Dénouement

Dénouement is a theatrical term for the part of a play that ties up all the loose ends.

I've decided that this will be my last post for this particular blog. The title is gratuitously provocative enough that I think it impedes my ability to draw people into a nuanced conversation. The sad reality is that most folks read the word "apostate" and jump to all sorts of conclusions. I didn't anticipate that.

Truthfully, when I began this leg of my journey, the title was apt. After 30 frustrating years, I was ready to dump the whole of organized religion into a trash bin and set fire to it. My views have moderated somewhat over the past few months. Not a lot, but some. Appreciation for nuance inherently means making midcourse corrections, tacking back and forth to triangulate in on the truth. So that's what I'm doing.

I always intended to use these posts as the basis for a book. The book is now available as a Kindle download. Here's a link to the Kindle store.

I had hoped to give it away, but 99 cents was as low as Amazon would allow me to price it. Hopefully, no one will begrudge me the 34 cents I will make on each purchase.

I did disable DRM protection on the book. Please feel free to share the book with my blessing as long as the copyright notice is not removed.

I do also have a PDF version that I'd be happy to provide on request. Go ahead and post a request in the comments and I'll see what I can do.

If you like the book, please consider liking the Facebook page dedicated to it: facebook.com/TheApostateChronicles

The next leg of my journey will take place here: Religion Optional.

Please join me.

Blessings and peace,
'Mo Spheric

Copyright 2013 by The Apostate Chronicles. Permission to copy and distribute granted as long as this copyright notice appears.

Détente

Détente: Literally, "relax" in French. In English, the easing of strained relations, especially in a political situation.

Religion still disturbs me. The reality that most men love their religion more than their God disturbs me. The reality that some men would happily kill anyone who disagrees with their religious beliefs disturbs me.

The inability of most men to separate God from religion is the root of many a great evil. Arguably, nearly all the grievances that men would lay at God's feet, are actually grievances against religion, not God himself!

It is not at all clear to me that Jesus intended to start another religion. 

The Bible records the origins of Judaism in minute detail. God personally wrote the first 10 commandments of that religion on stone tablets and gave those to Moses. In fact, God did that twice because a second set of tablets was needed after Moses smashed the first set in anger at the Golden Calf idol worship.

God so micromanaged the Jewish religion that He gave instructions to Moses regarding every possible aspect of a person's life. What they ate, who they married, what they might be obligated to do should something bad happen, what holidays they were to celebrate. God further designed the constructs of this new religion by personally stating the exact dimensions and construction of the tabernacle, who could and could not be a priest, etc. etc.

The Bible records all the various instructions for Judaism twice, because presumably it was really important that the Jews get this exactly right.

Conspicuously absent are parallel instructions from Jesus regarding the founding of a "Christian religion." The bible records Jesus personally commanding disciples to observe the Lord's supper (bread and cup), and to baptize future disciples (as part of the "Great Commission," but curiously enough, there is no record of any of Jesus' companions ever being baptized). 

While adherents of the Christian religion can reliably point backward from their modern doctrine and sacraments to something Jesus said or did, no one can point forward from Jesus' direct instructions to the founding of the Christian religion. Jesus never said (in so far as the Bible records, anyway), "this is how the new religion shall be established, this is what it shall be called, these are the sacraments, these are the holy observances, this is who can or cannot be a leader," etc., etc.

Anyway, back to détente. To the extent it is possible for me to do so, I unilaterally declare détente with the Christian religion for the sake of enjoying community. I wish one (religion) did not have to accompany the other (community), but that seems to be the reality I must deal with.

How long or how well I will unilaterally be able to maintain this state of détente is anyone's guess. I suppose only God knows. I don't imagine that I am any more able to tolerate the sort of self-serving personal agendas that I have personally witnessed in my personal journey through the wasteland that is the business of selling Jesus, but I shall try.

Anyway, for now, it seems to be working... today. Today is all any of us really has anyway.

Blessings and peace, 

'Mo Spheric

Copyright 2012 - 2013 by The Apostate Chronicles. Permission to copy and distribute granted as long as this copyright notice appears.

I resemble that remark

For the next few moments, let's set aside the relative merits of the atheist vs. faith debate. This is not what I want to write about today. Furthermore, I'm not convinced that such issues can be settled by debate.

What concerns me today is the co-opting of the term "free thinker" by the atheist community.

If one had never heard the term, one might expect that being a "free thinker" has something to do with how a person's mind works. That it might describe a kind of person who has the ability to correctly handle facts, discern nuances, ask probing questions, etc. In short, to be a critical thinker unfettered by unquestioned allegiance to anyone or anything. The kind of person who might follow the truth wherever it might lead them.

