Intro from an agnostic Christian

NightPhoenix

Member
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Wisconsin, USA
Hello all!

I'm not sure where to start or what to say or how to introduce myself really. But I'll give it a try.

I'm presently an Eastern Orthodox Christian, though I didn't grow up in that tradition. I grew up in a basically non religious household. Though I was baptized as an infant in the Catholic Church, we never attended Church. However we weren't particularly anti-religious either. We celebrated Christmas, Easter and all that...but I can't say I ever read the Bible until I was in my late teens. My interest in Christianity came to fruition from different reasons but mainly because a friend of mine and his fiance were born again Christians but weren't particularly nutty and lived what they preached. I never really saw that before. To make a long story short, I had a born again experience, went through various Protestant traditions, until I began to study history and Church history in my 20's, and this study eventually lead me to the Eastern Orthodox Church which is where I am at today.

However over the last 2 or 3 years I've begun to doubt at first my own Church's tradition, and now am doubting Christianity all together. (in part because of my study of history) This doubt leads me to also doubt religion all together as well. Granted some of this rejection is "emotional"...but then so is my acceptance of my faith as well. (I feel good during Church thus I have faith...but should faith or of faith be based on merely a feeling?)

I still consider myself a Christian but find myself questioning the major dogmas of even my tradition. I'm pretty well read in Church history, religious history, Christian origins, Judaism, in particular 2nd Temple Judaism, and NT studies and Christian origins has been an interest of mine for a number of years. I'm not a professional historian, but I'm probably more well read in these topics that the average laymen is in the pew is.

I guess I'm not sure why I'm here other than I do feel I'm a seeker of truth, whatever truth there may be in the universe. I'm pretty agnostic about many things, as I said, even theology of my own Church these days, so this has kind of opened my mind to other faiths. Even if they aren't a "fit" for me, I still love learning about various religions. I guess in part I'm here too because of my own doubt, not just about my Church, or Christianity but God's existence in general, or the "big questions" most people ask. I recently read Dawkin's the God Delusion and remained unconvinced by the positive atheism he puts forward. I feel like I don't know what the answers are, but do believe there are answers even if I'm too small to figure them out. And in the end i just want to live life and do the right thing, and I am a seeker of "truth" whatever than may be. I cannot imagine not being a theist in some sense, and often cannot imagine not being a Christian, even an Orthodox Christian at times, but have taken a much more agnostic approach to even Christian theology....it COULD be right...atheism COULD be right, but in the end I don't know for sure. i doubt this site will give me the answers, but at least it's a place full of others who want to learn and "compare" faiths and that's what I hope to do here.


Thanks...
 
Namaste and welcome NP,

We've got another eastern orthodox here, hopefully you'll find him and have some conversation...

I'm of the ilk that reading and seeking can expand and cement your spirituality...others prefer not. Sounds like you are well on your way with your search I say good luck and keep seeking. Seeking can send some born again devouts to atheism or agnotism as it did Bart Ehrman or it can send one deeper in their beliefs but less in the pomp and circumstance as it did Bishop Spong.

For me it makes me quite comfortable in my relationship with G!d, Jesus and Christianity...as welll as intrigued and accepting of varioius faiths.

I look forward to your discussions.
 
Hello KnightPhoenix. Welcome to the forum.

Would you mind if I tap you for a coupls of questions: In the Eastern Orthodox church, what is it like to go through the catechism? Are there secret levels like in the masons? How are priests selected, and do they have to be celebate? Do eastern orthodox have confession boxes? Thanks.
 
Hi, NP, and welcome to the Forum.

I used to be a Christian, but I ended up leaving Christianity because there were too many things in Christianity that I did not agree with. If you are interested in further exploring things in Christianity that you do not agree with, please let us know.

You asked,

"...should faith ... be based on merely a feeling?"

--> No, it should not. I make it a point to always walk away from any religion that does not make sense (which I have done several times), no matter how "feel good" it is. It sounds like you are ready to take a similar postion towards a religion (Christianity) that does not make sense to you. Is that true? Are there things in Christianity that do not make sense to you?

"I am a seeker of "truth" whatever [that] may be."

--> Then be willing to follow the truth, no matter where it may take you. Doing such a thing may be scary for you. Find the courage to do just that.
 
a very warm welcome to our gathering. Nobody here knows much for sure but it does keep us talking.;):D earl
 
Welcome NightPhoenix

For me Christianity has become a more personal thing I am not really interested any more in what some so called experts have to say about it whatever their particular field, the wisdom of men is foolishness to God even very clever men,

so for me the main thing is what does God and Bible mean in my life, well they give me peace, revelation and hope which is very real for me. Hopefully some of this will pour out into the lives of those around me.
 
