Wednesday's Child
I wanted to respond more fully to Victor's well-written comment below, but it will have to wait. Briefly, the idea that mid-life spirituality derives from disillusionment with media is very interesting. My own story is that I've had a lifelong obsession/interest/fascination with religion and I wonder how many other factors enter at mid-lie: awareness of mortality; diminishment of physical beauty and to some degree, appetite; in the West, financial leisure to ponder...the list is long. Victor deserves better treatment than I can give now; I may be able to come back at some point. I have ordered the recommended film.
And on suffering:
Driving to work today listening to "Fresh Air" I heard Bart Ehrman discuss his new book Misquoting Jesus. Ehrman is a "happy agnostic" who began as an Episcopalean, became a fundamentalist/literalist, and then, after studying ancient languages and NT manuscripts, gradually lost his faith. He now teaches at Chapel Hill Ehrman also mentioned the significance of a class he taught on human suffering and the Bible's attitudes towards it. As much as he couched his falling away in terms of intellectual process, facing the problem of suffering was also significant.
Here's the thing: it is possible that Christianity will one day be disproved. What would it take? Discovery of older, and radically different, gospel manuscripts. Some other contemporary account which undermines the resurrection or the bulk of miraculous events in the NT; more fantastically, how about Peter's authentic diary where he details the fraud he pulled off with Mary and James, even Paul was fooled when he visited them!
Something along these lines would change my spiritual path and the path of many others. Granted, it wouldn't change everyone's. The historical criticism of Joseph Smith is searing, yet his church keeps growing.
Has that kind of information been found? Should a rational person, someone who is open to not ruling out the miraculous a priori, examine the evidence we have and write off the Christian faith? Books keep coming out, like Ehrman's, which say yes. I admit I haven't read his yet, but it amazes me how many intelligent people line up on both sides of that question. Since there is so little information, almost none, outside the gospels, and since we don't even know exactly when they were written or how, there's plenty of room for scholars to beat the text silly, pounding out whatever they already want to find (as Schweitzer noted a century ago).
Right now I'm working on the OT. I've ordered Bruggeman. I'm beginning the story of the Exodus. The stakes are much lower for me of course. All I expect to find is Jewish religious literature which contains some Christophic themes. When I get to the NT next year, much more will be on the line. But, barring some new and dramatic discovery which either enhances or detracts from the gospel historicity, I doubt I will ever find intellectual certainty. It's very difficult to have that for any history, especially when the fine tooth comb becomes very fine. I simply want to know I'm not a Mormon (no personal offense intended). Ehrman's thesis that he can prove radical textual changes over time as the texts were copied wasn't very convincing (on the radio at least): yes, we have different versions of the Lord's prayer; he shows some later copyists apparently trying to make them agree. If so, why are the resurrection accounts and infancy narratives, the story of Peter's betrayal also, so divergent?
Why he wasted air time pointing out weaknesses in the manuscripts which went into the KJV is beyond me. This isn't the seventeenth century.
But like I said, I haven't read his book.
He is one of those "happy agnostics" who have lost faith and feel fine about it. This seems to argue against what so many of us feel, what Augustine and Lewis and Pascal and St. Paul and millions of others have felt: the God-need. Perhaps not everyone has this need. Perhaps this is part of God's plan. Perhaps it is neurosis. I tend to think it's both. I know it makes for poor blog to critque a radio appearance without reading a book, but the issue for me really is time. I wonder how agnostic Ehrman will feel on his deathbed, or when he needs help and no one is there but God, real or imagined?
***
It's been a hard 24 hours gang. Faith issues, yes; I am very sensitive, emotionally over-reactive, to doubt even though I seek it out. I heard a story once of a self-proclaimed Christian in Europe who when told that almost all matter is really empty space (according to quantum; what's empty space though, could be more 'real' than matter) had a nervous breakdown. Began drinking. Became an alcoholic. I'm not going off that deep end, but there is a relation between that story and my own. Real questions are one thing. Pounding thrashing terror something else.
But what really set me off was a book I'm reading for Sci Fi next term: Ender's Game. Ender. The story begins with him at 6, and even though it's not Flaubert, it's not poorly written fiction. In only 50 or so pages, I found myself very triggered. The violence in Ender's childhood, the expectations placed on him, his 'special' nature, his anger, his isolation, his detached relationship with his parents. It shook me up fast and good. I'm still shaken. I felt an awful lot like Ender at 6.
So now every little thing in the (real) world hits me like a baseball: some small report at work I did wrong...black feelings; self-loathing; some light yet dark obsessions; my self-care is slipping; I feel like smashing my desk (this last really would be okay). I see my therapist today and I also don't believe I'm going into a major depression (been there, done that) but I was and am amazed how hard the opening chapters of that novel hit me. Plus, emotions cycle, old feelings come in and out like the tide and right now the tide is rising. Also, I spent time with S yesterday; I fear closeness with my wife yet crave it. We were together all day with unstructured time. Much of it was good, but I came away from reading the novel and still trying to be present for her exhausted. I'm mostly over bronchitis but not fully. It's 1:30 and I need water and food. That last is so true I'm bailing on blog and walking to the caf.
Four entire class sets of papers to grade, including both online classes. I hope to be done by next Monday night. I want a Christmas and New Year's free of grading and I'll be out of town anyway.
Thanks for letting me share, truly.
