Neurosis of the Holy Spirit

It’s becoming a belief of mine that acceptance of the idea of a Holy Spirit is actually a dangerous notion. I used to just think it was indeterminate, somewhat meaningless, and silly in some of its expressions. However, more and more I think it’s not just silly, but detrimental.

What is (the) Good? – pt 1

This weekend has brought up some interesting discussions about the problem of evil. One of my dearest friends validly, I think, questioned the assumed connection in perfect being philosophy between the all powerful/all good god and its consequent “necessity” to act in all situations so as to avoid impunity. Of course this is where the criticism comes in and the existence of the christian god is denied due to the existence of senseless evil in the world. If the connection is invalid, the “problem” falls flat on its face.

Absent from the body, present with the… Dirt?

Traditionally, Christians believe that once a person dies they are immediately in the presence of Jesus. I have heard some apply the same conclusion to a person in a coma. To a large extent, I think it’s tied to an association between mind and soul. Therefore, if a person is not functional mentally speaking then they must be with Jesus. I mean, “where” else would they be?

Question for God

If you’re really out there and you surf the internet, I have a question. You don’t seem to hear my prayers, so maybe you could comment on a post. Does the fickle and inconsistent love of the majority of your people outweigh the rejection and anger of all those who don’t believe in you, especially the ones who have turned away from you?

Metaphysical Equivocation

Religious language as found in systematic theologies tends to be full metaphysical equivocation. Certain mystical statements are defined by other mystical statements. Even if we leave alone the critiques of positivism cocnerning linguistic meaningfulness, trying to come up with a meaningful explication of some biblical concepts can be very frustrating. One such phrase is “to be in Christ.” I can’t begin to relate the multitude of different interpretations I heard as well as the blank stares I got when I asked, “Yeah, ok, but what does that (original statement or given interpretation) mean?” One way I sought to get out of this trap was to see such metaphysical phrases and statements as linguistic expressions of social or ethical realities that could ultimately be stated and explained without such language. The difference is similar to that between poetry and prose. At the time I began using this method, I was just beginning to doubt the validity of religious metaphysical propositions. I’m not sure that this approach could be used in any traditional hermeneutic, but I’m going to continue and see what happens as my thoughts develop. To illustrate this methodology I want to look at a couple of texts in St Paul’s letter to the Galatian churches and analyze his statements.

Doctrine of Election

This is a concise reason that demonstrates some of the internalist logic and linguistic/metaphysical dissonance I found during my christian days. It’s not conclusive evidence per se, but just an oddity of religious dogma. Anyone who doesn’t accept election as a valid dogma won’t have a problem with this, but I think their exegesis is a bit faulty.

Subjectivity of the “Spirit”

Reason number 5 for my wandering has to do with the doctrine of the “Holy Spirit,” or Pneumatology for you theologians. If there is one thing that would cause a serious 180 degree turn around in my thinking now, it’s this. Thoughts, theories, dogmas, doctrines, uses and abuses about the HS have wreaked havoc on any intelligent form of christianity. The plethora of views and the myriads of claimed experiences are enough to make you think you’ve been “slain in the spirit” and fall down on the ground rolling with “holy laughter” only to get up and “speak in tongues” as you cry out to the Lord in gratitude! Habish-kalacka-gustica-nishtera-blah-blah-blah!! Thank you JESUS!

Internalist Logic

This is not a post about formal logic. It’s about a tendency that is common in Christian circles, but not necessarily universal nor without exception or contrast. As I said in my original Reasons for Wandering post, these are all to some degree informal and existential as well as purely rational.

There are two doctrines in Protestant Christianity that are extremely important and helped to shape Protestantism in various ways. These two are Sola Scriptura and an attending principle that says “Scripture interprets Scripture.” The result of these two teachings seems to be a sort of anti-realism based upon the statements and interpretations of a book. The result of saying that only the Bible is truth and that it interprets itself is a tightly closed circle that ends up creating its own reality through which the world is seen. It becomes unassailable and impenetrable. Presuppositional apologetics even went a theoretical step further in propounding the Bible’s “self-authenticating” nature, which has become their foundational axiom in a sort of Plantingian “properly basic” sort of way.

Apostasy or Interim?

The move to hold theistic beliefs in suspense, let alone to take the step of actual disbelief, is a difficult one in our current culture. There’s no popular support groups or counselling meetings for those who decide to take such a step. It’s different than leaving a cult, when none of your family members are also cult members. In those situations, the entire support network is trying to remove you from a “belief circle” and transfer you into a whole new “belief circle” with an associated social network. However, when your entire existing social and epistemic network is theistic, it can be difficult because the move of disbelief essentially means a move into isolation or dissociation. For some who may not have many social connections or collateral, it may not be too difficult. But for those who are integrally connected, this is tough.