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.

The True Meaning Of Easter

     I grew up completely understanding that if Jesus' body actually did regain life after being dead for three days following his crucifixion, that was a miracle of profound significance. I had no trouble understanding that. What I did have trouble understanding was how my life, my beliefs, and actions should be different because of Jesus' demonstrated physical resurrection.

     Clearly, I was to be in awe. After all, once any of us die, as far as the best science available to us today indicates, we remain dead. Therefore, Jesus being physically resurrected proved he could defy human physiology and physics. The only modern day example of this kind of power that I could think of was that Jesus was some kind of Superman.

     Even though a child, myself, I still realized a Superman comparison was childish. Easter had to represent something more important and more real than that. What was there about Jesus' life that even after he was crucified all his followers believed he came back to life? How could that be? This was a burning question in my heart for many years.

     Then I started experiencing the world as an adult. I heard a young President Kennedy ask what I could do for my country and I was energized and committed. I heard Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. describe his dream of human peace and racial harmony and I was electrified and wanted to help make it happen. Even though both of these icons of love, peace, and personal responsibility were assassinated, neither of them has died in my heart or mind. Their messages touched eternal truths that will live in history forever.

     By all scriptural accounts, Jesus lived a life of perfect love, personified. This was expressed by writers of scripture by describing him as the "Son of God" or even "God on earth." He made those who believed they had sinned, see themselves differently. He treated others as perfect in God's eyes and they saw it, too. Such clarity of thought, mind, and soul changes and heals people's lives, their actions and even their personalities. The eternal truth and validity of these lessons is not changed one iota by the human death of the teacher. Spiritual understanding radically diminishes the importance of human events and material circumstances.

     After recovering from the personal shock of loss, Jesus' followers realized he still lived in their hearts, minds, and actions. They had experienced unconditional love and just like their spiritual wayshower, there was no human suffering that could change their commitment to express that same love and to share it with others.

     I cannot say this is what actually happened. I can only say this is what makes sense to me. I, myself, am personally committed to Jesus' teachings because I have grown to know him through my readings of the Bible and experiencing the results of his teachings in my life. Living from love is always the best option. The true meaning of Easter is personal and arises from within the sanctity of your own heart and mind.

     So, for me, even though crucified, Jesus lives!

   

There Is A Single Destination

         Our personal lives, personalities, backgrounds, and aspirations are all different, but when it comes to spiritual awareness, there appears to be a single, final destination.  That destination is, loving others, without conditions, in every moment. I believe this because of the interactions I have had with many individuals throughout my life.

       During my professional career I had opportunities to attend AA meetings with friends and acquaintances.  All of the speakers I ever heard related their experiences of first getting lost in an exhilarating and aimless life of alcohol, drugs, sex, and power, then losing all that they thought was important. Finally, they realized that all that they were doing was killing themselves. Universally, their stories of recovery involved rediscovering the truth of who they really could be, by appreciating, caring for, and loving themselves and others.

       I have met individuals who are devout Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, evangelical Protestant Christians, Latter Day Saints, Unitarian Universalists, Druids and, yes, even devout atheists. I may frequently disagree with their perspectives of theology, but when I talk with them about how we can help others who are in need, we tend to agree time and again. As a result, I have become less interested in opinions about theology and more interested in how individuals and religious organizations promote acquiring a loving attitude.

      Jesus’ mission wasn’t to convert anyone to Judaism, or Christianity, especially since there were no Christians in existence during his lifetime. He didn’t have any organizational or membership goals, and he didn't establish a new religion. His mission was to change individuals, inside. He encouraged all to seek God and wisdom from within, to find love in our hearts and express it outwardly, and in that way take care of everything else. 

        If you carefully look at the practical results of the teachings of all major religions, you will find love there too. Sometimes it is almost hidden underneath dogma or doctrines designed to make God’s love conditional to the tenets they teach (which it is not), but love is there.

          For me, it is not that God loves us, as if we are in one state of existence and God is somewhere else. God cannot be external to our being. God is the principle, force, and power underlying and guiding our existence. How this can be is the real mystery of life, but its reality is experienced whenever we act with loving care toward others. 

       Something happens when we drop our evolutionary shield of fear and self-centeredness and view others with compassion, empathy, and love. In these moments we cross the bridge from material dimensions to spiritual reality. God is always there. In His presence, what we tend to view as problems of material human circumstances become irrelevant and awareness of new possibilities, humility, harmony, and hope emerge.

