Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Temple >

A New Christianity

03:46 / 14.01.02

Just finished reading John Shelby Spong's latest book and was curious to know if anyone else had any opinions on his rally call for a Christianity free of literalism and heavy-handed theism. I read his "Why Christianity Must Change or Die" a few years ago and am glad that he's now bravely taking to task the symptoms of a dying faith that he did in that book with this one.

There are times his New Christianity of the Christ-Experience sounds a little too much like a Judeo-Christian Buddhism. God is Love. Christ the agent of that Love personified, proving that barriers of non-compassion and tribalism could be crossed, etc, etc. It's not mindblowingly new in interpretation, mind you.

But it's a great argument for post-modern Christianity for a world in which the old providential Yahweh is completely unemployed and for Christians and believers-in-exile who are sick of the old imperial way of looking at Christ. If I hear one more "Christ died for your sins" slogan, I'm gonna sock somebody in the nose.

It's just long overdue that an informed Christian perspective was used to justify radically reinterpreting Christ for a modern age. And he does it well.

A very brave book and I'm sure he's probably already taking it on the chin from the literalist Christian journalists and Rolls-Royce driving evangelists.

Opinions? Statements? Dirty jokes? Anybody else read this?

[ 14-01-2002: Message edited by: Dekapot Mass ]

13:37 / 14.01.02

Nobody?

Regrettable Juvenilia

13:38 / 14.01.02

I've not read the book, but it does sound interesting: I bet you'd get some replies if this thread was moved into the Magick forum...

17:41 / 14.01.02

Can you quote a couple passages?

18:01 / 14.01.02

quote: If life is holy and if love creates and enhances life, then love is also holy. So I am led to suggest that love and God cannot be seperated and that to share love is nothing less than sharing God. For one to abide in love is to abide in God, for one to give love away is to give God away.

quote: What human life needs is not a divine rescue. What we need is rather a life so open, so free, so whole, and so loving that when we experience that life, we are called into the reality of love. We are opened to source of love and enter the empowering prescence of love. I call that love God. I see in Jesus of Nazareth, and I find myself called into a new being, a boundary-free humanity, and made whole in its prescence. So God was in Christ, I say. And Jesus thus reveals the source of love, and then he calls us to enter it.

quote: Jesus will become the doorway into the holy for those of us who have been privileged to know his name, but there will be other doorways for other people. The God who is the Ground of Being cannot be bound, not even by our religious claims. Once that is understood, then it becomes apparent that none of us should denigrate the doorways through which others journey in their quest to enter the holy God.

His 'A Call For A New Reformation' has got to be the ballsiest challenge to Christianity's stodgy old beliefs since the church was even begun.

18:06 / 14.01.02

For those who may not be familiar w/ Spong, he's not some random guy out of the wilderness, but the Episcopalean Bishop of Newark.

19:43 / 14.01.02

I haven't read any of his stuff but I certainly will now. Sounds intriguing.

15:33 / 15.01.02

Spong sounds *really* familiar. I'm sure he's been cited as a hallmark of the 70s or something.

The book sounds really interesting, though.

06:48 / 16.01.02

Just about to move this over...

Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero

17:47 / 16.01.02

So far I'm digging his ideas. I just heard that the Pope decided that Southern Baptists no longer recieve the light of Christ after they refused to pray with Catholics after 9/11. I grew up Catholic, so I kinda feel guily about this. My last roomate was southern baptist, and he saved my ass...

18:16 / 16.01.02

Well, I haven't read him, but so far my opinion seems to be about the same. That is, if you strip away all the Dogma and patriarchy, Christianity as a path of spirituality has really one main lesson to teach: Love. Just like Buddhism has the lesson of peace to offer. Its an idea so simple its lost on most, it seems. When you strip away the support structure of the religion, that's the message that's left.

09:18 / 17.01.02

Agreed. I still don't understand the clinging to the Mosaic laws that Christianity still fights tooth and nail to do. And Spong asks that question repeatedly. Why has a religion, that's founder defied those old divine dictates, still pick and choose adherence to those dictates to reinforce their own bigotry? (Ever read the tail-end of Leviticus? God has a major disclaimer about not following ALL his laws in that chapter. All of them or the wrath of God sort of stuff. And Leviticus is ALWAYS where the evangelists turn to supplement their homophobic leanings)

Christ was said to negate all of them in favor of the new law, which was basically 'Love thy neighbor'. Anything else is utter overcomplication and is just going to bring the house down on top of itself.

09:22 / 17.01.02

quote:Originally posted by Johnny the Zen bastard:
So far I'm digging his ideas. I just heard that the Pope decided that Southern Baptists no longer recieve the light of Christ after they refused to pray with Catholics after 9/11.