NP, NCT et all.

NCT's post brings up an important point. There are different kinds of people, so there must be different kinds of religions, and different ways for people to approach those religions. Some people have a more emotional or devotional way of looking at religion, while others have a more rational or analytical approach. So we must have devotional religions as well as analytical religions. In my humble opinion, it is rediculous to think one religion works for everyone.

NP, what kind of person are you?
 
Wow! thanks for the great welcome everyone! I wasn't expecting so many replies. Thank you very much. I'll try and answer the questions asked as briefly as I can.
 
Hello KnightPhoenix. Welcome to the forum.

Would you mind if I tap you for a coupls of questions: In the Eastern Orthodox church, what is it like to go through the catechism?

It kind of varies depending on the parish priest. Some are more formal very much like the RCiA in the Catholic Church, and some are more informal. Often it depends on the number of catechumens. For me it was a half way between formal and informal. I went to Bible studies, Orthodoxy classes, but also did a lot of informal discussions with the priest, sometimes over lunch etc.



Are there secret levels like in the masons? How are priests selected, and do they have to be celebate? Do eastern orthodox have confession boxes? Thanks.

No, no secret levels like the Masons. Priests do not have to be celibate, most of our parish priests are married. But one must be married before ordination. (which usually isn't a problem so that's not a big deal) There really isn't a selection process per se. No standard formula other than the need to go to seminary. However there are a lot of unspoken "rules" one must follow, depending on many different things, and it's cost prohibitive to the 'nth degree. (I know because I strongly considered going to seminary for a time)

No confession boxes, rather confession is done before an Icon of Christ with the priest usually standing next to you...

hope those help out some. Feel free to ask for clarification.
 
Welcome NightPhoenix

For me Christianity has become a more personal thing I am not really interested any more in what some so called experts have to say about it whatever their particular field, the wisdom of men is foolishness to God even very clever men,

so for me the main thing is what does God and Bible mean in my life, well they give me peace, revelation and hope which is very real for me. Hopefully some of this will pour out into the lives of those around me.

that's very much how I feel as of late. Orthodox Christianity is really big on "correct belief" etc...but all the "correct beliefs" in the world do me no good if they don't help me live a good Christian life. So I completely understand where you're coming from. Maybe that's where I'll end up comfortably at some point, right now I just don't know.
 
NP, NCT et all.

NCT's post brings up an important point. There are different kinds of people, so there must be different kinds of religions, and different ways for people to approach those religions. Some people have a more emotional or devotional way of looking at religion, while others have a more rational or analytical approach. So we must have devotional religions as well as analytical religions. In my humble opinion, it is rediculous to think one religion works for everyone.

NP, what kind of person are you?

That's the thing...I'm kind of "both". :)

I'd actually say though that I lean much more to the rational or analytical approach. I love history, and development of religions in general etc...In fact that is what brought me, in large part to Eastern Orthodoxy. However I don't rule out my emotional side either. For the better part of a year I kind of have just been looking for the more "practical" aspects of my own faith and tradition and within other faiths as well. (how does this help ME in a practical way?) It might be a little utilitarian but that's just where I am.

I'm also a natural skeptic and doubter, (which is why I love "doubting" Saint Thomas the Apostle.) Definitely more rational/historical, but the emotional part is there at times as well. In the end the one thing i do know is that I don't know. :)
 
It sounds like you are ready to take a similar postion towards a religion (Christianity) that does not make sense to you. Is that true? Are there things in Christianity that do not make sense to you?

In Western Christianity there are a LOT of things that never made sense to me. Eastern Christianity is much more open to saying "I don't know" and has less doctrines I find "disagreeable". But there are a few things within Eastern Orthodoxy that don't quite make sense to me personally, but I really don't think about them. What I do think about is Christianity in general...is it what it claimed to be? etc...that's my rational side coming in I guess.

be willing to follow the truth, no matter where it may take you. Doing such a thing may be scary for you. Find the courage to do just that.

It is scary at times. A friend of mine is going through something similar and is having a "scary" time of it as well. So at least with her, and obviously a lot of people here, I know I'm not alone. And that's a comforting thought.
 
NP, you said,

"It is scary at times. A friend of mine is going through something similar and is having a "scary" time of it as well. So at least with her, and obviously a lot of people here, I know I'm not alone."

