Christian Atheism
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:46 pm
The New Testament is composed of several gospels, of which only few gospels remains in edited form in todays Bible.
Non-canonical gospels, like the gospel of Judas, Mary Magdalene amongst many others, were not canonized along with the gospel of Luke, Mark etc.
These gospels were edited from their original form, and the original Gospel of Mark does not end with Jeus' resurrection, it just ends with the discovery of an empty tomb. There is widespread consensus amongst modern scholars of the New Testament that the Gospel of Mark is the oldest gospel of the New Testament.
If we consider the vast detailed descriptions of the early "Christians" (which, btw. were not named Christians until much later in the 2. century), we see a diverse, scattered community disagreeing about... everything. Everything from wether or not non-Jews could be accepted in the Jesus-movement (it was because of Paul of Tarsus that gentiles would be accepted, Jesus and all his followers were Jews) and even the ressurrection story itself.
It wasn't until much, much later in the 3rd-5th century that the Roman Catholic Church along with the Roman Emperor, decided what is "right" and "wrong" and condemned everyone who disagree, heretics.
That the corner stone of Christianity is the ressurrection of Jesus, is what all Christians agree on, is only true from the 5th century onwards.
Before the 5th century, and even amongst some Gnostic Christians in The Middle Ages, Christians could disagree on wether or not Jesus was resurrected.
There is a gospel, the Gospel of Thomas which is a collection of a lot of "mystical sayings" by Jesus. But to 1st century people, these sayings were not mystical at all, because it is a language of symbols, ie. the lion was a symbol of something, the snake is a symol of another etc. Of course the symbolism varies from region to region, and I'm not sure wether it is the Greek or Egyptian mythology that was used here.
Anyway, according to the Gospel of Thomas the important thing is not how Jesus died, or wether Jesus was resurrected.
The important thing is his sayings. His opinions about the world, his philosophy.
Christianity comes from the Greek word, Christos, meaning savior. It doesn't mean "god".
From the late Ancient history to this day, nobody could question the orthodoxy of the Church, or any church at all.
Fortunately, no churches has absolute political power and people are free to believe whatever they wish.
This begs the question:
Can a Christian be an Atheist/Atheist be a Christian - at the same time?
I think one can. If we adopt the differences of theology once again, and become pluralists once again, like in the early history of the Jesus-movement (which gradually became Christianity), Atheists too can become Christians - as well as Christians can become Atheists - and keep their Christianity.
But WHY would an Atheist even consider becoming a Christian (or a Christian becoming an Atheist)?
First of all, Science push "God" further and further away. In ancient times, the gods lived in caves. When mankind found there was nobody home in the caves, the gods "elected" One God who moved to the sky.
Then the astronomers of the 16th and 17th century found God was not in the sky sitting on any cloud, and couldn't possibly live amongst the stars either, so God was moved once again into the realm of the unknowable.
I believe that instead of moving God further and further away, just keep Him down on Earth, in the minds of HUMANS.
There is a lot of beautiful art/music in Christianity. The architecture, the art, music - and of course the Ethics & Morality derived from (liberal) Christianity, I think that if you are living as a Christian - not neccessarily going to church, but live with its values, but don't subscribe to the belief in an omnipotent or omniscient but only omnibenevolent deity, you could call yourself an Atheist Christian (or Christian Atheist).
I'd like to get some feedback on this post. Please let me know of any inconsistencies, or other mistakes.
Non-canonical gospels, like the gospel of Judas, Mary Magdalene amongst many others, were not canonized along with the gospel of Luke, Mark etc.
These gospels were edited from their original form, and the original Gospel of Mark does not end with Jeus' resurrection, it just ends with the discovery of an empty tomb. There is widespread consensus amongst modern scholars of the New Testament that the Gospel of Mark is the oldest gospel of the New Testament.
If we consider the vast detailed descriptions of the early "Christians" (which, btw. were not named Christians until much later in the 2. century), we see a diverse, scattered community disagreeing about... everything. Everything from wether or not non-Jews could be accepted in the Jesus-movement (it was because of Paul of Tarsus that gentiles would be accepted, Jesus and all his followers were Jews) and even the ressurrection story itself.
It wasn't until much, much later in the 3rd-5th century that the Roman Catholic Church along with the Roman Emperor, decided what is "right" and "wrong" and condemned everyone who disagree, heretics.
That the corner stone of Christianity is the ressurrection of Jesus, is what all Christians agree on, is only true from the 5th century onwards.
Before the 5th century, and even amongst some Gnostic Christians in The Middle Ages, Christians could disagree on wether or not Jesus was resurrected.
There is a gospel, the Gospel of Thomas which is a collection of a lot of "mystical sayings" by Jesus. But to 1st century people, these sayings were not mystical at all, because it is a language of symbols, ie. the lion was a symbol of something, the snake is a symol of another etc. Of course the symbolism varies from region to region, and I'm not sure wether it is the Greek or Egyptian mythology that was used here.
Anyway, according to the Gospel of Thomas the important thing is not how Jesus died, or wether Jesus was resurrected.
The important thing is his sayings. His opinions about the world, his philosophy.
Christianity comes from the Greek word, Christos, meaning savior. It doesn't mean "god".
From the late Ancient history to this day, nobody could question the orthodoxy of the Church, or any church at all.
Fortunately, no churches has absolute political power and people are free to believe whatever they wish.
This begs the question:
Can a Christian be an Atheist/Atheist be a Christian - at the same time?
I think one can. If we adopt the differences of theology once again, and become pluralists once again, like in the early history of the Jesus-movement (which gradually became Christianity), Atheists too can become Christians - as well as Christians can become Atheists - and keep their Christianity.
But WHY would an Atheist even consider becoming a Christian (or a Christian becoming an Atheist)?
First of all, Science push "God" further and further away. In ancient times, the gods lived in caves. When mankind found there was nobody home in the caves, the gods "elected" One God who moved to the sky.
Then the astronomers of the 16th and 17th century found God was not in the sky sitting on any cloud, and couldn't possibly live amongst the stars either, so God was moved once again into the realm of the unknowable.
I believe that instead of moving God further and further away, just keep Him down on Earth, in the minds of HUMANS.
There is a lot of beautiful art/music in Christianity. The architecture, the art, music - and of course the Ethics & Morality derived from (liberal) Christianity, I think that if you are living as a Christian - not neccessarily going to church, but live with its values, but don't subscribe to the belief in an omnipotent or omniscient but only omnibenevolent deity, you could call yourself an Atheist Christian (or Christian Atheist).
I'd like to get some feedback on this post. Please let me know of any inconsistencies, or other mistakes.
