So--it's probably important for me to note that I don't regularly attend church. My wife does and loves it, and the kids go with her--though as they turn 18, it will be up to them whether they continue. I'll go on Christmas and other days when Julie feels it is important to her for me to be there.
This amuses Joe--not that I don't go, but that even though I do not go, I'm happy to learn about religion(s), compare them, or take their ideals and apply them to my own personal moral and spiritual growth. Now, Joe knows me well enough to know that I really do think about these things--and that I'm always asking questions....so now it's time to get to the point.
I ask questions. There are few things I accept in life on face value. Religion is one of those things, especially in the context of American politics. Have you ever wondered:
*How many so-called Christians have ever read the Bible? --I don't mean the ability to quote a verse here or there, but actually read it, taking everything in its proper context?
*I don't understand the belief that the Bible is God's direct word. For Islam, I understand it is Mohammad's text directly--because Muslims don't accept translations as authentic. To read the Koran, you have to read it in Arabic. But think of that assertion in terms of Americans and the Bible: They are reading it in one of multiple versions--New Standard, King James, Living English...there are 30+ versions available and none exactly the same. But it goes deeper...the English versions come from the French which come from Luther's German translation that he took from the Catholic Latin Bible which was itself a translation of Greek taken sometimes from Aramaic. So how can you accept what is in the Bible as the LITERAL direct Word? Frankly, that's silly. Does it detract from the lessons within? Absolutely not.
*Besides, if it is all the word of God--there's another problem. You've got the Old Testament and the New Testament and the New replaces the Old, at the least, it changes things, including 'God's attitude' towards Man. Now, if the Almighty is a perfect Being and his Word is perfect, too--then there is something wrong because a perfect being would not need to change his views and actions. Change in that regard means imperfection, thus if the two Testaments are the direct word of God (as is), then God cannot be perfect. If God is not perfect, he is not actually the Almighty. If God IS perfect (and in any definition of the Almighty--whether Muslim or Christian, etc), he is--then He is incapable of error, thus negating the idea that the Old and New Testaments are his direct word. (For a really good book about the creation of the Bible within the English language, check out God's Secretaries)
*Ultimately, I find religious fundamentalism to go directly against what the Creator has given as humanity's greatest gift. Man has been blessed (or cursed, I suppose) with free will, the ability to think and do what he wishes. Unfortunately, the whole concept of the Bible being literal and that we must do EXACTLY as it says, that I can not read it and disagree or find it lacking and needing amplification, negates the concept of free will. If I must believe in a very specific, exact fashion, where is the free will? Yes, you can argue I have the choice to believe or not believe, but if everything else must be a certain way (usually the way of that 'believer' conveniently), that is not free will.
It is my responsibility to question things if I am going to have the gift of free will. I should consider the stories of the Bible--which are metaphors, which represent historical truth. Who is the original audience for the story, given that literacy was limited for much of history? Heck--how many people realize that there were gatherings of leaders to determine which texts should/shouldn't be included in the Bible in the first place. Worry over that isn't a new thing. It influenced Luther in his translation and decision of what to put into a 'common' Bible.
The thing is--too many people don't want to think. For being true believers, they prefer to accept someone else's assertions--what my minister says has to be true, I mean he's a minister, right? Doesn't that go against the use of free will, the use of my independent ability to think? I'd argue, too--that doesn't seem to be the intent of Jesus either. The Bible notes--anywhere you get 2+ believers, he's at it. It also notes that prayer should be done in private, not in groups.... Think about that. The premise of modern Christianity is going to church on Sundays with a trend towards 'mega-churches' which feature big screen TVs, rock bands, and prosperity ideology and in their rush to be seen as "Christian", they miss some important points of theology....
- If Christianity is monotheistic, why does Catholic ideology maintain God is a Trinity?
- Why could men 400 years after Jesus take a vote on what was/wasn't 'truth' and necessary for a New Testament?
- Why was it bad for the Roman Church to be exclusive, keeping services in Latin, and thus keeping power in the hands of the priesthood, yet Americans do not object to the presumed 'expertness' of priests/ministers? Isn't that the exact same thing, and how does it relate to 2+ believer = Jesus is present...no church required?
Look--I don't have answers. Ultimately, we can't know the answers and I know that, but
by goodness, I'm going to ask and think. It just always seems suspicious that ministers/priests drive nice cars, eat nice food, and with many in the US (and Africa and S.America, too) have large mansions or even private jets. And that doesn't seem right.
Realistically, I think the problem comes because people WANT answers, but rather than think about them, read the books in question, discuss these issues--they take the easy route and immediately trust their minister's answer. "Hey, he's a minister so he JUST HAS to be right." Right? Believe the expert, do what he says. So maybe the problem isn't that people want answers--maybe it's they want answers but don't want to put the thought-equity into it...just like most temporal issues, too.
* * *
It reminds me of a story about a former student. At my former employer (conveniently, a Catholic school that ignores the New Testament in its behavior...), they had a religious retreat called KAIROS for boys (girls had one also, a separate trip) that was a wonderful experience for the adults and attending seniors (funny...you know, Father Leo never attended--he always has Mrs. Koester or Father Tom run things...of course, he always had time to go on the girls retreat....)
Ok--sorry to rant. Anyways, on KAIROS, the students are confronted with silence, anywhere from thirty to ninety minutes. And it IS silent, the only noise being someone adjusting positions in a seat or a sigh of breath. Every one of those boys was uncomfortable in that silence. They didn't like being alone with their thoughts, didn't like HAVING TO THINK.
One of those though--a young man named Cory--thought about it, and after that point, made sure to find time for silence every day, a moment of reflection, a moment where he would be alone to pray, a moment of silence. Coincidence or not, he's turned into a good man, a good father and husband, and he's going back to school, making a commitment to become a teacher to share his values with the next generation (needless to say, I'm ALMOST as proud of him as I am of my own children)....
Do you take time for silence? Do you meditate or reflect? Are you comfortable in silence? Try it--it will be uncomfortable at first, but once you have practiced, it's a wonderful feeling. The more you think, the more you use God's greatest gift--and everyone loves seeing gifts used by those who receive them!
No comments:
Post a Comment