#Xtians deserve better and should demand better from the church

[unbidden-yidden]

In Judaism, one alternative way of referring to converts is "Jews by Choice."

If a parallel term exists in Xtianity I am not aware of it, but I would like to propose that it really should exist, albeit not just in reference to converts but to all Xtians. Every Xtian should get the opportunity to fully understand their faith in context and to make an informed decision to choose it for themselves. As it stands, many Xtians are deeply ignorant about Jewish history (before and after the formation of Xtianity), the original cultural context for the stories in the Old Testament, the cultural Jewish context that Jesus existed and taught in, the critical historical (scholarly) read of these texts, what they probably meant to the Israelites who produced them, and what they mean to Jews today and how we read these same texts differently in our religious context.

This creates a problem, where Xtians are taught only the narrow band of context that their church deems it important for them to know, and even that is frequently inaccurate or so limited in scope as to make it inaccurate by omission.

And this is because the reality is that the Tanakh (that is, the Hebrew and Aramaic scriptures that the Old Testament is based on) does not naturally or inevitably lead to the Jesus narrative. If you are starting from a Xtian perspective, and especially if you read the New Testament first and then and only then dive into the Old Testament, the Jesus narrative is obvious to you because you are looking for it, expect to see it there, and are coming at these texts with that reading lens in mind. And it's not that you or anyone else is nuts to see that narrative there - there are plenty of solid Xtian reads of these texts that make sense if you already believe in Jesus as presented by the New Testament.

But what the vast majority of Xtians aren't taught is how to approach the Tanakh from a Jesus-neutral perspective, which would yield very different results.

Now you might fairly ask, why would they *need* to approach the Tanakh with a Jesus-neutral perspective? They're Xtians! Xtians believe in Jesus, that's what makes them Xtians!

My answer is multi-pronged: First, I believe that G-d wants a relationship with all people, and speaks to us in the voice we are most likely to hear. That's inherently going to look different for everyone. And that's okay! G-d is infinite, and each of our relationships with G-d are going to only capture the tiniest glimpse into that infinite Divine. Therefore, second, when approaching religion, everyone sees what they want to see. If you nothing religion but find your spirituality in nature, you're going to come at these biblical texts with that lens and take away from them similar things that one might take away from other cultural mythologies. If you, like me, are coming at these texts with a Jewish mindset, you are going to come away with a portrait of Hashem and our covenantal relationship as Am Yisrael. And, of course, if you read with a Xtian lens, you're going to see the precursor narratives leading up to Jesus. That reading bias is not only understandable but good or at least deeply human. Everyone sees what they want to see in these texts. There is no objective or flawless way to read them, and to claim that there is, is to claim that not only is there only one answer, but only one kind of relationship that G-d wants to have with people, that you personally happen to know what that is, and that everyone else is wrong. I am sorry, but if you believe that - if you truly think that you in particular (and/or the people you happen to agree with) know the mind of G-d, then you do not worship G-d. You worship yourselves, because to know the entirety of G-d would require you to be G-d. There's a term for that. That doesn't mean there aren't wrong answers too. But it does mean that there is no singular unimpeachable reading of the texts. What you see in these texts then, says far more about you than it does about the texts themselves or G-d.

So the question then becomes: Why do you want to see this? (Whatever your "this" is.) If your read of these texts is something you choose, why do you choose to see what you see? And is it a meaningful choice if you are not taught other ways of knowing, other perspectives on these texts, and to think critically while exploring them?

Judaism inherently teaches a multiplicity of opinions on the texts, and maintains that they can be read to mean different things, even at the same time by the same person. Deep textual knowledge and methods for learning more, asking questions, challenging accepted answers as a way to discover new meaning, and respectful disagreement are baked into our culture and methods. Some Xtians of some denominations have analogous processes, although on the whole still emphasize correct unified belief over correct action with a multiplicity of belief. I am not suggesting here that Xtians stop approaching their own scriptures as Xtians or adopt Jewish methods instead. What I am suggesting is that Xtians should be taught a fuller picture of these texts and learn other perspectives so that they (1) understand their own beliefs and why they believe them (or after further inquiry if they believe them), and (2) understand and respect that this is what they are choosing to believe and that it is not the only thing one could reasonably believe. Because (3) if not, they are more susceptible to having their faith shattered at random by something unexpected, and will connect less to their faith as a relationship with G-d and more as an obligation based on an unchallenged world view.