However, in actual practice "free thinker" only means that the person in question has arrived at an atheistic world view. It has nothing whatsoever to do with how that person arrived at that world view, only that they arrived at it. For example, someone who had not given the world we know much thought at all, would still be considered a "free thinker" if they merely decided to be a member of the atheist throng.

Conversely, I believe that it's entirely possible for someone to carefully consider the world in which we live and come to an entirely different conclusion: that the so-called "purely scientific" body of evidence does not sufficiently account for certain nuances in the data, and therefore the presence of a supreme being is a less-flawed working paradigm than the atheistic one.

So my main gripe with the co-opting of "free thinker" is that it is in fact a self-congratulatory social club (not unlike most churches). Think the way they want you to think, and you can be awarded the title of "free thinker." Disagree at all, and clearly you are not ready to ascend to such lofty heights. It is the ultimate Orwellian oxymoron. "You can't be truly free, until you let us do your thinking for you. Until we are allowed to approve your thoughts."

For me personally... trust me on this... when it comes to thinking for myself, I am no one's slave, nor am I blinded or deluded by anyone or anything. I have merely examined the same set of facts as others and come to a different conclusion. Never at any point was I the slightest bit interested in adopting a world view because I wanted to belong to some club (atheist, Christian, or any other). I have (and still do) seek the truth, to the extent that it can be known, given the inherent limitations of science, theology and our own consciousness at this particular moment in time. This is very much a work in progress.

So I would ask all the so-called "free thinkers" out there: Am I truly "free" to do my own thinking? Would I be more "free" if I let someone you approve of do my thinking for me?

Free thinker? I resemble that remark. Proudly.

Copyright 2012 - 2013 by The Apostate Chronicles. Permission to copy and distribute granted as long as this copyright notice appears.

Faith

This past Saturday, a friend died of brain cancer. I didn't know him well, certainly not as well as I might have liked. He was a believer, a musician and decent human being. We seemed to have much in common, but the opportunity to know each other better never presented itself.

I'm more than a little uncertain about how to proceed with this post. I want to be sensitive to someone who endured a great hardship and did his level best to finish well and do what God asked him to do. Yet, his passing leaves me with unanswered questions and serious concerns about the nature of "faith."

Part of my ongoing journey about how to live out my faith in an authentic God-honoring way, is the true nature of faith, and also how faith is perceived in the culture, particularly by non-believers. Again, I did not grow up in a Christian home, so most of my family views faith is being equivalent to superstition. Their attitude is more or less, "Well, I'm glad your faith makes you feel good." Truthfully, that hurts. It's very condescending. But I have only limited power to change the way people feel about things. The only real tool I have in my arsenal is to model what it looks like to live out faith in an authentic God-honoring way, and let the chips fall where they may.

So back to my friend. Almost immediately after being diagnosed with cancer, D**** began proclaiming that God was going to heal him. He was certain of it. God had told him so. I'm trying to cut the guy some slack, but clearly God did not heal him, at least not in the sense that I think most folks would interpret "healing."

This is probably as good a place as any to note that, unless Jesus comes back before then, all of us are going to die. As that famous theologian Jim Morrison once said, "No one here gets out alive!" Some of us will die peacefully in our sleep, some of us in more difficult circumstances. For the Christian, it is absolutely correct to view death as "the final healing," for we have faith that our resurrected savior will raise us too from the dead. But again, in the popular culture and in the sense that most Christians pray for healing, this is NOT the way "healing" is used. But I believe viewing death as the final healing does offer some insight into scriptures that promise healing, which is why I mention it.

So then, what are we to make of the kind of faith that makes bold, arguably impossible claims, then falls flat on its face? My personal belief is that it models the sort of faith my family thinks of when it dismisses mine ("Oh, that's nice sweetie. I'm glad it works for you.").

Doesn't the truth of what we place our faith in matter? I think it does. A lot. Again, as someone who didn't grow up Christian, I wouldn't have anything at all to do the Christian religion if it weren't for Jesus. The Christian religion doesn't make me feel all warm and fuzzy. Arguably, my greatest heartaches and disappointments in life... my deepest scars have come at the hands of fellow Christians. So why do I continue on this journey of faith? Because I believe Jesus is exactly who the Bible says He is, and I am compelled to acknowledge that truth, and His free gift of eternal life for the rest of my life, or until such time I can be convinced that He is not who the Bible says He is (don't hold your breath).

