Breathing new life into troublesome Christian ideas

Or, Rediscovering Christianity practically and symbolically…

…or why I’m still fine to still call myself a sinner.

These days, there are so many Christian terms that I feel ambivalent or uncertain about – sin, salvation, atonement, heaven, hell, Satan; God perhaps; even Christianity itself.

I’m just no longer comfortable with many of the traditional or historical meanings that have been placed on these words. I often find it hard to accept the ways these concepts are understood or explained within mainstream Christian orthodoxy. That’s not to say I don’t believe in these things any more, but I no longer view them in quite the same way.

And sometimes the words themselves can be problematic – they carry so much baggage, so many negative connotations, that at times it’s tempting to sweep them away and come up with shiny new terms. Except that the same thing would simply happen again eventually, so I’d prefer to try and reclaim the old, however tarnished. (I think that’s a divine principle too.)

But while I’m increasingly certain of what these terms don’t mean (for example that hell isn’t a literal place of eternal fiery torment), I’m far less certain of what they do mean.

Nonetheless, I still think they may have a meaning worth seeking, even if I’ve only yet the vaguest inkling of what that might be.

Practical symbolism

There are two main ways in which I still find these troublesome old words useful and meaningful, and they’re really two sides of the same coin. Let’s take the example of that highly loaded and unloved word ‘sin’.

1. Practically. I don’t know exactly what ‘sin’ means, how it works, whether or why specific behaviours offend or grieve God (though I have an increasing sense that it’s primarily to do with offending against divine love not law).

But I do know in a very practical or empirical sense that, despite my best efforts, I tend to follow patterns of thinking and behaviour that harm others and myself, that mess things up. I don’t need to understand all the theology to be able to describe myself practically as a ‘sinner’, or some of my behaviour as ‘sin’.

2. Symbolically. On the other side of the coin, as I say I’m no longer happy with some of the classic theological ways of understanding the concept of sin. But I can still use the term ‘sin’ as a symbol to stand for this reality that I don’t understand but do still see at work, and which I need a word for.

So when I use words like ‘sin’ or ‘salvation’ or ‘atonement’ I’m using them symbolically to represent mysteries that I don’t yet fully understand, rather than to explain them or sign up to particular existing theological views and understandings of them.

But I’m also using them practically, as labels for actual things that I see at work in the world, in my own life and other people’s lives.

Re-interpreting liturgy and the Bible

I’d also extend this to singing hymns and worship songs or reciting liturgy in church. I’m not always comfortable with all the church words and sentiments now, but I can still use them if I treat them less literally. Instead I can see them as symbolic of a deeper reality that they’re trying and often failing to convey, and which I do broadly believe in but don’t fully understand or have other words for.

A similar principle applies to reading the Bible. Often now when I read certain Bible passages I wince at their literal meanings which can seem harsh, barbaric, unenlightened or unscientific. But if I accept that the authors were imperfect and of their time, yet were doing their best in their limited language to convey glimpses of reality far ahead of their age’s understanding – then I can start to overcome my modern liberal antipathy.

The limits of language

Words are always blunt tools, and language is fundamentally limited.

There’s an argument that all language is inherently metaphorical. Even an apparently concrete noun like ‘chair’ doesn’t actually describe or explain anything – it just acts as an agreed label so we can communicate.

We have to take it on trust that what you mean by the colour ‘red’ is what I mean by it. But often we do have different experiences and understandings; we use the same words but don’t always mean the same things by them.

So with words it’s all too easy to miscommunicate or misunderstand. And it’s never going to be possible to convey in language all the nuance and complexity of actual reality – either as we subjectively experience it or as it objectively is (if we can even ever know that).

Speaking of the spiritual

And this is infinitely more so with religious language. Here we’re attempting to convey in words the ineffable divine, the invisible supernatural – that which lies beyond the realms of our normal experience, understanding and therefore language.

Life and the universe and God are so much more complex and mysterious than we can begin to comprehend. Our attempts to speak of God are like a 5-year-old trying to grasp quantum physics, or a stone-age person trying to describe a computer.

So when we use words like God, spirit, holiness, sin, evil, atonement, angels, salvation, heaven, hell, we’re speaking far beyond the normal capacity of words. We can only approach these spiritual concepts distantly, partially, tangentially and metaphorically, by reference to things which we have directly experienced.

