When my father hit 50, he had a classic mid-life crises doubting his place in life. Part was due to the Nixon Recession, in which his business suffered, but it was also a question of age and maturity. Like most in early years, especially those of his generation, the emphasis was on success. At 50, most of us see that whatever we are doing is not enough - if one's criteria is on success, then that becomes shallow. What does any of it mean when life is so short? What is the point to it all?
And so he began to study. He got his MA in psychology, going to classes at night, a move that would not help his business one bit. He wanted to learn how he ticked. He also began to read theology; not dogma, but theology, the study of religion, including its history. This was the 1970's and new discoveries involving Christ and Christian history were being unveiled - slowly, but inevitably. Some news about the Dead Sea scrolls were coming out, along with the Gnostic Gospels, both discovered in the 1940's; also the "Lost Gospels" were being revealed. My father read what had been discovered in these, as well as new findings concerning Jesus and his times in archaeology, and he became an agnostic. Once a strong Irish Catholic, the facts led him to doubt the divinity of Christ. From what I can recall, he also had doubts about the existence of God as well. And so he took those doubts to the grave.
I know what he found; in one of the bleakest reviews of the History of Religion that I have read - although I try to avoid the most sterile - a book by former Catholic nun Karen Armstrong, I was left with a feeling of gray doubt myself. Unlike my father, however, I was not left an agnostic - I had already had well over a decade of the pulverizing grind that is modern academia, where everything is put into the mill of materialism and comes out as dry dust, every spiritual nuance pulverized by the icy, flat perspective of social science. However, the research is not all hogwash, by any means. There are the facts, or at least competing information that can and sometimes should change one's perspective on one's religion.
For many this is not only hard to do, but evokes rage - how dare you (they)! Hindus were scandalized by Gandhi when he condemned the caste system, the subjugation of women, and the jingoism that had them in perpetual conflict with neighboring Muslims. Eventually, the West applauded, as did much of India. Since Gandhi, fundamental ideas have changed concerning social status, and we believe it to be for the better.
In this country, it is Christianity that stands with fists razed - and in many cases it is warranted. But facts are stubborn things. Since my father's studies, the Dead Sea Scrolls have been released to the academic public at large, and the Gnostic Gospels have been better deciphered; and more of the Lost Gospels have come to view. When we combine these with the historical facts about the rise of Christendom, we (Christians) have to be at least a little bit shaken. We find that many gospels were tossed out because they did not underscore the power structure; and others may have - almost certainly were - doctored to foster the growth of the Church. Simply put, the new findings that have been revealed force seekers of truth to reconsider, although to do so is a perilous path, as my father's painful doubt shows. For instance, it is only in John, written by an unknown some 70 years after the death of Christ, that we read that Jesus calls himself God. In the others he refers to himself only as "the son of God," which we find was typical - typical - of Hebrews at that time (as in, 'made in God's image'). Jesus's lack of special divinity is also underscored in the Gnostic Gospels, and probably in the Dead Sea Scrolls, although I have not come to read of them just yet. Christians are indeed challenged, to the bone.
Of the Dead Sea Scrolls, I will read more explicitly of them soon in the book, "The Truth about the Five Primary Religions," by Laura George. Not a theologian but a lawyer, she has pulled the latest findings on the Great Religions together for us and has laid them out for us outsiders to understand. Unlike the authors my father read, she has absolute faith in the existence of God - but she questions how he/she/it/all is represented by these great religions, bringing to the fore what is now known about them. These will be the center of the next several blogs. Like George, I have no doubts whatsoever about the existence of God, both intellectually and emotionally. But like George, I know all too well that religion has often been perverted to serve certain powerful factions in society. Her findings will be read with an open mind, and will be presented for you to judge. I will judge them as well, but of course the reader is always left to himself to decide.
