Trying to be a Christian

Here’s a comment on an old thread, so I’m going to post it here:

By Cameron on The Last Enemy on 2/6/11

        

He said "started" the cracks, not being the sole cause of the cracks.

The precipitating cause of his apostasy was emotional rather than rational. That’s what he said.

Your belief is your belief, our opinion is that it is *probably* erroneous. Most atheists will concede at every stage the possibility of being wrong.

Of course, that’s just a throwaway concession, the purpose of which is to ease the burden of proof on the atheist. He can append that disclaimer to whatever he says. But it has no practical effect.

I used to be a Christian. And generally not the hypocritic sort. I genuinely tried to be an upright Christian, not that I didn't have my flaws according to the teachings.

That’s a stereotypical phrase I often encounter among apostates: “I tried to be a Christian, but…”

i) That’s a revealing approach to Christianity. 2011 will mark my 35^th year as a Christian. But in all that time I can’t say I ever “tried” to be a Christian. Honestly, it’s never occurred to me to “try” to be a Christian. I don't know how I'd even try to try to be a Christian. 

For me, that’s like trying to be American, or trying to be male. I’m psychologically Christian, just as I’m psychologically American, or psychologically male. It’s not something I must try to be, like practicing a role in a play.

If I moved to France or Italy, I’d still be psychologically American. That’s because I was born here. Born to American parents. Attended American schools. Grew up watching American TV shows and movies. Had American neighbors and relatives. That’s my formative experience.

Likewise, the walk of faith is a formative experience, with its own lifecycle. It’s own developmental stages. God shapes us by his grace and providence.

ii) Of course, there are certain things a Christian is supposed to work on. Like self-examination. Bible study. Besetting sins.

But that’s a part of being Christian, not trying to be Christian.

iii) There are times in life when it may be harder to be a Christian than others. But that’s not because Christianity is harder at those times. That’s not because Christianity made it harder. Rather, that’s because life can be harder at one time or another.

It’s not more difficult because you happen to be a Christian. Rather, you happen to be a Christian who’s encountering the difficulties of life. Christian faith generally makes it easier to cope with life’s trials.

iv) An exception is if you have a faulty theology that fosters false expectations. That generates cognitive dissonance.

Ultimately, however, I kept hitting contradictions in the text. I was left with a choice, to either reconcile the contradictions, or abandon the faith. I tried to reconcile the contradictions using as many translations (and a Strong's concordance (I personally lacked the desire for a degree in theology though I considered the possibility). In the end I found the amount of work I was doing to patch over the Bible's teachings, to make them more ethical, was a waste of time…

Well, that’s all rather vague:

i) In my observation, folks perceive lots of contradictions in the Bible because they don’t acquaint themselves with the compositional techniques of the Bible writers. They seem to think that a true historical account should read just like a security camera which records every single thing that happens, in the order that it happens, from a single viewpoint.

But Bible writers have various plot devices which they use in arranging the material to make it more readable, comprehensible, and insightful.

There are some good introductory works on this issue, like How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart; Words of Delight: A Literary Introduction to the Bible, by Leland Ryken, and The Art of Biblical History, by V. Philips Long.

There are also good treatments of Bible “contradictions,” like The Historical Reliability of Gospels (2^nd ed.), by Craig Blomberg, and Interpreting Puzzling Texts in the New Testament, by Robert Stein.

ii) I’m not clear on how making Bible teachings “more ethical” is relevant to the charge of “contradictions.” If you’re alluding to OT ethics, there are some excellent monographs on that subject, such as Story as Torah: Reading Old Testament Narrative Ethically, by Gordon Wenham, and Old Testament Ethics for the People of God, by Christopher Wright.

iii) A writer leaves a lot unsaid. He relies on a common cultural tradition which he shares with his audience. For instance, I’ve never read a book on the SF genre. Yet when I watch a SF film or TV drama, I understand what I’m seeing. And that’s because I grew up with SF films and movies. I learned the SF conventions by cultural osmosis.

But imagine transporting someone from the 16C to the 21C, then sitting him down to watch an SF movie. He’d find so many things unintelligible.

Indeed, a director will often play on the difference between the knowledge of the audience and the knowledge of the characters to generate suspense. Take a horror film involving vampires or werewolves. The audience knows the conventions. The director doesn’t have to name or explain these creatures for the benefit of the audience.

So the audience knows what’s taking place before the clueless townfolk do. They see a small town being overrun by vampires or werewolves, while the mayor, the sheriff, and the other residents are dumbfounded. Blindsided.

And that generates suspense. Will the townfolk figure out what’s going on in time to halt the infestation? Or will they be overtaking by events? Will they discover the truth after it’s too late to fight back? When they are now outnumbered?

But if a filmgoer didn’t know the conventions, he’d be in the same condition as the hapless, clueless characters.

It’s surprising how much of the Bible we can understand without any preparation. At the same time, we must make allowance for the fact that Scripture was written to an audience with a different background than you and me. An audience with the same referential universe as the author. That’s something a Bible writer could take for granted. But at our distance, you and I may have to work at it. And that’s only to be expected.

iv) In the accidental universe of atheism, life itself is a monumental waste of time. But you can never waste time investing your time in the Bible. 

…and that I should instead try and work out my own standards of morality, which are actually very close to what they were as a Christian, although there are some areas I've loosened up on.

Well, the nice thing about working out my own standards of morality is the way my standards adjust to my proclivities.

Now, does that mean I do not continue to treasure some of the Bible? Hardly so. Some passages are very moving, although most of it isn't. Much of it is, frankly, barbaric.

Barbaric because it’s realistic. The Bible isn’t a Hallmark movie with beautiful people, cute kids, watered lawns, adorable pets, and a happy ending for all concerned.

As far as death, when it occurs, it occurs. I don't pretend that I won't be scared when it becomes close. To be such is to be human. It is a natural thing, and you shouldn't be ashamed to be scared of death in any way.

I appreciate your candor.

Hitchens IMHO pretty much tells it like it is. He doesn't sugarcoat things. And that in my view is exactly how it should be.

Well, you just said much of the Bible is frankly barbaric. Do you think the Bible should sugarcoat real life?

I hope he recovers.

I hope he repents.