel writers as references to Jesus as the expected Jewish Messiah, you become aware that none of these passages could have had anything to do with Jesus or Mary, or anything that was to happen in the 1st century CE. 

     Just because sincere people have been taught their whole lives that these passages are prophecies about Jesus, that doesn't make them true. Those prophecies passages are literally not about Jesus. Most ministers and priests are fully aware of these textual facts, but they fail to share this knowledge with their congregations. If they are not honest about the Bible, then what, exactly, are their motives? To me, these are highly dishonest sins of omission.

     Scholarly honesty does nothing to diminish the value of Christianity. On the contrary, it allows Christian teachings to become real, alive, and expansive in spiritual significance. Literal interpretations turn the Bible into a list of conflicting events and perspectives. Metaphysical interpretations allow us opportunities to develop personal faith based on insights into our own life experiences. It’s the personal God experience that counts, not traditional dogma or the votes on doctrine made by religious councils.

     Developing spiritual awareness and faith from Christian teachings does not require that Christianity be the only religion around, nor does it require the expression of personal hysteria. Practical Christianity is sacred primarily because it works. Orthodox Christianity is considered sacred primarily because that is the way it is promoted. It is the default perspective used by most Christian and secular media outlets. A rational Christian perspective deserves equally wide public dissemination as an alternative to irrational orthodoxy.

           To be fair, I must also say that what people believe in their hearts that drives their actions towards others is far more important than the dogma they claim to believe. I have met many fundamentalists whose desire to love God and their neighbors appears to moderate their staunch defense of orthodoxy.  I have few practical disagreements with these fine people and I support them in their spiritual journeys. However, I continue to invite them to stay closer to their hearts than to their religious doctrine.

     The basic problem with current Christian orthodoxy is that it is irrelevant. There is so much more to the Bible than being in awe of supernatural events that we need to get over that kind of thinking and get serious. We are not worthless pawns experiencing rewards and punishments doled out by a capricious, supernatural God. We have responsibilities to use our God inspired spiritual talents to run a better, kinder world. The work and the payoff are here and now. Anything less from a religious community is irresponsible and a cop-out.