        God’s eminence becomes evident as we love and care for one another. God is the love that inspires and fulfills us. That is why the Great Commandment is so important. If we experience God as love and make that first and foremost, we are placing love in our lives above all else and that leads us to automatically fulfilling the remaining commandments. 

         Reading Jesus’ parables we realize that is what they collectively teach. We may have all sinned, in whatever way we define that for ourselves, but all our highest spiritual destinations are the same, learning to love continually, without restrictions. The Kingdom of God is not somewhere else in time or location; it is always in our midst, ready to be accepted and expressed through us. As Matthew wrote , "Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." (Matthew 5:48)     Let love live.

The Secret Of Life

       The secret of life is that there are no secrets at all. Everything we need to live happy, successful lives is always available to us in every moment. There is no eternal life, nor any past life, that is more important than your life in this moment. Since all other moments are either memory or imagination, that which is eternal exits right now.

Look at the teachings that the Gospel writers attributed to Jesus. Despite the apocalyptic views of John the Baptist, Paul, and the early Christian church, there are major parables of Jesus that do not reflect an apocalyptic view of history, at all. Consider Jesus’ parables of the Samaritan, prodigal son, dinner party, vineyard laborers, shrewd manager, unforgiving slave, corrupt judge, leaven, mustard seed, pearl, and treasure. 

All of these have to do with how to live in God’s kingdom, now. There is no heavenly or hellish eternity, no deceiving or tempting devil, no original sin, nor any need for redemption. These parables are all about how to express unconditional love, now. That is the secret of life.

The only explanation for these teachings being so different from the popular apocalyptic mindset held by many in Jesus’ day, is that this was the message he actually taught. He was different then, and he is still different, even from many Christian churches that claim to follow his teachings. Jesus’ teachings of love, now, were so simple they were not understood by his followers and certainly not by Paul, nor by the members of the churches Paul founded.

The fact that the Gospel writers were compelled to include these contrary teachings in their texts was not unprecedented. The Yahwist strand of written material in the Torah was written about 950 BCE in Jerusalem, the capital city of the Jewish state of Judah. Jerusalem was located in the southern portion of the country. Solomon was king of Judah at the time. The Yahwist materials favored the traditions and institutions of the dominant southern Jewish tribes.

The Elohist strand of material in the Torah was written about a century later, 850 BCE, in the northern Jewish state of Israel, which was created following a civil war in Judah in 920 BCE. The Elohist document included many of the same stories of the Yahwist strands, but editorial changes were made so the new document supported the traditions and institutions of the northern Jewish state, Israel, and actually condemned actions of the southern nation of Judah.

 In 721 BCE the Assyrians conquered Israel and disbursed the northern Jewish population throughout the Assyrian Empire. The remnants of the 10 tribes of Israel simply disappeared from history. Still, the Elohist document survived and found its way south to Judah, where at around 690 BCE it was edited together with the original Yahwist version written in Judah. Instead of editing out conflicting perspectives, however, the editors blended both versions together much as they were originally written, leaving doublet texts in Genesis with which we are all familiar. For example, consider the two different creation stories and the two conflicting stories of Noah. Each had its particular purpose for its intended audience. The same is true for all the other doublets that are found in the Torah.

Jesus was respectful of the Law and the Prophets, but he saw and taught a perspective even higher than the Torah. He taught love, now. His teachings were so strikingly different that his themes and verbal examples were remembered and eventually written down. Just like the Old Testament redactors, the New Testament Gospel writers included Jesus’ teachings of living God’s love now, right in the middle of their own concepts of an apocalyptic universe.

When reading the Bible it is each reader’s responsibility to separate the wheat from the chaff. As you learn more about how and why the documents in the Bible were written, understanding the overall message of the Bible becomes easier. That overall message appears to be that there are no secrets of life, at all, past or present. A final conclusion emerging from Jesus' teachings in the New Testament is, simply, God reigns whenever and wherever love rules.

Life Is A Journey Of Personal Spiritual Discovery

     Probably the most satisfying and the most terrifying aspect of being human is our self-awareness. Because we are self-aware and can hypothesize beyond what we can verify, we seem perfectly willing to create simplistic answers to complex cosmic questions. For example, an interesting cosmic question is, "Why is there suffering on earth?" 