Looking ahead, I see that she will also give us an idea of what may come from all this - of what sort of religion or religions we might come to expect in the future - or what sort we might HOPE come about. As readers here know, that is a central concern in this blog. We shall see if she answers our questions and needs shortly. My guess is that her ideas will fall short, as they must from all who are not specific, enlightened prophets of the Truth. But perhaps it will be another good start. FK
And so he began to study. He got his MA in psychology, going to classes at night, a move that would not help his business one bit. He wanted to learn how he ticked. He also began to read theology; not dogma, but theology, the study of religion, including its history. This was the 1970's and new discoveries involving Christ and Christian history were being unveiled - slowly, but inevitably. Some news about the Dead Sea scrolls were coming out, along with the Gnostic Gospels, both discovered in the 1940's; also the "Lost Gospels" were being revealed. My father read what had been discovered in these, as well as new findings concerning Jesus and his times in archaeology, and he became an agnostic. Once a strong Irish Catholic, the facts led him to doubt the divinity of Christ. From what I can recall, he also had doubts about the existence of God as well. And so he took those doubts to the grave.
I know what he found; in one of the bleakest reviews of the History of Religion that I have read - although I try to avoid the most sterile - a book by former Catholic nun Karen Armstrong, I was left with a feeling of gray doubt myself. Unlike my father, however, I was not left an agnostic - I had already had well over a decade of the pulverizing grind that is modern academia, where everything is put into the mill of materialism and comes out as dry dust, every spiritual nuance pulverized by the icy, flat perspective of social science. However, the research is not all hogwash, by any means. There are the facts, or at least competing information that can and sometimes should change one's perspective on one's religion.
For many this is not only hard to do, but evokes rage - how dare you (they)! Hindus were scandalized by Gandhi when he condemned the caste system, the subjugation of women, and the jingoism that had them in perpetual conflict with neighboring Muslims. Eventually, the West applauded, as did much of India. Since Gandhi, fundamental ideas have changed concerning social status, and we believe it to be for the better.
In this country, it is Christianity that stands with fists razed - and in many cases it is warranted. But facts are stubborn things. Since my father's studies, the Dead Sea Scrolls have been released to the academic public at large, and the Gnostic Gospels have been better deciphered; and more of the Lost Gospels have come to view. When we combine these with the historical facts about the rise of Christendom, we (Christians) have to be at least a little bit shaken. We find that many gospels were tossed out because they did not underscore the power structure; and others may have - almost certainly were - doctored to foster the growth of the Church. Simply put, the new findings that have been revealed force seekers of truth to reconsider, although to do so is a perilous path, as my father's painful doubt shows. For instance, it is only in John, written by an unknown some 70 years after the death of Christ, that we read that Jesus calls himself God. In the others he refers to himself only as "the son of God," which we find was typical - typical - of Hebrews at that time (as in, 'made in God's image'). Jesus's lack of special divinity is also underscored in the Gnostic Gospels, and probably in the Dead Sea Scrolls, although I have not come to read of them just yet. Christians are indeed challenged, to the bone.
Of the Dead Sea Scrolls, I will read more explicitly of them soon in the book, "The Truth about the Five Primary Religions," by Laura George. Not a theologian but a lawyer, she has pulled the latest findings on the Great Religions together for us and has laid them out for us outsiders to understand. Unlike the authors my father read, she has absolute faith in the existence of God - but she questions how he/she/it/all is represented by these great religions, bringing to the fore what is now known about them. These will be the center of the next several blogs. Like George, I have no doubts whatsoever about the existence of God, both intellectually and emotionally. But like George, I know all too well that religion has often been perverted to serve certain powerful factions in society. Her findings will be read with an open mind, and will be presented for you to judge. I will judge them as well, but of course the reader is always left to himself to decide.
Looking ahead, I see that she will also give us an idea of what may come from all this - of what sort of religion or religions we might come to expect in the future - or what sort we might HOPE come about. As readers here know, that is a central concern in this blog. We shall see if she answers our questions and needs shortly. My guess is that her ideas will fall short, as they must from all who are not specific, enlightened prophets of the Truth. But perhaps it will be another good start. FK
RSS Feed