And, frankly? (4) It will help them to be better neighbors, to love their neighbor as themselves, and to give to others the respect that they would like to receive.

Being taught the historical context, Jewish history before and after Jesus, the differences between the Old Testament and the Tanakh, the timeline of the development of Xtianity in relationship to rabbinic Judaism in the wake of the destruction of the Second Temple, the development of church doctrine and the various splits amongst the denominations, and Jewish readings of the Tanakh would give clarity and desperately needed context to Xtians about their religion. Is there some risk that some people, upon understanding these things would drop out of faith entirely or, like me, discover that they are actually meant to be Jews? Yes, definitely.

But let me let you in on a little secret: you don't want those people to begin with. You really don't. Because the reality is that if a person is not called to relate to G-d through Jesus, eventually that person will learn this about themselves one way or another. If they are given the information and tools to make a meaningful choice, they will part company on good terms. If not, they will likely become disillusioned and leave the church in pain, anger, and even trauma. They will bring that out into the world with them, and spread the bad news about the Good News making it even more likely that other people who were already on the fence will jump ship on bad terms. You cannot trick people into a meaningful relationship with G-d. You can only give them the tools they need in order to explore on their own and the rest is between them and G-d.

And the bottom line is that you don't need to and should not be afraid of knowledge. If your faith cannot stand up to scrutiny, then it deserves that scrutiny tenfold. The people you lose from the flock? You would have lost them anyway, because we aren't in the driver's seat here. G-d is. Hashem called me to be a Jew with just as much love and desire to connect as G-d calls Xtians to the church and to Jesus. A faith examined is a faith deepened or exposed in its weakness. And if it is the latter, don't you want people to know this sooner rather than later in order to fix it?

So my proposition and wish for Xtians is that they become Xtians by Choice. That they delve deeply into the origins and context of their faith so that they can be 100% certain that they understand their Xtian faith and why they choose to relate to G-d through that lens.

#every hour is theology hour around here apparently #interfaith #this is tochecha from an ex-Xtian ger #who desperately wants for my Xtian family friends and neighbors the level of peace and security in their faith that I now enjoy #the church is not doing its congregation any favors by under-educating them on these matters #Xtians deserve better and should demand better from the church #xtianity #anyway if I have any Xtian followers here who would like book suggestions lemme know

[quakerjoe]

A CUPPA JOE for 11 Dec. 2018

This was a response to some queries as to whether of not I believe... So, I thought I’d share it for one and all so you know where my mind and heart are at. ~Joe

It's one thing to believe in god, which I do not, and believe there IS a god or gods, which, if I am being honest here, cannot confirm or deny. I certainly cannot confirm that any of the ones we humans have adhered to over the course of history is the real deal. However, there's this one little tidbit that leads me to believe that it is at least POSSIBLE that there's something more to existence and that perhaps a deity IS out there, and that's this point: All around the world, from one culture to another, from one tribe of humans to the next, even though they could never have spoken to one another, there's always a similar form of religion that keeps popping up- a hierarchy of some form of ultimate deity of good and one of "evil"; opposing forces with one supreme being at the top, lesser gods of angels below, versus  an opponent (typically seen as evil) with devils or demons below it, and in the middle, there's us, mortal humans, and we're part of some sick game between the two.

So as to the question of whether or not I believe in the existence of these things... Perhaps people heard and saw more a long time ago when the world was more wild, yet more quiet. I find it POSSIBLE, to say the least. As for said deity's involvement with us... I'm highly skeptical that he/she'd give a shit, to be honest. If we're judged after we die, I find it hard to believe that those not dedicated to "the right religion" will be judged harshly if they were good people, and I doubt that those who followed the false prophets into dark places along dark, cruel paths while claiming to be righteous will be judged with love and tenderness and rewarded with paradise just because they showed up to church regularly and repeated the same weekly chants while being total dicks all the rest of the week. 