     A simplistic answer might be, "There is a devil tempting us to be selfish and evil toward one another." A more rational approach is that as creatures of evolution, we have an innate drive to dominate and control others. This insures survival, first for ourselves, then secondly, for our families or what we could call our "tribe."

     There is hardly a conflict between neighbors nor a war among nations that is not related, in some way, to an ethnic or cultural conflict. It always seems to be a we/they matter, where what WE think is right and what THEY think is wrong.

     You might ask, what is available to humans to counteract these innate aggressive and self-centered impulses when they are not appropriate? A simplistic answer might be, "God will reward those who are good and punish those who are evil." A more rational perspective is that we are completely capable of recognizing our own destructive, innate behaviors and changing them for the good of all. Our capacity for reasoning can override our survival impulses, if we so choose. The decision each of us makes determines the direction our life goes.  The good news is that each moment is a opportunity to decide anew.

     We cannot eliminate our innate impulses, but we can change our reactions to our own impulses. In fact, this appears to be the foundation upon which religions are based. Religions represent institutional attempts to prompt (shame?) individuals into controlling their survival drives when such impulses are no longer beneficial to society.  This includes the most basic sins involving sex, greed, and envy.

     Unfortunately, church organizations are human institutions and frequently evolve into theological families or tribes that compete with and attempt to dominate other theological families or tribes. They simply mirror the personal drives and impulses of their particular members. Again, the mantra is, WE are right and THEY are wrong. Unconditional love, which is the reality that defines God, is a level of understanding that is higher than the thinking we use to find fault in others or to demand retribution for the perceived sins of enemies.

     This does not mean that participating in church organizations is bad or wrong. God is wherever we are, listens when we speak, and speaks when we quiet our minds. Actually, I feel it is important to have a church home, it's just that each individual is responsible for what he/she believes, not some external church authority. Your most precious beliefs are between you and your experience of God. 

     Church administrative hierarchies are not at that level of understanding. They must reflect and promote the human cultural biases of their members or they risk losing them.  Yes, this creates an insulated, circular system, but in this way the teaching traditions and organizational hierarchy, including jobs, dogma, status, and material wealth are perpetuated.

     All human organizations exist with members serving in core leadership positions. This core is surrounded by an even larger number of peripherally committed members attracted by the presence of the leaders, who are respected as spiritual guides. It is primitive tribal grouping behavior. It's not bad, but it does tend to support organizational growth, and not, necessarily, personal spiritual growth. 

     You learn and grow, spiritually, into the presence of God from within your own mind and heart as an individual. Spiritual growth is not mastering details of doctrine, nor memorizing scriptures or creeds, or expressing Christian apologetics, making public professions of faith, nor accepting dogma because it is written in a particular book or spoken by certain people. Righteousness is not arranging to be seen doing the right things, but rather, it is seeking and knowing the right things to do from within your capacity to love and understand...the link we have with our Creator.

     You grow spiritually by reading, listening, thinking, praying, meditating, deciding, acting, and observing how your world and life change as you make better, more spirit-led choices. What you grow to understand may be in perfect alignment with the teachings of your church, and that is a wonderful experience. If it is not, however, be true to what you have learned from your own spiritual development. It is revealing to you something more important than what your church teaches.

     Interestingly enough, from among the multitudes of religions and denominations around the world, there are individuals who decide to accept responsibility for their own thinking and strike out on their own personal spiritual journeys into the presence of God. They have participated within their institutional home to the point of becoming spiritually aware of themselves and aware of something greater than themselves. And when that awareness occurs, their allegiance to the doctrine and discipline of their religious heritage becomes secondary to their personal spiritual understanding.

     I know this happens, because I have met many such individuals during my life. Our religious backgrounds are very different, but what we have come to understand, as adults, about the world, life, humanity, and reality is strikingly similar. 

     This has confirmed and reconfirmed to me that spirituality is a personal job, within the mind and heart of each of us. A group of independent mystics, regardless of their original theological heritage, will express more unconditional love and unity among themselves than will members or leaders committed to specific religious organizations. The fact that religions are "organized" means that membership in them is "conditional." Jesus never taught anything like that.

     Still, yes, participate in churches or religious organizations that are meaningful to you. God is wherever you seek. Find and rejoice in a religious family and support ministries as you see fit, but realize all along that your true spiritual journey is guided by however you experience God's presence and in that presence we are all one.