In sharing my faith, I find myself somewhat consistently at the mercy of other Christians who graft all sorts of goofy shit onto the truth. It's the whole question of credibility. Did my friend D**** consider the damage done by, on the one hand claiming to personally know Jesus as Lord and Savior, and the other hand claiming in no uncertain terms that  God was going to heal him of his cancer? Again, I know it doesn't seem like it, but I'm trying to extend as much grace as I can to my friend. I haven't walked even one step in his shoes. However, I believe it is critically important to open our eyes and speak the truth. The truth is, God did not heal D****  He was wrong about that. What of the non-believers in his circle of influence who might also ask, "How many other things was D**** wrong about? Maybe he was wrong about this Jesus guy too." I think that would make D**** sad. Just saying.

Copyright 2013 by The Apostate Chronicles. Permission to copy and distribute granted as long as this copyright notice appears.

Juxtaposition

Juxtaposition:

1.  The act or placement of two things (usually abstract concepts) near each other
2. A procedure of contrast (music)

I'm still trying to make sense of the past few days. It all started a week ago, when I received an email from a worship leader, asking if I could sub in on bass at the last minute. I agreed.

So I show up Sunday morning and a guest Pastor is speaking. Jerry (his real name, and I don't much care if he reads this) strides into the room and announces that "God gave him a completely different message to preach last Thursday." Immediately, my crap detector goes off. 

Well, OK. I completely support the right of a Pastor to have things his own way, But there was something unsettling about the passive-aggressive way this guy positioned everything as agreeing with him=being on God's side; disagreeing with him=being too fleshly to allow God to have his way. I don't remember exactly how he phrased it, but he kept asking the worship leader if it was OK to change the order of service. But he did so in a manipulative way that made it appear as if the worship leader actually had some say in the matter, when clearly his opinion wasn't going to matter one bit. 

My experience is that strong authentic leaders just make it known what they want. Passive-aggressive types are always more concerned about appearing to be a nice guy. But it's always a faux niceness, just to keep up appearances. I loathe such people.

Jerry starts his sermon. It was immediately clear that he was taking a page out of Benny Hinn's sleazy carnival sideshow word of faith playbook. I'll give him his due, he was slick.Whipping the congregation into an "amen" frenzy, suggesting that the "spirit was moving powerfully" as he taught, that he was receiving spontaneous words of knowledge along the way ("I didn't know I was going to say that"), etc.

I've known dozens of guys just like Jerry... always with a "word of knowledge" for someone else, always talking about how "led by the spirit" they are, always trumpeting their actions so that people will see what "mighty men of god" they are, all the while pretending to "give glory to god." My direct personal experience is that people who truly are led by the Spirit, who truly are mighty men or women of God, don't feel the need to brag about it or strut about like some deranged peacock.

At some point in Jerry's teaching (if you dare call it that), he tells a story about how a high diver entered pool room in complete darkness (except for the unusually bright moon reflecting through a glass ceiling), and accepted Jesus immediately before a Janitor came in, turned on the lights, only to reveal an empty pool, which would have meant certain death had he dove in. Jerry punctuated the story with "true story!" Yeah, well... read what snopes.com had to say about it. The story is so completely implausible on so many levels, words escape me. It is a textbook example of a "load of oats that's been through the horse." Snopes calls it "glurge;" I call it "holy horseshit."

I suppose counterfeit christianity, especially from the pulpit, is a real hot-button issue for me. I know my Master's voice, and Jerry's wasn't it. I found the entire experience so disturbing on so many levels, that I emailed the worship leader and told him that I never wanted to be present in the same room with Jerry for any reason ever again. I still don't know exactly why God had me there in the first place. After all, I was a last minute replacement.

Fast forward to Thursday evening of the same week. I attended the premier of a documentary film called "Sunshine Daydream." Basically, it documents a benefit concert by the Grateful Dead in August 1972. This concert is widely considered one of the best Grateful Dead shows ever. The film is stunning, moving, with a gritty unvarnished authenticity.

I couldn't help feeling like I had returned home in some profound way. Oh yeah, the naive idealism of the whole hippy flower power era seems quaint now. And that whole scene did eventually implode, leaving in its wake lives ruined by debauchery and hard drug addiction. There's just no escaping human nature, and the tendency of it over time to sink to its lowest level. But there was a definite sincerity in that scene early on. The idea that being kind, tolerant and helpful to one another could make the world a better place. Values by the way that aren't so different from Jesus' teachings.

I suppose what the juxtaposition of these two very different experiences showed me is how little I belong to the world of the cheezy counterfeit church, and how much I do belong among the "freaks" (back in the day, we used to refer to each other as 'freaks' because we were/are societal outcasts).