And on suffering:
Driving to work today listening to "Fresh Air" I heard Bart Ehrman discuss his new book Misquoting Jesus. Ehrman is a "happy agnostic" who began as an Episcopalean, became a fundamentalist/literalist, and then, after studying ancient languages and NT manuscripts, gradually lost his faith. He now teaches at Chapel Hill Ehrman also mentioned the significance of a class he taught on human suffering and the Bible's attitudes towards it. As much as he couched his falling away in terms of intellectual process, facing the problem of suffering was also significant.
Here's the thing: it is possible that Christianity will one day be disproved. What would it take? Discovery of older, and radically different, gospel manuscripts. Some other contemporary account which undermines the resurrection or the bulk of miraculous events in the NT; more fantastically, how about Peter's authentic diary where he details the fraud he pulled off with Mary and James, even Paul was fooled when he visited them!
Something along these lines would change my spiritual path and the path of many others. Granted, it wouldn't change everyone's. The historical criticism of Joseph Smith is searing, yet his church keeps growing.
Has that kind of information been found? Should a rational person, someone who is open to not ruling out the miraculous a priori, examine the evidence we have and write off the Christian faith? Books keep coming out, like Ehrman's, which say yes. I admit I haven't read his yet, but it amazes me how many intelligent people line up on both sides of that question. Since there is so little information, almost none, outside the gospels, and since we don't even know exactly when they were written or how, there's plenty of room for scholars to beat the text silly, pounding out whatever they already want to find (as Schweitzer noted a century ago).
Right now I'm working on the OT. I've ordered Bruggeman. I'm beginning the story of the Exodus. The stakes are much lower for me of course. All I expect to find is Jewish religious literature which contains some Christophic themes. When I get to the NT next year, much more will be on the line. But, barring some new and dramatic discovery which either enhances or detracts from the gospel historicity, I doubt I will ever find intellectual certainty. It's very difficult to have that for any history, especially when the fine tooth comb becomes very fine. I simply want to know I'm not a Mormon (no personal offense intended). Ehrman's thesis that he can prove radical textual changes over time as the texts were copied wasn't very convincing (on the radio at least): yes, we have different versions of the Lord's prayer; he shows some later copyists apparently trying to make them agree. If so, why are the resurrection accounts and infancy narratives, the story of Peter's betrayal also, so divergent?
Why he wasted air time pointing out weaknesses in the manuscripts which went into the KJV is beyond me. This isn't the seventeenth century.
But like I said, I haven't read his book.
He is one of those "happy agnostics" who have lost faith and feel fine about it. This seems to argue against what so many of us feel, what Augustine and Lewis and Pascal and St. Paul and millions of others have felt: the God-need. Perhaps not everyone has this need. Perhaps this is part of God's plan. Perhaps it is neurosis. I tend to think it's both. I know it makes for poor blog to critque a radio appearance without reading a book, but the issue for me really is time. I wonder how agnostic Ehrman will feel on his deathbed, or when he needs help and no one is there but God, real or imagined?
***
It's been a hard 24 hours gang. Faith issues, yes; I am very sensitive, emotionally over-reactive, to doubt even though I seek it out. I heard a story once of a self-proclaimed Christian in Europe who when told that almost all matter is really empty space (according to quantum; what's empty space though, could be more 'real' than matter) had a nervous breakdown. Began drinking. Became an alcoholic. I'm not going off that deep end, but there is a relation between that story and my own. Real questions are one thing. Pounding thrashing terror something else.
But what really set me off was a book I'm reading for Sci Fi next term: Ender's Game. Ender. The story begins with him at 6, and even though it's not Flaubert, it's not poorly written fiction. In only 50 or so pages, I found myself very triggered. The violence in Ender's childhood, the expectations placed on him, his 'special' nature, his anger, his isolation, his detached relationship with his parents. It shook me up fast and good. I'm still shaken. I felt an awful lot like Ender at 6.
So now every little thing in the (real) world hits me like a baseball: some small report at work I did wrong...black feelings; self-loathing; some light yet dark obsessions; my self-care is slipping; I feel like smashing my desk (this last really would be okay). I see my therapist today and I also don't believe I'm going into a major depression (been there, done that) but I was and am amazed how hard the opening chapters of that novel hit me. Plus, emotions cycle, old feelings come in and out like the tide and right now the tide is rising. Also, I spent time with S yesterday; I fear closeness with my wife yet crave it. We were together all day with unstructured time. Much of it was good, but I came away from reading the novel and still trying to be present for her exhausted. I'm mostly over bronchitis but not fully. It's 1:30 and I need water and food. That last is so true I'm bailing on blog and walking to the caf.
Four entire class sets of papers to grade, including both online classes. I hope to be done by next Monday night. I want a Christmas and New Year's free of grading and I'll be out of town anyway.
Thanks for letting me share, truly.
Comments
thanks for the info. I'm only 50 pages in, but already his sci. fi. stands out from the little I've read before. The attempt at a psychological realism...I'm sure eventually I'll get through the series.
t
I find myself reading the Bible much differently now, finding inspiration in metaphor and symbolism. I find common spiritual themes in other spiritual traditions. Really - my whole personal spiritual identity has been through a re-formation. I still feel uncertain about so many things, yet somehow more alive than when I thought I had it all figured out so neatly.
Still, I find the going rough. I'm thankful for the inner witness, for the times the Divine has touched me. I think I can honestly say that my heart is at peace with God. More so than when I followed all the rules and carefully attended to the status quo. A well tended garden is lovely, but the beauty and unpredicability of the untamed wilds claims me now.