--> I am fortunate to have found a belief system that makes sense to me -- I cannot find even one discrepancy or contradiction in it. I will not allow even one discrepancy or contradiction in my belief system. Church leaders tell us to accept such things on faith, and I think this is a bunch of hooey. I am reminded of the Mormon church leader who made a speech at a college and told the students not to think, that all of the thinking had already been done for them.

"...there are a few things within Eastern Orthodoxy that don't quite make sense to me personally, but I really don't think about them."

--> Wow, I am sorry to hear that. I would not be able to put up with such a belief system, but if it works for you, go for it. (I tried for many years, but finally gave up. My belief system actually encourages me to mercilessly examine any such discrepancy or contradiction, and not give up until I am satisfied.)

It sounds like there are discrepanices and contradictions in your faith. What are they?
 
--> Wow, I am sorry to hear that. I would not be able to put up with such a belief system, but if it works for you, go for it. (I tried for many years, but finally gave up. My belief system actually encourages me to mercilessly examine any such discrepancy or contradiction, and not give up until I am satisfied.)

That's kind of where I'm at, the point of examining things. Not that I've never examined before but now I'm doing so somewhat differently...with the assumption my faith could be (probably is?) wrong, or at least not 100% right.


It sounds like there are discrepanices and contradictions in your faith. What are they?

It's not so much theological or dogmatic issues. In fact there really aren't any that I can think of off hand in that category. As far as theology goes I probably cannot imagine finding one that seems a more perfect "fit" for me than where I'm at right now. (practical application is another thing entirely though, as I said, correct "beliefs" are one thing, but if they don't help me live life, what's the point?)

It's more along historical questions and maybe "bigger" questions all together....like Christianity says Jesus is the Messiah, however WHY should I trust the Church over say Judaism which says He isn't?

Where's the evidence?

And why do I trust the Church's "evidence" over Judaism's?


The problem is I'm fully aware of the evidence and the proof texts, though I'm still searching them out quite specifically....but so far the evidence seems to come down on the side of Judaism (from a purely rational and historical perspective) than with Christianity. However, Judaism wasn't as clear cut in the 1st century as it became in say the 8th century, so which interpretation is correct? Which is older? Septuagint vs Hebrew texts....the Dead Sea Scrolls only confuse the issue because half the time it agrees with the greek, the other half the later hebrew texts. Or are either of them correct? modern Judaism isn't the same thing as 2nd temple Judaism, nor is Christianity today the same thing as 1st century Christianity. Maybe they're both "wrong"...

The other historical issues are things like my own Church saying brutal warlords like Justinian I are "saints" to be venerated...though technically a person in my Church is not required to venerate any saints in Eastern Orthodoxy, all that is officially required is to say it's ok for someone else to venerate them even if I personally don't...and that seems like a fair and balanced way of handling it and is the approach I take. live and let live. You venerate this saint, while I venerate another. Not a problem for me at all.

And of course there are issues about the so called "one true Church", but these are not faith issues that I have problems "believing" in and of themselves but more so how they played out in real history. That's my trouble at this time.

Again these are not so much faith issues as practical issues.

Don't know if that makes any sense or not, but that's kind of where I'm at.

Lastly, of course I often come down to the question of "what if none of these are right? maybe God is just a construct of our mind?" etc...Though I don't think I could EVER be a fundamentalist atheist. The furthest I could push it is the Carl Sagan route on that issue....I just "feel" too strongly that there is some sort of higher "being" (though being is not the right word)....but in the end I don't know, and so then come back to my Christian faith and then go through the questions all over again...LOL! In the end I guess I'm a person of faith, and have been a Christian (in at least a lose since of the word) my whole life.

Maybe I should try and read John Shelby Spong when I get a chance. I'm a big JD Crossan fan, however I think he is by far a better speaker than a writer. (I find his books boring) I'm also a fan of NT Wright who has a great take on Christian origins.

I also find other religions quite interesting, and part of me feels far more at home, and more spiritually content watching the stars or northern lights than in any Church. So I don't know....but I'm willing to say I don't know, and that's a big step for me personally. :) (as I used to be quite certain of everything)
 
NP, you said,

"… the assumption my faith could be (probably is?) wrong, or at least not 100% right."

--> Good for you! Keep pursuing this, only settling for 100% satisfaction, until the day you die.

"… correct "beliefs" are one thing, but if they don't help me live life, what's the point?"