     

Thanks, To My Fundamentalist Friends

     Years ago, I gained new friends in an organization of primarily fundamentalist Christians. Throughout my life, fundamentalists have appeared to me to be somewhat bipolar. On the one hand, better people you could not hope to find. They will care about you and for you without question, except, perhaps for the obligatory probe, “Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal savior?”

      Basically, they are wonderful, honest, helpful, kind, patriotic, loving, and family-oriented individuals. However, whenever the discussion turns to religion, from the depth of his or her being there arises a cynical, judgmental, assertive, and intractable presence that hovers over the conversation like a vulture awaiting the death of all living opposition. As I said, it can be an almost shocking change in the social atmosphere.

     Despite disagreements on issues of theology, I doubt neither the sincerity of their Christian faith nor the depth of their concern in trying to save me from my own way of thinking. It was suggested that I read the Bible again and meditate on it. I said that I would and I did. After my reading and meditation, I felt even more strongly that many specific sections of the Bible directly contradict other sections in both the Old and New Testaments. There are, also, many sections that directly refute their fundamentalist dogma.

     Feeling a need to study the Bible more carefully, I started reading what Biblical scholars have to say about how the Bible was written, assembled, and interpreted. I am grateful that my friends had suggested I look at the Bible anew.

     Much to my astonishment, what I had noticed as a non-expert Bible reader, is already well known and has been thoroughly studied and discussed for centuries. Bible research, discussion, and debate is continuing right into the 21st century.

     It seems to me that there are two major contrasting perspectives from which the Bible has been viewed and interpreted through the ages. One is what has been called the prophetic view and the other is the apocalyptic perspective.

     The apocalyptic viewpoint assumes God’s imminent return by a direct, supernatural intervention to place his final messiah into power to rule over the end of the human domination systems that exist and to make final judgment on every soul. The origin of this kind of thinking comes from Jewish traditions several centuries preceding Jesus. 

     "Messiah" comes from the Hebrew word māshīach, which means “anointed.” This was the title given to all the kings of the Jewish nation. Saul was the first anointed king of the Jews (messiah), but he was unable to unite the various Jewish tribes. However, the second messiah, King David, through his military and political skills, did establish a strong and prosperous Jewish nation over which he reigned for 40 years. One of his sons, Solomon, was the third king (messiah) and he ruled successfully for another 40 years. This was the foundation for the thinking that successful messiahs could be expected from the line of David.

     Centuries later, after being defeated as a nation and oppressed by other countries for generations, there seemed no hope that a new messiah could arise from within the remnants of the Jewish nation. Gradually the expectation grew that God would have to directly intervene in world events to provide his chosen people with a messiah, in the tradition of David, who would bring forth God's final kingdom and rule on earth. This is why John The Baptist was calling for Jews to repent, for the day of the Lord was coming.

     Into this atmosphere Jesus arrived with a message that had an unexpected, non-apocalyptic angle. His message of love and ethical conduct is based on the prophetic viewpoint, first articulated by ancient Jewish prophets. Jesus' parables and sayings suggest that righteous motives from within are what please God. Jesus taught that to conform to religious law and rituals has its place, but external appearances are secondary to inner attitudes and behavior based on unconditional love. Recall Jesus’ ethical reconstruction in his Sermon On The Mount of the laws of Moses.

     Jesus’ teachings strongly state that God’s desire for loving behavior (righteousness) from human kind is ever-present and meeting this expectation is all that is necessary to enter into His kingdom on earth. This perspective is expressed in Hosea 6:6, and echoed in Matthew 9:13, and Matthew 12:7. Jesus’ teaching that the kingdom of Heaven is ever present and within mankind’s reach or “at hand” as written in Matthew 4:17 (RSV) clearly indicates the prophetic viewpoint. Through either the Aramaic or Greek language, whichever was used by Jesus, the meaning of that passage is unambiguous. The Kingdom of God is specifically available now.

     Despite this emphasis by Jesus, Paul and other early members of the developing Christian communities appeared to revert to an apocalyptic view after Jesus was gone. Plus, they expanded their mission to include people beyond the Jewish nation, which actually was consistent with Jesus' teachings. Since their message found willing listeners among the gentiles (pagan non-Jews) this helped alter the purpose of the anticipated apocalypse. 

