I’m always thinking about religion, faith, and belief. At the moment I’m a provisional atheist, but I’m not excited about being a permanent member of the club. I may ultimately feel like I have no choice, but if I do, I’d just as soon be some kind of believer.
Anyway, here are some of the ideas I’m tossing around in my head.
I’ve been reading Joseph Campbell and thinking about the interaction between myth and the human psyche. I wonder if Myth is the process by which human beings process the unprocessable. There’s something out ther,e bigger than all of us, and to attempt to define it scientifically would probably utterly fail. It has to be tackled holistically, using all the disciplines and arts and sciences and philosophies that humanity has at its disposa, and even then we miss it completely. So maybe Myth is the way we deal with it. We conceptualize it in a way that we can wrap our minds around. We use Myth as metaphor for the deeper reality that we otherwise are completely incapable of communicating.
If that is the case, then theology is probably a lost cause- at least if we think that theology is somehow going to lead us to an ultimate truth. Narrative, on the other hand, becomes extremely important.
If that is the case, then to do something with this transcendant reality, humans need ot negage it in a way that is meaningful for them. Thus, different societies and cultures have different myths and religions based on those myths based on what resonates with their culture. For me, the most resonant Myth would be Christianity. Seen that way, I could envision myself believing in God and following Jesus Christ, but with the reservation that I knew full well that it was just the best way I know of how to get at the Ultimate Mystery of Existence.
I simply cannot believe in God, face value, as described by any one religion. And I feel like simply entertaining some vague notion of transcendant reality is not sufficient for anything approaching spiritual fulfillment. So if I am to believe in something, I need to find a vehicle for that belief, and keeping in mind the ultimate flaws in any human conception of the sacred/divine/spiritual is how I would avoid the pitfalls of dogmatism and fundamentalism and furthermore be able to feel intellectually honest with myself.
I realize that this sounds a lot like the liberal Christianity that I normally dismiss without another thought. I don’t know what to do about that except to say that it just might be the best I can do. I also wonder if this doesn’t sound awfully like Neopagan theology, except that I’ve decided to believe in Jesus instead of, I don’t know, Zeus or something.
Anyway, that’s what’s on my mind right now. I’m also trying to read Kierkegaard. From what I know about his approach, it sounds interesting and different, and maybe something I can get on board with. We’ll see.
Sailing to Byzantium 
This is a very thoughtful and, for myself anyways, a thought provoking post. I appreciate this level of honesty, perhaps more than most.
I especially like your thought about attempting to define that trascendant entity even though it is, well, transcendant. It’s a little like asking Aristotle’s fish to define, I don’t know…us. I agree that something that is irrefutably transcendant (that is, because, if it isn’t, then it’s not what we are talking about) has to be dealt with holistically. I also agree that the end of such an endevor is inevitably futile and results in the relative myths about which you continue.
I agree that this would be the case, that is if there is no provided means of communication between the Trascendant and the transcended. Then the Transcendant would be able to reveal how we could relate.
I don’t know if you’ve yet to assume that I’m a Christian. If you have then you can probably guess what I’m getting at.
Which brings me to your thought about the lost cause of theology and the importance of a narrative. My question: what if the Narrative is the basis of theology?
Allow me to quote somethone I’m reading: “All the ideas of Christianity might be discovered in some other religion, yet there would be in that other religion no Christianity. For Christianity depends, not upon a complex of ideas, but upon the narration of an event.”
Your last two thoughts about your concerns for spiritual fulfillment and avoiding pitfalls hit especially close to home for me.
I can affirm that holding to a “vague notion” of a trascendant reality is not at all fulfilling. May I suggest that perhaps that is because when you are holding to a “myth” simply because it seems to “resonate” with your background it can never be anything more than a custom made reality, not at all trascendant and thus not at all fulfilling.
As for “avoiding pitfalls”, I’m afraid that’s a realative term. A pitfall may be a pitfall simply because is is incovenient or, as you said in the beginning, simply incompatable to us. But, if we are speaking of a transcendant reality (and if we’re not then I’m wasting both our time) then don’t you think it is our job to come to terms with that reality (assuming the true definition of reality) rather than attempting to reconcile that reality to our subjectivity?
I submit that the Bible answers all of these questions and more. But, I’ve taken too much space already. 🙂
Well, at present I am holding to no myth at all, so it’s purely conjectural.
If reality is transcendent, then I think it’s possible that
I appreciate your insights, Travis, but right now they’re just not going to be much help. I’ve been working on this for awhile. I’m no stranger to the Bible. I’ve read it from the believer’s perspective, more than once. However, right now I’m doing my best to figure out how to get out of the atheism that I’ve worked myself into, and I’m just going to let you know right off the bat that accepting Christianity (or any religion) at face value, especially at the face-value interpretation of most evangelicals and fundamentalists, is simply not going to happen right now.
Thus, I appreciate the fact that you made a point without beating me over the head with it and then let it go. I like input, but I’m in no mood to argue. We’re talking about what I believe anyway, and I try not to get to feeling too accountable to random internet strangers for.
Right now, like I said, I simply no not believe that the Bible is plainly factual, and that it is a very good basis for literally describing the universe.
Also, don’t worry about taking “too much space.” It’s the internet, and I don’t care if WordPress wants to host novel-length comments. Worry about if what you’re saying is meaningful, relevant, and purposeful. Length isn’t really an issue.
Thanks for reading my comment. I tend to run off at the mouth some times. 🙂
The last thing in the world I want to do, however, is run off another honest inquirer by being over-bearing. I’m glad you noticed my efforts.
By the way, I did not realize that you were formerly a Mormon. I sensed some root of a religious background, but I honestly would not have guessed Mormonism.
One more piece of advice if I may. I was right in guessing that you and I had in common a background with which we have found ourselves at odds (albeit, different details, but I wouldn’t doubt similar themes).
Your honesty is strikingly refreshing, and I’ll keep an eye out for your posts.
Take a look at mine sometime. It’s new and there’s not much on it, but I think you’ll appreciate some stuff that I write. I’d like to hear your take on some thing, too.
Thanks.
T.J.S.
Acts 20:24
tjcontending.wordpress.com