--> Can you give some examples?

"… Christianity says Jesus is the Messiah, however WHY should I trust the Church over say Judaism which says He isn't?"

--> I do not.

"… so far the evidence seems to come down on the side of Judaism (from a purely rational and historical perspective) than with Christianity."

--> I think that ancient sacred texts become intentionally rewritten and falsified as the centuries go by. I do not think you can use these texts as the main basis for making your decision. No, I think you have to go more with what makes sense to you. Which makes more sense?

"…which interpretation is correct? Which is older?"

--> More importantly, which one makes more sense to you?

"Maybe they're both "wrong"..."

--> I am glad that you are open-minded enough to have come to this realization. Good for you. Keep going, and I think you will eventually come to the conclusion that you are looking for.

"The other historical issues are things like my own Church saying brutal warlords like Justinian I are "saints" to be venerated..."

--> That right there would cause me to quit your church, although you are free to do as you like.

"…that seems like a fair and balanced way of handling it and is the approach I take. live and let live. You venerate this saint, while I venerate another."

--> But people in your own religion are venerating a person that you consider to be a monster. I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one.

"And of course there are issues about the so called "one true Church"

--> Do think it is the One True Church?

"…but these are not faith issues that I have problems "believing" in and of themselves but more so how they played out in real history. That's my trouble at this time."

--> How have they played out in history? Can you give some examples?

"…"what if none of these are right? maybe God is just a construct of our mind?" etc... Though I don't think I could EVER be a fundamentalist atheist."

--> There may be a divine source that is nothing like the God that is described in Christianity. That is how I see it.

"....I just "feel" too strongly that there is some sort of higher "being" (though being is not the right word)....but in the end I don't know, and so then come back to my Christian faith and then go through the questions all over again..."

--> I do not use the word being, I use the word principle.

"I also find other religions quite interesting…"

--> Perhaps you were a strong believer in another religion in a previous reincarnation? I think I was.

"…that's a big step for me personally. (as I used to be quite certain of everything)."

--> I think you are making very good progress along your path.
 
That was very helpful. I agree that so many rules do not seem to fit the ideals of Christianity, however I may visit an eastern Orthodox church sometime. What you told me shows that confessions were centralized long before the big schizm. I suspect there were a lot fewer rules at one time. That is another thing that the schism shows. Perhaps Eucharist and confession were done differently in the beginning. It really depends on a lot of information that I don't have, however thank you for your comments.
 
"… correct "beliefs" are one thing, but if they don't help me live life, what's the point?"

--> Can you give some examples?

Well one of the translations of the Greek word for "Orthodox" is "right belief"...(it actually means right/correct glory..Ortho and Doxa, Orthodox. But an alternate translation is right belief. And what I mean is that whatever one's Christian faith, EO, Catholic, Protestant, who all have an understand of what small o orthodox Christianity is or isn't, my question is while I do believe it is important to ask the right questions and get the right answers, Christianity over the centuries has tended to overemphasize doctrinal issues over ethical ones. (IMO)

So as an Orthodox (big O) Christian, we really focus on specific doctrinal issues. For example the Nicene Creed before the filioque clause was added to it in the 7th/8th centuries (and I believe in the Holy Spirit the lord the giver of life who proceeds from the father (and the Son)...the and the Son part was added centuries laters by anti Arian Bishops in Spain and was in fact opposed not only by the Eastern Bishops but also the Bishop of Rome...however by the great schism in 1054 it became an "important" point of contention between Rome and Constantinople. Of course we insist we're right. But in the end how does that help me, to know "we're right"? How does a shallow understanding of that issue of the Trinity HELP me as a follower of Jesus Christ? Does it help me to feed the poor, does it help me to honor my parents, does it help me to love my neighbor? Or does it simply bring up a bone of contention for me to "feel superior" to those who recite the Creed that was later "tampered" with? Or does it do both? Do you see what I mean? It's not that I "disbelieve" that the Eastern Church is adhering to a more ancient understanding of the Trinity...that is an historical fact. But the truth is the Rome and the East got along just fine for hundreds of years even though many Western Christians recited the Creed differently. Did it make Western Christians worse Christians? Did it make Eastern Christians better Christians? I don't think so either way.

That's not to say I don't believe the issue is important, because I DO....but is it important enough to justify schism, excommunication and the like? I don't think so.