     Former pagans had little interest in reviving the Jewish nation on earth, but they did have interest in saving themselves from the idea of an afterlife in hell. This was a doctrine perfect for the pagan mindset. We must remember that pagans constituted more than 90% of the general population. As a result mystical, magical polytheism was commonplace thinking, even for Christians. 

     In fact, there were numerous Christian centers of teaching that were polytheistic. One Christian group believed that the God of the Old Testament was angry and vengeful but a different God, described in the New Testament, was kind and redeeming. Other Christian groups claimed there were as many as 365 different gods. All these groups claimed to be Christian.

     This resulted in considerable infighting among the various Christianity’s during the first couple of centuries. Each saw themselves as the true believers and the others as heretics. It is clear that paganism had a profound impact on the direction and course of Christian theology.

     What is so amazing is that the common thread of Jesus’ prophetic viewpoint was maintained in the Bible, across the gospels, despite the apocalyptic notions of the writers and followers of the gospels. The biblical scholars believe this happened because both Jesus’ disciples and the leaders/teachers that followed them (e.g. Paul) did not fully understand what Jesus was teaching.

     You might recall their lack of understanding was frequently reported in the gospels. What Jesus taught was so different from what they were expecting, yet so closely tied to familiar Old Testament teachings, that they were simultaneously spellbound, uplifted, and perplexed. Still, after Jesus was gone, they just couldn’t seem to free themselves of the need for something apocalyptic to occur, despite the clear prophetic message in Jesus’ teachings.

     Paul, too, seemed affected by both Jesus’ teachings of love as well as Paul’s own background of dedication to every detail of Jewish law. Law and doctrine were at the foundation of his very being. When he had his spiritual awakening, he may have changed his spiritual view of Jesus’ role as redeemer, but not his need for strict religious discipline. The topics in his writings vacillate between beautiful expressions of Jesus’ prophetic message and detailed, legalistic explanations of proper Christian theology, unlike anything Jesus would have ever said about himself.

     Despite this obvious clash of perspectives, even today fundamentalists appear to accept Paul’s apocalyptic perspective and dogma on faith, as opposed to Jesus' teachings and feel no need to explain or defend their decision to do that. In fact, I was told that Christian doctrine cannot be debated or rationally explained. It must be accepted on faith. 

     This stretches the meaning of “faith” beyond all limits. You can learn arithmetic and have faith in your ability to perform arithmetic calculations that you have never seen before. But how can you have faith in irrational doctrine and traditions that cannot be objectively confirmed through life events and which you must simply memorize? That does not demonstrate faith. That demonstrates obedience to what you have been taught and fear toward thinking differently. That is not developing faith. It is, rather, relenting to the propaganda of your own human heritage. There is a time for each of us to take on the responsibility for our personal spiritual thinking and development. When that moment occurs your journey of faith has truly begun. 

     My fundamentalist friends don’t seem to read the Bible to consider the accuracy or consistency of its contents. They simply assert there are no problems, no contradictions, then interpret the Bible however they wish. They continue to assert a lot of things, such as the inerrancy of the Bible, the need for literal interpretations including the stories of creation, heaven, hell, the devil, etc. which they accept ‘on faith.’ If fundamentalist Christian beliefs are considered the ‘orthodox’ beliefs for Christianity, then even Jesus could not qualify to be a Christian.

     Even though my Christian beliefs appear to contrast sharply from my fundamentalist friends, they are spiritual Truth to me. I have lived them by applying them to the practical activities of my life and they have always provided better answers than I could have ever discovered on my own. 

     When you turn the other cheek in real life, it totally changes what’s happening and what others expect, and different outcomes result. Approaching people of different cultures, races, sexual orientation, etc. with an attitude of complete acceptance changes the dynamics of such encounters in ways that can easily lead to the resolution of conflicts. Applying Jesus’ teachings to everyday activities just hasn't failed me. I’m hooked and cherish dearly what I have learned from His teachings and example. I am compelled to hold firm to my Christian beliefs until God leads me through life experiences to even higher understandings.

     I make only one demand of you, my fundamentalist friends. Just as I will always respect your right to practice apocalyptic Christianity as you understand it, (e.g. the teachings of Paul), I ask that you, also, respect my right to practice prophetic Christianity as I understand it (e.g. the teachings of Jesus). I must also thank you for prompting me to journey again through the Bible. It has meant more to me than you could ever imagine.