Southern Baptists are unabashedly obnoxious but I don't what's worse.. their elitism or the elitism of other sects of Christianity that get snubbed by them.

<foot stomping Pope> I'm taking my blessings and my light of Christ and going home!! You guys don't play fair!!</foot stomping Pope> Why can't religion be more adult than a playground sandbox?

09:22 / 17.01.02

From what I've read here, I'm in agreement with the spirit of the book. Christianity is a hell of a lot more fun and real when you remove the religious elements and mindless traditions. But then, that's what the Charismatics have been doing for ages (to varying degrees from church to church). The book does sound like a good read - I'll look out for it.

09:22 / 17.01.02

On the most fundamental level, I feel like I disagree with most of what Bishop Spong says. On another level, I agree with everything he says, except possibly the separation of God and love business.

What is this theistic definition of God? It seems a logical contradiction to have any other kind. I'm sure it isn't, but I don't know what he means.

16:27 / 17.01.02

quote:Originally posted by Dekapot Mass:

Christ was said to negate all of them in favor of the new law, which was basically 'Love thy neighbor'. Anything else is utter overcomplication and is just going to bring the house down on top of itself.

Was he? Someone probably should have told him, then.

Matthew 5:17 - "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them."

Matthew 5:18-19 - "For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven"

Of course, not being a Christian myself, the whole debate affects me about as much as a debate about tax reform in New Guinea. Interesting only in an academic sense, and that only because I'm a pedantic bastard.

16:57 / 17.01.02

I did some searches. Matthew, Mark and Luke all agree: Jesus says these are the most important commandments, upon whihc all other laws are written. He doesn't say at any time they override the old laws that I could find.

His general attitide is a bit more rebellous in Thomas, though.

17:07 / 17.01.02

One of the other writers here at Sun instantly recognized Spong as "that guy who said St. Paul was gay."

So go figure.

20:37 / 17.01.02

The bit I read of Spong from promotes love and tolerance above all else - good stuffto me.
Saloway notes:
"He admits to having difficulty with prayer.
What emerges from Spong's labored quest is a stripped-down belief system centred on the luminous example of Christ's exemplary life and a vague, undefined commitment to the limitless nature of human existence. To many, this will seem thin gruel, indeed."
The prayer part is scary. A bishop?
I dunno if Spong is too far off base, Grant.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Paul wrote on the wages of adultery (having sex w/ anyone not your wife) and scolded a few early churches on their lax attitude about this...
While he spent the last 30 years of his life in prison, after never being married?
His right forearm probably was twice the size of his left forearm.

13:08 / 18.01.02

A new christianity? Its all good with me as long as we have Buddy Christ running the show!

13:44 / 18.01.02

Aw yea. My Buddy Christ looks over me at work, standing in front of my Sendmail book.

16:01 / 18.01.02

quote:Originally posted by FatherDog:

Matthew 5:17 - "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them."

Matthew 5:18-19 - "For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven"

And yet here was an ordained Jew who consorted with lepers, tax collectors and prostitutes, all of which was forbidden under Jewish law/ religious norms/ ritual purity. He defiled himself by their laws simply to prove that human heart was more important than stringent adherence to law. So, already he's a lawbreaker/ blasphemer of major proportions. The fact that he transgressed the law and said God found no issue with it fundamentally negated Mosaic law.

Couple that with his statements in Mark 12: 28-31 and you have a guy who didn't really stick to the Mosaic laws, who found that love for others was more important than not approaching the altar if you had glaucoma, etc (Leviticus again). And the laws stated that God wasn't the least bit liberal on this (Leviticus 27: 14-46 being my favorite of the Yahweh saber-rattling) Thus the bone of contention between he and the ecclesiastical powers-that-were. The literalism and disregard for humanity was the core of his rant about the Pharisees in Matthew 23.

And that's the screwy irony that I find in literal Christianity. And Spong does an effective job of nailing it between the eyes.

17:52 / 18.01.02

quote:Originally posted by Dekapot Mass:
The fact that he transgressed the law and said God found no issue with it fundamentally negated Mosaic law.

....unless, of course, you simply say that Jesus is God, and God is not bound by the laws he sets for men. For instance, Thou Shalt Not Kill, but God does so pretty damn frequently.

Which makes more sense than "He broke Mosaic law so it's fundamentally negated, even though he says specifically that it's not."

18:41 / 18.01.02

quote:Originally posted by FatherDog:

....unless, of course, you simply say that Jesus is God, and God is not bound by the laws he sets for men. For instance, Thou Shalt Not Kill, but God does so pretty damn frequently.

He's also a mean drunk, they say.

19:49 / 18.01.02

quote:Tom Waits croons:
Don'tcha know there ain't no devil, there's just God when he's drunk.

