Christians Might Be Surprised to Find That Not God, But Men, Decided What They Would Believe

[Coyotl]

Christians Might Be Surprised to Find That Not God, But Men, Decided What They Would Believe
By: Hrafnkell Haraldsson feb 9 2014 http://www.politicususa.com/2014/02/09/christians-surprised-find-god-men-decided.html

Anyone paying attention to the rhetoric coming out of the Religious Right will be aware that the theocrats position themselves as the defenders of truth and tradition. Change, they say, is bad, and not only bad, but evil and that the people motivating this change, from Barack Obama on down, are moved by demons and even by Satan himself.

It is this determination to cling to the old that drives the debate over women priests and bishops. In the Anglican Church everything comes down to the meaning of one word – trust. Anglican Mainstream reports that, “Hopes of an end to the Church of England’s 40-year battle over women bishops could face a last-minute challenge this week amid wrangling over ordination services and an argument about the definition of a single word.”

If this all seems trivial and rather silly, consider the history of Christian dogma. Christianity did not spring full grown from the mouth of Jesus. It was voted upon. By men. It is not God who told future Christians what they would be required to believe, but angry, sometimes violent, men. Many are familiar with the Council of Nicaea in 325 – after all, it gave us the Nicene Creed, which would determine Christian belief for many centuries. Most are unaware of all the other, less well-known councils that determined the minutiae of Christian belief.

Historian Ramsay MacMullen offered what is but a sampling of these issues in his book Voting About God (2006), positions that, as he put it, were “seriously argued by someone of influence at some point in time” during the first Christian centuries at various church councils. If you peruse this list, you will see that after arguing about whether “like” means “identical,” arguing over the meaning of the word “trust” is hardly a stretch:

.................

[brewens]

1. Men that didn't know to wash their hands after they took a shit made those dicisions.

Not exactly who should be telling anyone how to live.

[hrmjustin]

2. It should suprise no one that there were several different schools of thought about who and

what Jesus was in the early church. It should suprise no one that decisions were made at times at the end of a sword.

It should suprise no one except those who think it all came nicely rapped in a box sent from God.

[rug]

3. I wondered what Hrafnkell's been up to.

Here's his blog.

About

For five years A Heathen’s Day has been providing an online voice for modern Heathenism, also known as Ásatrú, and to a great extent, modern Paganism and Polytheism. Since November 2005 it has brought you the life and thoughts of a modern American Heathen, and shown you the world through his eyes as he looks backward towards his ancestors, forward toward the future and at today, which is the construct of that past and the present which is creating that future. A Heathen’s Day is a portal into an ancient religion as it is practiced today, and it is to be hoped one that will provide you some insight into what Heathenism is for one American, a Scandinavian American and a surly old son of Odin.

http://aheathensday.com/about-2

[Brettongarcia]

4. Seems consistent with what he wrote: he's looking back, then creatively "construct"ing a future.

Seems to have a playful, tongue-in-cheek side to his creativity.

Much of contemporary Existentialist-based theology acknowledges the role of humans in constructing religion, God. To fail to acknowledge it, is said to fail to accept the responsibility we have for our own lives. (Cf. "The Social Construction of Reality&quot .

[rug]

5. Ásatrú itself is religion.

[Brettongarcia]

6. Yeah; but the author seems to know he's "constructing" or playing with it

[rug]

7. Read some more of his stuff. He's pretty serious about it.

[okasha]

8. And a good many

might just yawn and turn the page. Old news.

[Ino]

9. but...but... Divine Inspiration

The men who wrote the bible, those who decided what should or should not be included in it, were divinely inspired or led. It's all god's plan, doncha know?!

[Brettongarcia]

12. Many claim that the inspiration of the Holy Spirit helped men write true doctrines. But...

The Bible warned that there are many "false spirits" out there, pretending to be spirits from God. So rather than trust that a given spirit is Holy, the Bible finally tells us to "test the spirits" (1 John 4).

Interestingly, the Bible warned that often the very persons and spirits that seem holiest, are really the devil himself (2 Corin. 11.14).

For that matter? The followers of Moses were said to have the protection of the spirit of God in the wilderness; yet they still erred in major doctrinal matters (like worshiping the golden calf). And for having erred even in major doctrines, and even in spite of the Holy Spirit it seems, they were killed by the Levites/"perished" in the wilderness (1 Corin. 10.4 ff.).

Inspiration is not so reliable, after all.

[BlueStreak]

10. The average Christian isn't even aware that Jesus never wrote a single word of the Bible.

As a professional musician, I have occasion to attend many services with many different denominations each year. I have heard preachers carry on at great length talking about all manner of minutia. But strangely they never see fit to point out some of the basics of their religion:

a) that although the religion holds that the New Testament is literally the word of god, that this book is immensely important to this god, that Jesus was literally the son of this god personally dispatched to carry the message that should be in said book, this god didn't see fit to send somebody who could help write the book !?

b) that none of it was written contemporaneously. At best, the thing today's Christians use as their sacred texts was assembled from a grab bag of writings, none of which were written within decades of Jesus death, and many were heavily edited and essentially re-crafted 300-500 years later.

Gee, I wonder why preachers never mention these things. Seriously, if you were this god and you intended to hold all of humanity accountable for what was going to become the Bible, and you are omnipotent, why wouldn't you make sure the agent you sent to the planet would be able to write some of this stuff?

[Fumesucker]

11. Wouldn't that be the Book of Mormon?

We have a pretty good idea where that one came from.

[Brettongarcia]

13. From the authors of South Park

Originally? The aptly-named angel "Moroni."

It's got to be true, conservative theologians insist; because no one would make this up. ("Criterion of Embarrassment": if it's too embarrassingly silly, then obviously no one would make it up; it must therefore be authentic).

[BlueStreak]

14. We have to give the non-Mormon Christians credit for at least trying to get it to hang together

although their doctrine is such a mess of contradictions, they inevitably either just ignore 98% of it or else play the "God works in mysterious ways" card.

Joseph Smith, on the other hand, just didn't care. The crazier, the better. He was one of the great practitioners of "The Big Lie" propaganda technique.