On Moderate Christianity
I must confess, I find it easier to understand fundamentalists than moderate believers, at least as far as Christians are concerned.
When it comes to the Bible, if you’re a Christian, you can take the viewpoint that all of it is literal truth, or that all of it is made up, or any point in between.
The idea that all of it is literal truth is, of course, ridiculous. There are plenty of internal inconsistencies in the Bible, starting right there in Genesis, with the two different creation stories, and only getting worse from there on.
So even most fundamentalists try to soften their stance a bit. Many of them will say that even though the Bible is the inspired word of God, it’s written by humans, and humans make mistakes. Even though the creation essentially happened as described in Genesis, both accounts were written from different points of view and mess up some of the details. Maybe words don’t mean what they usually mean, and a day of creation actually means a million years. And so on.
Fine. You can explain away the various inconsistencies like that, if intellectual honesty isn’t your main objective. At least the story as a whole is kind of coherent.
On the other end of the spectrum, you have the people who believe the Bible is entirely fabricated; all of it made-up symbolic stories meant to convey the message of Christianity rather than historical facts.
This point of view kind of makes sense as well, as long as you’re careful not to define the “message of Christianity”. If you leave it sufficiently vague, it works. Robert M. Price, who was in Flemming’s The God Who Wasn’t There, explained that this was the type of Christian he was: he didn’t believe the Bible was at all factual, but just saw it as fascinating stories.
And somewhere in between, you have everyone else. These people describe themselves (and are described by non-fundamentalists) as “moderate” Christians. They aren’t creationists, and they don’t necessarily believe in things like the Burning Bush or the Ten Commandments physically being given to Moses, but almost all of them will agree: Jesus was the son of God, sent to Earth to die for our sins. Most of them will believe in the Resurrection as well, though where they stand on the various other miracles varies.
How does this make sense, though?
Even ignoring the fact that sending your (sorry, Your) son to die (but not really) because of arbitrary rules you (You) made up and are in total control of, and then demanding people regard that as a huge sacrifice, is a ridiculous thing to do (but God moves in mysterious ways, obviously), the sin Jesus was sent to die for was the Original Sin—the Garden of Eden snake-and-apple affair.
If Genesis was symbolic, why did Jesus have to die? For a symbolic sin never committed by two people who were completely made up? Does that make sense?
Or was the line of reasoning given for that symbolic as well? Was Jesus really just sent to get our attention and keep people on their toes?
If so, he violates every single prophecy about the Messiah in the Old Testament (not that he doesn’t anyway), which would make God a liar. Which, of course, violates the Ten Commandments. Can he break his own rules? If so, why bother sending your own son down to suffer? I mean, we know he’s cruel (and jealous; he’s both said and demonstrated these things amply in the OT), but isn’t it kind of counterproductive to claim to start a New Covenant and then demonstrate you’re really just the capricious old git you’ve always been?
Or was Jesus really sent to Earth by Satan, to confuse people?
Things actually fall into place much more neatly when you look at it like this.
So, in conclusion, if the God of the Bible is real, Jews have it right and moderate Christians are Satanists, or fundamentalist Christians are right and Jews are evil for not recognising the huge (but still completely arbitrary) sacrifice God made for us.
Either way, “moderate” Christianity seems to be incoherent.
speedwell said,
February 11th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
Koen, I was a moderate Christian, but I’ve been an atheist for about four years. I don’t have anything to hide about how I thought and felt in either case. If you have questions you’d like to ask someone who remembers how she thought and felt as a Christian, but has no impulse whatsoever to sugar-coat it or attempt to convert you, please feel free to e-mail me. You’ll be helping me too; I have really never had a chance to think through my deconversion with the help of people who are themselves good clear thinkers.
Coren said,
February 11th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
I was just wondering, if you ask these “moderate” Christians if they truly objectively think Jesus was born from a virgin, that he walked on water and stood up from the dead, don’t you think they’ll admit that it’s probably not factual but mostly symbolic?
I’d say it’s possible to “believe” in something while still knowing that what you believe isn’t entirely factual. The way I see it, once you believe something so bad you won’t even consider the facts, you’re already in the fundamentalist camp.
I’d like to believe most moderate Christians (at least fairly well-educated European Christians) realize that their faith is based on something non-factual, but they don’t care because they find comfort in their god or because they agree with the Christian values.
Also, pointing out incoherences, contradictions or outdated morality in the Bible won’t help with moderate Christians, because they know that the Bible isn’t the literal word of God and that it has to be read in context to be of any value. The Bible was written by humans a few millennia ago, and these people had their own culture and their own human weaknesses. The fact that some fragments of the Bible are outdated doesn’t mean it’s become entirely pointless. The Big Christian Values are still there.
Of course, I’m not trying to say that being a Christian is a good idea after all. You don’t need a god or an old book to believe in kindness and love or whatever. Just drop the stories and believe in life.
Cairnarvon said,
February 12th, 2007 at 6:15 am
I don’t doubt that the only reason moderate Christians are Christians at all (on the whole) is because they never really examine their beliefs, and because of peer pressure.
I can’t really do anything about the second thing, but it’s at least worth pointing out inconsistencies in their position so as to change the first thing. Most people really seem to just don’t examine their beliefs at all.
Even if it wouldn’t have a 100% success rate, if it gets one person to stop and think it will have been worth the effort of writing the post. Which is something you seem to keep forgetting, Coren. >.>
Coren said,
February 12th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
I wasn’t saying your post was useless. If it had been uninteresting I wouldn’t have commented at all, probably. I just wanted to put down my thoughts upon reading it. No attack or “destructive” criticism intended, just wanted to continue the discussion~
Cairnarvon said,
February 12th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
I know, sorry if I seemed harsh.
The thing really is, though, that most moderate Christians just aren’t aware of the contradictions in their own doctrines (even if they do know of them; they just don’t connect the dots), and definitely don’t have the historical background to assess anything in context. They get by by not examining their beliefs at all, they just assume everything works out.
More often than not, if someone does call them on their bullshit they use “you have to look at it in context” as a way to stop the conversation and not think about it anymore.
And even when they recognise their Bible is fundamentally flawed, they do indeed say things like “The fact that some fragments of the Bible are outdated doesn’t mean it’s become entirely pointless. The Big Christian Values are still there.”
The problem is, they have no idea whatsoever what these values are.
Protip: they don’t include loving your fellow man (unless he happens to be Jewish and queer for Jesus).
Cairnarvon said,
February 12th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
(I do mean “moderate Christian” primarily in the American sense, though you really would be surprised how many American-level Christians there are in Belgium; the difference is that religion in anything but the vaguest sense is regarded as an absolutely private matter here, to the level of a taboo.)
King Aardvark said,
February 15th, 2007 at 7:56 pm
One other reason that moderate Christians remain Christian is that they like the fluffy message given to them in their fluffy versions of Christianity. A lot of them really feel like they’ve felt God’s presense and love (I personally have no idea how; I think they’re all nuts). Maybe they’ve turned their brains off and just absorbed the funky vibes of being surrounded by singing zombies in church, but they feel a connection.
Of course, that many people from all religions feel like, or that the feeling can be reproduced by drugs or scientists in a lab doesn’t bother them in the slightest. It’s a “personal thing,” they claim, yet they are sure that they are right and that others are wrong. That’s lack of examination of beliefs, there.
Cairnarvon said,
February 15th, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Yeah. Cognitive dissonance is a way of life to many people.