00:19 / 19.01.02

quote:Originally posted by FatherDog:
...Which makes more sense than "He broke Mosaic law so it's fundamentally negated, even though he says specifically that it's not."

Not to me.

Can someone tell me what Spong means by a non-theistic definition of God?

01:08 / 19.01.02

I would be hazarding a guess here, but it would seem to be refering to a Christ who is not god/the son of god/at all divine, but instead just a really nice person, like Buddha.

Which, you know, would seem to defeat the point of Christianity, as I purport to understand it, religion being the worship of a divine being. But then, perhaps my definition of religion is a bit archaic. I don't pay a lot of attention to that sort of thing.

06:00 / 19.01.02

I really should be getting plug checks from the bishop.

quote: If theism dies, is atheism the only alternative? Is it not a possibility worth pursuing that our very self-consciousness might be the means by which our lives could be opened to nontheistic dimensions of our existence, even nontheistic definitions of God?

quote: If our understanding of God has been couched in the language of "a being, supernatural in power, dwelling outside this world and invading the world periodically to accomplish the divine will" then perhaps God is, as Freud suggested, nothing more than a human creation, designed to assist us in banking the fires of hysteria, controlling the trauma of rampant anxiety created by self-consciousness [and with it the anxiety of awareness of our own mortality]......However...today's knowledge revolution and an emerging human maturity have conspired to make the theistic patterns of the past unbelievable.

quote: I refer not to a diety who is "a being"... I speak rather of the God I experience as the Ground and Source of All Being, and therefore the prescence that calls me to step beyond every boundary, inside which vainly seek dependent security, into the fullness of life with all its exhilarating insecurities.

I'm doing a spotty job of summarizing the meat of nearly three chapters but that's the crux, more or less, of what he's getting at. Removing traditional theism and replacing it with a bit more unity in an effort to better see "God".

06:04 / 19.01.02

I really should be getting plug checks from the bishop.

quote: If theism dies, is atheism the only alternative? Is it not a possibility worth pursuing that our very self-consciousness might be the means by which our lives could be opened to nontheistic dimensions of our existence, even nontheistic definitions of God?

quote: If our understanding of God has been couched in the language of "a being, supernatural in power, dwelling outside this world and invading the world periodically to accomplish the divine will" then perhaps God is, as Freud suggested, nothing more than a human creation, designed to assist us in banking the fires of hysteria, controlling the trauma of rampant anxiety created by self-consciousness [and with it the anxiety of awareness of our own mortality]......However...today's knowledge revolution and an emerging human maturity have conspired to make the theistic patterns of the past unbelievable.

quote: I refer not to a diety who is "a being"... I speak rather of the God I experience as the Ground and Source of All Being, and therefore the prescence that calls me to step beyond every boundary, inside which vainly seek dependent security, into the fullness of life with all its exhilarating insecurities.

I'm doing a spotty job of summarizing the meat of nearly three chapters but that's the crux, more or less, of what he's getting at. Removing traditional theism and replacing it with a bit more unity in an effort to better see "God".

15:35 / 21.01.02

So its more, "God the concept" or "God the energy" than "God the person with the long white beard"? That's what I'm reading from it. Though I'm a big fan of "God the abstract concept that we can't fully understand, only strive towards as a goal so as to better ourselves by its persuit."

09:21 / 23.01.02

After reading Spong, I get the impression that he wavers back and forth between "God the Energy" or whatever, and being turned off by non-rationalistic metphysics altogether. It seemed as though his book made the same mistake made by the biblical literalist fundamentalists: that is, either something is literally true and actual and physical, or it's imaginary or mental and therefore superstitious and second-rate.

The real power of religion, in my opinion, is when it has one foot in the rational, the practical, and the logical, and the other end dealing with all of the "stuff" that doesn't fit well into a scientific rationalist box. The stuff that can't be expressed, and can only be approximated poetically if at all.

09:21 / 23.01.02

quote:Originally posted by Logos:
After reading Spong, I get the impression that he wavers back and forth between "God the Energy" or whatever, and being turned off by non-rationalistic metphysics altogether. It seemed as though his book made the same mistake made by the biblical literalist fundamentalists: that is, either something is literally true and actual and physical, or it's imaginary or mental and therefore superstitious and second-rate.

See that's not what I walked away from after his book at all. It seemed to me that Spong was basically saying that God could be recognized in loving unconditionally and patiently. More like "God the Community of the Human Race". Very much like seeking enlightenment in bodhicitta.

quote:The real power of religion, in my opinion, is when it has one foot in the rational, the practical, and the logical, and the other end dealing with all of the "stuff" that doesn't fit well into a scientific rationalist box. The stuff that can't be expressed, and can only be approximated poetically if at all.[/QB]

Frankly I thought he did a wonderful job bridging the two. Love and compassion being an extremely undefinable poetic concept steeped in a rational world.