By using these words we can give the false impression to ourselves and others that we’re speaking of concrete, understood realities. But the words are often just labels to mark out things we don’t (and maybe can’t) understand, like Dark Matter in science, or x and y in algebra to stand for numbers we haven’t yet worked out.

We do need these words so we can speak of spiritual things, but we must remember that they’re only symbols. We shouldn’t treat them as literal or complete, or cling too tightly to particular understandings of the mysteries they can only point to and hint at.

Taking things too literally

So I think there can be a real danger in taking biblical ideas or Christian terms too literally.

If people find it helpful to understand 6-day creation or hell or demons literally, that’s not necessarily a problem. We do have to approach and engage with spiritual things at our current level of understanding.

The danger comes when we move on a bit and discover that the literal versions don’t really stack up. The temptation then is just to reject them outright, throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Whereas I think that if we accept them as picture-language pointing to deeper realities, we can hold onto the words and allow them to take on deeper meaning as our understanding grows and changes.

C.S. Lewis famously said that people fell into one of two opposite errors regarding the devil – either getting obsessed with him, or else rejecting his reality entirely. I’d say we fall into similar errors with most areas of Christian or biblical ‘truth’ – either requiring that it be taken literally, or else chucking it out as not true at all. But there is always a third way.

So perhaps I do still believe in things like the devil, and hell, in some sense. Just not in the ways I used to.

Next time – why Christian truth is never abstract…

Advertisements

About TheEvangelicalLiberal

Aka Harvey Edser. I'm a web editor, worship leader, wannabe writer, very amateur composer and highly unqualified armchair theologian. My heroes include C.S. Lewis and Homer Simpson.
This entry was posted in Bible, Liberalism, Theology, Truth and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Breathing new life into troublesome Christian ideas

  1. David says:

    I’m with you all the way on this. It has become increasingly clear to me that our reliance on absolute meanings for words gets us into all kinds of trouble. I also wrote a related blog yesterday on how these things divide us. Much of what we construct as ‘beliefs’ based on the bible are really opinions about what something might mean. I love your emphasis on not being sure about these things. Many protest this is a sign of weakness or lack of conviction, but I think it is a sign of maturity and openness. Enjoyed reading thanks.

    Like

    • Thanks David, I really appreciate your comment! I too view theological uncertainty positively. There are so many things that we don’t really know and probably can’t fully know, and this side of heaven (whatever that is!) our understanding will always be ‘through a glass darkly’. Many find that frustrating or woolly, but most of the time I’m glad of the mystery.

      And I’ll check out your blog as soon as I can – sounds very interesting!

      Like

  2. jesuswithoutbaggage says:

    Harvey, I really like this post; you have taken a deep subject and engaged it in terms that people can understand and relate to.

    I know I say this a lot, but you are absolutely one of my favorite bloggers on issues that matter a lot to me. You speak easily and creatively and bring out important insights in a fresh, innovative way.

    Like

  3. My son has a receptive language disorder, as well as autism, so the idea of miscommunication, or that we can get a misunderstanding even over a simple word, is not new. I think it is much more important to BE the gospel than to interpret it, rightly or wrongly (although theology is vital).
    Interestingly, Julian of Norwich wrote about sin in terms of suffering, as opposed to something we do, which I think backs up what you have written here. Excellent post, thank you.

    Like

    • Hi Sandy, sorry for the delay in replying! Yes, absolutely agree about being the gospel. In fact you’re nicely pre-empting my next post, which is basically that Christian truth and love don’t mean anything as general abstract principles, only when they’re made real in actual lives and situations. (Most of which are pretty messy!)

      I’ll have to look up what Julian of Norwich says about sin and suffering – she’s a wise one 🙂

      Thanks for saying about communicating with your autistic son. Do you find that you have to communicate more in non-verbal ways, or just that you have to live with quite a lot of misunderstandings (or perhaps both)?

      Like

  4. tonycutty says:

    This is great stuff, Harvey. Using the mind God gave you to bring out deeper meaning. Well done 🙂

    Like

  5. Pingback: The Best Blog Posts I Read in January-February 2016 | Jesus Without Baggage

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s