Why I'm Not a Christian; or Faith, Rationality, and their Intersection

[da]

dpolicar recently wanted to say he respects religious people who value rational thought and intelligence (as opposed to the religious for whom rationality is irrelevant). My initial reaction was honestly more guarded and negative than it should've been, since I generally just agree with that sentiment.

But I needed to rail against hypocrites who claim to be rational but don't question the irrational aspects of their faiths. This is certainly self-serving, because lots of sorts of religious irrationality is, I think, bad for this world. I don't believe in heaven, so behaving irrationally in this world to preserve one's place in the afterlife is an argument that doesn't hold any truck with me. Further, I think I can state that I will actively work against irrational religious behaviour that damages our world for the sake of the Hereafter.

If you like, such are dead-end memes that should doom their carriers. I hope they can do so without bringing down the rest of human civilization. Looking at certain aspects of the US right now, I can't help but feeling doubtful.

So: here are a few religious beliefs which I think Christians cannot hold and still be considered rational:

• creationism- is an easy one; specifically, any timeline that says evolution is impossible
  
• transubstantiation (see my comment below)
  
• inerrancy of the Bible regarding such topics as slavery, subservience of women
  

...and possibly the most frustrating for me personally:

• Christian behaviour that completely discounts the Sermon on the Mount, in favour of relying on considering oneself "saved" through ones faith. In my view, Christianity carries much more responsibility than going to church, tithing, and possibly convincing others to consider themselves "saved"; the most rational part of Jesus' message is his instructions for how to live in this world as a necessary precondition for salvation. Any Christian who is not a peacemaker, who doesn't thirst for justice, who doesn't work toward being a light for the world, who doesn't actively love their enemies, who doesn't acutely listen for the will of God in his or her life... is missing the point. And missing what I think Jesus was mostly calling for his followers to do.
  

My faith does not have any creedal statements, but it comes out of a Christian tradition, and much of the tradition of early Christians does resonate strongly with me- which is possibly why I'm most irritated by irrational Christian behaviours.

But, you're saying, faith is by nature irrational. How can you be rational and have faith?

I've seen a lot of the powerful good that faith can do- faith in God can overcome certain failure (as one takes single steps forward, each on faith, and relying on God to know where the path will go); faith can crystallize thought around an intracable problem so that the solution becomes blindingly obvious; it can be the only thing a person has left to go on, and that can be enough.

I don't think faith in God requires one to toss away rationality. I believe God wants us to live love, in this world. Maybe that's heaven. The clearest explanations I've read for how faith can and should work, have come out of a Christian tradition.

However, since I fundimentally have no faith in Heaven, I don't see much point in calling myself Christian. I can follow the examples patterned in the Bible; I can call myself a Friend of the Truth; but that's about as far as you'll find me going. And I think that's OK.

Comments

[thomb.livejournal.com]

So as I said in that other thread, I'm on your side about three of those four points. As for transubstantiation, it might be bad Christianity, but if your not a Christian, then it's a little weird to say so.

Just as I can't take sides in the Theravada/Mahayana divide, or the orthodox/reform Jewish divide, it seems weird for a non-Christian try and take sides about something which is essentially entirely internal to the religion. If you aren't a Christian, then why take sides about that issue?

[melted-snowball.livejournal.com]

(Of course, I don't speak for my beloved, and I don't know if he'll respond himself. It's just that in this area, even though I don't think we agree fully, I still feel that I can say what I have to say as well.)

One tension is that since we liberal Friends fall in a weird relationship with Christianity, we sort of wind up with some of your controversies on our plate regardless of whether we want them, though I wouldn't say that the meaning of the Eucharist falls in that range.

On the other hand, I'd really like to push this in a completely different direction, if you're willing.

When you take Communion, what do you experience? What is the meaning of this sacrament in your life? (And yes, I'm genuinely curious. I've been disappointed by the answers I get to this question, typically.)

[thomb.livejournal.com]

I think it's a little weird, from my perspective, to focus on "what do I experience". The answer is, well, different things at different times. My heart will be strangely warmed, or the fellowship of the event will be paramount. Or sometimes there might be no particular "feeling" associated. But it isn't about getting some feeling or special spiritual oomph; those are only the icing on the cake. Heck, take Thanksgiving (which is, after all, what "Eucharist" means). Such a meal has a million meanings, all balled up together, and it's weirdly reductionistic to ask "so what exactly do you get out of that holiday meal?"

The Eucharist is spiritual nourishment; it's food for the soul. It's Christ giving himself for me in a tangible form, not contingent on my imagining. It's a renewal of my baptism, at which I claim and am claimed by Christ. It's effects (like those of food) are not just confined to the moment of eating.

[melted-snowball.livejournal.com]

I think it's a little weird, from my perspective, to focus on "what do I experience".

Well, that's the reason why I expanded the question to what its meaning in your life was. On the other hand, asking someone "why do you really love Thanksgiving" is a perfectly reasonable question, no?

Typically, when I've asked this question, I've gotten variations on "it's just what I do", or "I don't know", which are quite disappointing. Thank you for not doing so.

[da-lj.livejournal.com]

Sorry, juggling projects a bit today so time is short, but I'll add a bit here quickly.

Upon reflection, I've struck transubstantation from the list of things that I think are irreconcilably irrational. I didn't mean to offend anybody's faith by writing it.

The point was to get at substantial issues that I think rational people should be able to agree to a common foundation on, and I don't see that kind of issue here.

Like d, I'm also curious about what the experience of communion actually means, though.

...and now it's back to work for me!