The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ

Philip Pullman's latest offering is a retelling of the story of Jesus, and it has already ruffled a few feathers. It looks excellent! I haven't read it yet, but if anyone has, please feel free to add your comments below.
If you haven't read it, you can catch an excerpt at the Guardian.

You are not alone

I guestimate that 15-20% of Christians do not really believe that the resurrection happened, or that Jesus was really the son of God. At least 10% of regular churchgoers (who will describe themselves as Christians) do not believe in god at all - you are probably one of them if you're reading this.

Now comes news of a study by Dan Dennett and Linda LaScola, interviewing current preaching ministers who do not believe in god. There is a lot to consider there. However, the ministers concerned regarded themselves as the tip of a much larger iceberg.

If that iceberg would like to make acquaintance with the Titanic that is CJCA, come right ahead - feel free to comment away (but do read the study!)

This "Christ" thing...

The way I see it, Christian Atheism is an entirely valid position. I don't believe in any gods, and I don't believe that Jesus the Nazarene was even that special. He is, however, the focus of a rather remarkable phenomenon that crystallised out of the supersaturated religious solution of the Roman Empire. Now, whether we accept that the "Impostle Paul" (Saul of Tarsus) made the most of this up or not, we are left with this concept of a "Christ" which has become attached to the story of a Galilean teacher in 1st Century CE Palestine. Jesus, in many ways, can be viewed as a retrospective Christ, not crowned by God, but by us.

And we're not even exclusive. A Christian Atheist won't say that Jesus is The Way (even if Jesus himself did say that, which is questionable). He's not even *A* way as such, because there isn't really any need for a way in the first place. What the Christian Atheist does (in my view) is simply adopt Christianity and the person of Jesus as a ready-made set of tools by which to explore human relationships. Some aspects of the stories of Jesus can be made to handle this better than others of course, but it is a fair enough start. Other religions have developed similar parable-packs, and there is even no real need to go to religion to get them - it is perfectly possible to either address the issues directly, or with entirely secular approaches that do not draw on religious metaphor.

So why choose Christianity as an atheist sandbox?

I think it's because a lot of the groundwork has already been done. A lot of entirely humanistic and atheistic ideas have already been incorporated fully into Christianity. There is also the huge infrastructure of Christianity - surely we can tap into that rich vein?

Of course, this approach is not without its difficulties. Some standard Christian hymns and bible stories are frankly silly, or even a little offensive to atheistic views. Can we maintain the heritage of Christianity, warts and all, yet still move forward with what is, essentially, the inescapable logical conclusion of the Reformation and the Enlightenment?

The God of Classical Theism vs Zeus?

Luke over at Common Sense Atheism has a post about whether there is a proof of the existence of the God of Classical Theism (hereinafter GOTC) that would *disprove* the existence of Zeus. He thinks that Zeus wouldn't have a look-in, but my point is that YHWH wouldn't have a look-in either, without the layers of theological reinterpretation that have been applied over the millennia.

Here's what I wrote:

Luke, your problem here is that this "God of classical theism" is actually incompatible with the god of (say) Genesis or Job. Classical theism presents a multiply worked-over god concept that in the Christian tradition has been superimposed on the biblical texts, but when we look at those texts without the "benefit" of millennia of interpretation and metaphorisation, there's no spitting distance between YHWH, Zeus, Amun-Re or even the FSM.

If the Greeks had bothered (and some evidently DID), they would have had no problem at all in identifying the GOCT as Zeus, and vice versa, just as Theistic Christians (as opposed to Atheistic Christians) have done, and just as could be done for Amun-Re (which would be really cool - I'd love to see Karnak re-open as a functional temple to Amun).

I would also argue, of course, that this means that Christianity doesn't actually require a god to exist for it to *work*, and the same may (arguably) be true for many other religions - we should encourage atheistic versions of them too (Ancient Greek, Egyptian, Islam, Hinduism, etc). God is like the gap under an arch - when you're standing atop it, you feel like there is something there, but the support is actually coming from elsewhere. And whichever arch you fancy, go for it.

A lot of Christian people know this already, but don't feel that they want to come "out" with it, for fear of upsetting their friends and family (in much the same way as you don't want to tell the kids about Santa, but let them work it out for themselves).

Any thoughts?

[Luke's blog, btw, is absolutely excellent, and a must-read for would-be philosophers of religion. He deserves to go far, and I predict you will be hearing a lot more of him in the future. Keep up the good work, Luke!]

Behold the mighty Sphinx!

Religion is a funny thing. Over 5000 years ago, long before Yahweh was invented, the people of Egypt developed a sophisticated (and oft-misunderstood) religious system that lasted far longer than Christianity, yet vanished without a trace.
Yes, elements of Egyptian religion became incorporated into the new religion of Christianity (the Trinity is one example; much of the Gnosticism that ended up making its way into *mainstream* Christianity is also traceable to concepts directly related to the old Egyptian religion), but by and large it was forgotten.

At Christmas time, let's celebrate what came before. Let's raise a toast to the Egyptians, and make our snow-sphinxes (weather permitting) with pride.

That old "God-shaped hole"

There is a popular theistic cliché that inside everyone there is a void - a "god-shaped hole".
The problem is: if you start out with a god-shaped hole, you end up with a hole-shaped god.

Christian Atheists grab this bull by the horns. We don't have a god-shaped hole. A god is like a piece of clothing; a style. We're not saying that Christianity is the Right Way - the Way, the Truth or the Life. It is simply the way we have chosen. Other atheists are Muslims, Jews and many others. Some are happy to remain within their religious tradition; others have grown beyond that.

Don't worry about a god-shaped hole. Typically what you really need are fulfilling human relationships and a direction to what you're doing with your life. Pay it forward. Don't be defined by what other people say you lack. Don't live by the hole.

What would Jesus do?

Turns out he would do whatever you think he would do. People create God in their own image - the Will of God turns out to be remarkably close to the Will of whoever thinks they're interpreting it. Which we have known all along of course. Here's more... http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience/2009/11/creating_god_in_ones_own_image.php