Marcus Aurelius is often accredited with these words:

“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”

IF we, as people, can stop being fooled into fighting one another over whose god's better than the other person's god, all while doing the deed of murder to satisfy the fearful and greedy overlords of society to enhance their wealth and status, then perhaps for an instant we can drop the insanity that's put upon us by religion and just simply... stop.

If we are kind, if we look out for one another, we don't NEED religion; we'll be accepted by the Almighty based upon our hearts, souls, and minds as well as by our actions, not our words. Judgement is to be based on genuine character, not dedication to an unprovable, probably false religion. It's all a long, fucked up game of 'telegraph'.

If I were to pick a patron saint (well, I have, honestly, just for fun, but it has a deep meaning) it would be St. Thomas or Doubting Thomas- the pioneer saint of Skeptics. He knew people could be deceived and he demanded proof that he was facing the genuine Jesus by inspecting his wounds before accepting the truth.

Lastly, as I know I'm dragging this out; apologies- imagine that you are a painter and you've got a gallery showing put together. People drop by, enjoy some wine and cheese, some say thanks, others meander about looking at your art and you get a lot of "Oh, that's pretty" and "Ooh, look at that!" sort of comments. But there's that one patron; the one interested in actually buying one of your paintings. He/she tells you why- taking note of the lighting you used, your brush strokes, your ability to put so much thought and emotion into your creation, and this patron really, REALLY appreciates your work. THAT is the person there that makes you feel the praise more than any other; the one who bothered to look closely and appreciate what went into it.

To me, that patron is the world's scientists. If we're the result of evolution OR design (or both) then we were given senses in which to observe and learn, and religion does NOT promote that sort of 'satanic', devil science stuff. It's why religious nuts END their journey towards enlightenment with religion instead of it being a launching point towards all sorts of enlightenment.

Imagine, if you can, just for a moment, that you're God. All day long, day in and day out, all you get are the repetitive prayers from Catholics and Jews and Muslims... Nothing heart felt; just redundant recitals of utter nothingness. Under all that droning you get prayers outright begging you for something; a life spared, a lotto win, some sort of rescue from despair... Never ending.

But under all that is the humble; the penitent one who asks for genuine forgiveness for some deed or other, all while giving thanks by letting you know he/she took note of your work through science; the discovery of something microscopic, something in biology or astrophysics or meteorology etc. and so on. THAT is, to me, the truest, most dedicated worshiper and the most deserving of paradise. He/she doesn't blame devils or what not for misdeeds but takes full responsibility for his/her actions.

THAT, is how I'd imagine a god of love and compassion to be, if there is one, and to admit, especially as I grow older, that with the more I learn, the more I realize that I don't know, and no longer wield the confidence of youth so much as wield the heavy weights of skepticism while I keep watch on what's unfurling today in world history. I know a false prophet when I see/hear it, unlike in my youth when I was on a quest of religion hopping to find enlightenment rather than just letting enlightenment find ME. It's out there; it's a wonderful feeling, and to just admit certain things and let them go, is most liberating and enlightening. I reject the Abrahamic religions. They're all politics and a lot of made up shit meant to keep control over people. But like I mentioned a while back; there ARE good lessons to be learned from the 'holy scriptures'; for instance, the Beatitudes.

Also, admitting there are OTHER sources of good life lessons from other sources is not a bad or satanic thing; that's all bollocks and scapegoating things on Satan is juvenile. In the Torah, there isn't a Satan or even a Hell; that's all a Xtian invention to keep people in line through FEAR of damnation and not something to be expected from a so-called god of love and peace. That's hostage taking. I mean, honestly, if I die and somehow find myself in Heaven where I'm supposed to spend eternity in happy bliss, yet my children and loved ones are sent to Hell, how am I supposed to be happy when I'm helpless to help them and relieve them of their suffering in some pit of fire where they'll burn alive for eternity and be tortured by demons?

Anyway... that about sums it up for now. If you wish to keep chatting about this, I'm all for it, but send a private message so this doesn't get lost in the feed, eh? Peace.