Anyways, other beliefs that I might consider would be the Ever Virginity of Mary. I suppose either side of the Nicene Creed issue could argue "it does matter because the way you believe is the way you pray and vice versa." I can buy that. However I truly cannot see how believing Mary's hymen was intact her entire life..(not a dogma, but a strong tradition) or how Mary remained a Virgin (in the sense she never had sex after Jesus' birth, which is a dogma) makes the least bit of difference to me or really anyone else. The rational is of course the Ever Virginity of Mary "protects" Jesus' Divinity...(if Mary really gave birth to God then would she have been changed, or made holy in some way?....I mean, who would have nerve enough to have sex with a woman who gave birth to GOD Incarnate?" That's the line of reasoning taken...it it does make sense, even if I'm not expressing it very well. But OTH wasn't Jesus fully man? Why would it "change" Mary at all? And if it did, wasn't Jesus more of a "super human"? And if so, then that contradicts the fact that he was as human as we are. These questions then could go into Christoligical questions, the unity of Jesus' human nature, divine nature, one or 2 will....or what one group means by "one" will, is not the same thing meant by someone else who says "one will"....

Lots of blood was shed over these issues. Christian versus Christian, and so while the "correct belief" may have prevailed, or been declared, it didn't prevent those who held the correct belief from doing very un-Christian things. So just because I hold the "correct dogma" on an issue, does not make me a good Christian. Though usually the ones who believe theirs is the correct belief will say that unless you hold that belief then in fact you're not a Christian at all.

It's not that I feel these questions are unimportant, nor do I feel the answers are unimportant, Nor do I necessarily disbelieve these dogmas. I just feel that BEING a Christian is more important than the mental ascension of most specified doctrines. because in the end, no one truly understands the Mystery of the Trinity so instead of fighting/excommunicating each other over this stuff, wouldn't it be better to just BE followers of Christ?

Again, I do think these are important....I'm not saying throw out the baby with the bath water, but just that there should be a little more balance that's all.


"…which interpretation is correct? Which is older?"

--> More importantly, which one makes more sense to you?

The problem is they BOTH make sense to me...lol! I guess I just haven't determined which tradition makes more sense I suppose.



"The other historical issues are things like my own Church saying brutal warlords like Justinian I are "saints" to be venerated..."

--> That right there would cause me to quit your church, although you are free to do as you like.

"…that seems like a fair and balanced way of handling it and is the approach I take. live and let live. You venerate this saint, while I venerate another."

--> But people in your own religion are venerating a person that you consider to be a monster. I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one.

well it's not really what I consider him to be, history shows the Emperor Justinian I was not a very nice guy. And the truth is very, very few people in my Church actually venerate him. But he is on the Calendar of saints, as is Constantine the Great. The reason I don't have a problem with it is because the Church at that time did not have a formal canonization process. Certain people and Church leaders venerated him as basically a political and idealogical hero (sort of like the way some American venerate Ronald Reagan I suppose). No one is required to accept any Orthodox saint as a saint. Our canonization "process" is very different than the Roman Catholic Church's...declaring someone a saint for us is basically just a way of saying "you can ask so and so a saint to interceed in public worship..." but it's not a dogmatic issue, and of course the veneration/political hero worship of Justinian began in a very different time. truth be told, I think most in the Church would prefer to remove him from the Calendar, but it's not done because of tradition.

It's still a point of contention for me, but no one says I "must believe this" so I just don't.

Eastern Orthodox Christianity is a lot more free on various issues, like the Assumption of Mary...there's a feast for it, but no one who is Orthodox is compelled to believe it. There are really very few "required" beliefs in my Church, which is why it's been easy for me to remain Orthodox in good conscience even with the doubts and questions.



"And of course there are issues about the so called "one true Church"

--> Do think it is the One True Church?

Well my Church says it is. Whether i believe it is, is something else entirely. :)

However what the Eastern Church has meant by "one true Church" is a bit different than say what the 16th century Catholic Church meant by it.


"....I just "feel" too strongly that there is some sort of higher "being" (though being is not the right word)....but in the end I don't know, and so then come back to my Christian faith and then go through the questions all over again..."

--> I do not use the word being, I use the word principle.

Actually neither does the Orthodox Church. In fact there is a strong tradition refusing to say what God "is", but rather saying what He is "not"...God is NOT evil....but to say God is love will always come up short of what you're trying to express. And these aspects of my faith I find very appealing and enlightening, but we do tend to get bogged down with certain legalities at times, which can be frustrating.

Anyways didn't mean to post so long a reply...and I hope what I said is fairly clear.
 
Back
Top