I just want no part of the fake world of "holy horseshit," but I do very much love and want to follow Jesus. Why is that so hard to do in church? Do I really need to silence my crap detector in order to endure the fake world of the modern American church (aka, "the business of selling Jesus")?

As far as holy horseshit goes, I am apostate. And proudly so.

Copyright 2012 - 2013 by The Apostate Chronicles. Permission to copy and distribute granted as long as this copyright notice appears.

Parable Of The Buffet

There once was a town. In this town was a restaurant famous the world over for its sumptuous buffet, piled high with the finest meats, seafoods, confections and exotic delights... all you can eat for $12.95.

In that town there also lived a rich and powerful man. This man was so rich that his wealth exceeded all the remaining wealth of the town combined.

This rich man was so wealthy and powerful that the restaurant owner feared upsetting the man. To ensure that the restaurant always enjoyed the rich man's favor, the owner agreed to charge the man only $1 for his meal, and to allow him into the restaurant a full hour before any other diners.

This continued for many years. Eventually, the rich man would consume as much food as 50 grown men at each meal. Then, after eating his fill, the rich man would fill many additional plates with food just so he could gaze at all the food he might have eaten.

This arrangement made the rich man so happy that he would often rise out of his chair and exclaim in a loud voice to the whole restaurant of diners, "Of all the restaurants in all the world, this restaurant is truly a marvel. Where else can any man rich or poor feast like a king and eat his fill for only $12.95!" He would say this even though he had himself only paid $1 for his meal and had enjoyed the choicest dishes before other diners were even allowed inside the restaurant.

This continued for many more years until the restaurant would often run out of food. Of course the rich man continued to enjoy the choicest dishes. But eventually the restaurant had to start serving table scraps to the other diners. They cleverly disguised this rancid food with rich sauces, dazzling spreads and exotic sounding names. Eventually, some of the diners got sick and one man even died from eating these tainted leftovers.

Well, even Jesus had to explain his parables to those closest to him. So here goes...

• The rich man represents the super rich and powerful; the other diners represent everyone else. 
• The restaurant represents the current political-financial system in which the rich receive favored treatment and special access. 
• The rich man's speech represents the "American way free market capitalism prosperity" propaganda of the super rich and powerful. While they never acknowledge playing by an entirely different set of rules. 
• The tainted food represents toxic assets and predatory lending practices that caused the 2007-2008 financial meltdown. 

Copyright 2012 - 2013 by The Apostate Chronicles. Permission to copy and distribute granted as long as this copyright notice appears.

The only role model I will ever need

Tim Tebow is back in the news. Truthfully, Tim Tebow is someone I rarely think about. Don't get me wrong... he seems like a nice guy, and I believe he is a sincere individual. But as far as sports are concerned, he is (at best) a somewhat naturally talented hard working good looking athlete with demonstrably poor mechanics and mediocre ability at the quarterback position he has been playing for many years. And yet, because of "the Tebow," that cartoonish kneeling-in-prayer thing he does after every big play, he is esteemed as some sort of "positive role model" for the Christian community.

In no particular order, here is a laundry list of things that trouble me about "Tebow Mania:"

• According to the Bible, Jesus is known to have openly discouraged self-serving public demonstrations of piety. If Jesus thought such things were important (or even positive), I'd be doing my own version of the Tebow. But He didn't, so I don't. That's good enough for me.
• Does earthly success or notoriety necessarily mean that God approves of how you live your life? I would say that the book of Job has much to say about that, and for me the answer is "not necessarily."
• Considering "the Tebow" gesture to be a positive portrayal of persons of faith is somewhat like saying the old Amos n Andy radio show was a positive portrayal of African Americans. Unfortunately, the culture at large views Christians as gullible, ignorant, and prone to do silly things if they seem "spiritual." The Tebow gesture actually reinforces and perpetuates this stereotype. So no, that's NOT positive.
• "The Tebow" isn't authentic. It's mugging for the camera and the only reason it works at all is that the person doing it is a celebrity. If Mr. Tebow really wants to thank God for his successes, he can certainly do that - silently. I know this because I do that all the time. Silent thanks are no less meaningful to God. God appreciates the gratitude the same way any parent appreciates that sentiment from one of their children.

That brings to the whole idea of "role models." The only role model I will ever need, and the only person I strive to emulate is Jesus. Every other human being who has ever lived is a flawed mixture of virtue and sin. Me included. I don't want to be like Tim Tebow or anyone other than Jesus. I guess one perfect role model just isn't good enough for most Christians.

Copyright 2013 by The Apostate Chronicles. Permission to copy and distribute granted as long as this copyright notice appears.