( From Spring 2000, transferred from other section of this site)
I don’t see how anyone can say that Christianity is not a pick-and-choose affair. Is the Christianity of today the same as it was 2000 or even 200 years ago ?
Consider some of those who’ve shaped Christianity : authors of the Old Testament; authors of the New Testament; the people who formed doctrines of the Catholic Church; the people who formed Protestantism as a reaction to what they saw as corrupt in Catholicism; and so on.
Believing in the divinity of Christ is, of course, a key part of being a Christian. Perhaps that’s an understatement. But what about all of the people who’ve shaped Christianity during the more than 2,000 years since Christ, resulting in a religion that differs significantly from what existed during the lifetimes of those who wrote the New Testament. Were Martin Luther or John Calvin divine, not to mention the authors of the New Testament ? If John, Mark, Paul, or Luke were fallible human beings, then could what they wrote perhaps be incorrect in same ways ?
Not only that but in response to the idea that some Christians express–that Christ was either a liar or a crazy person–I suggest a third possibility: he was an extraordinary human being who was honestly mistaken about his divinity.
But about the authors of the New Testament and all the various other extraordinary people who made changes to Christianity, forming various sects, who is willing to claim to know where to make the distinction between, on the one hand, a blasphemer, and, on the other hand, a divinely inspired innovator. Wasn’t Christ himself put to death, at least partly because some of the Jewish authorities regarding him as an an extraordinarily extreme blasphemer ?
So , if person puts her or his trust in tradition or the status quo, what does that say about what stance he or she may have taken toward Christ during his day and age ? Christ was, for lack of a better term, a radical, as were the protestants.
So regarding current controversies in which some conservative Christians and progressive Christians find themselves involved with, such as the issue of homosexuality, should a person automatically assume that mainstream Christianity, in line with tradition, is right ?
Some of us may look upon beliefs of the past as silly, calling the beliefs of the Romans or ancient Greeks ‘mythology’. How do we know that Christianity, which was itself a revolution of sorts initially, will not at some point in the future be widely regarded no longer as a religion, but as mythology ? This can be asked regarding Islam, Hinduism, and Judaism as well. I am not sure about Buddhism.
*See rest of hand written text
Leave a Reply