The Questioning Christian

Am I Just “Tone-Deaf” About the Traditional Christian Story?

Written by

D. C. Toedt III

in

,

For some people, the traditional Christian story — that God became man; died as a necessary sacrifice to atone for our sins; rose from the dead; and ascended into heaven — resonates so strongly that it captivates them right away.  To them, the story is simply and obviously true. 

It’s never worked that way for me.  I’ve never been able to get past the troubling inconsistencies in the New Testament accounts, plus the fact that the men who actually knew Jesus evidently preached that he was the long-awaited Anointed One, not that he was God incarnate.  Those facts are what resonate with me (not least because professionally I’m all too aware of how easily memories and stories can become distorted).

But I can’t rule out another possibility:  It may be that I just don’t have what it takes to “get” the traditional story.  I might be like a tone-deaf person who doesn’t have what it takes to “get” music.  

I have some idea of what that must be like:  The quickest way for me to get into a really good mood, and even a state of exhilaration, is to hear (let’s say) What is This Feeling? from the original Broadway cast recording of Wicked, or to sing, say, O Zion Haste (Hymn 539) or Guide Me, O Thou Great Jehovah (Hymn 690).  I feel sorry for the unfortunates who will never know the joys of music. 

Perhaps that’s how my orthodox friends feel about me and the traditional Christian story.

 

Comments

5 responses to “Am I Just “Tone-Deaf” About the Traditional Christian Story?”

  1. Wayne Avatar
    Wayne

    DC,
    It’s funny; I’ve wondered the same thing at times. In the course of my life I’ve come from a place where I assented to the correctness of the traditionalist story of Jesus to a place where I do not. Because of this. I know and remember all of the reasons and “facts” that support the traditionalist story, but over time they have become less and less persuasive to me.
    I’ll try to state it plainly: It makes no sense to me that God would not be reconciled with his creation unless a man was tortured and killed. The notion that God is like this makes as much sense to me as the notion that the good and holy God commanded Saul and the Israelites to run their spears through women, children and infants as in the story of the slaughter of the Amalekites.
    If I’m understanding the traditionalist story of Jesus correctly, God is powerless to forgive people unless a perfect person (or divine being) is murdered. Or it could be worse: Another interpretation is that God isn’t powerless to forgive people on other grounds, but he actually chose to put this condition on his forgiveness!
    In the story of the Prodigal Son, does the father refuse to forgive the Son until something or someone is killed?
    I really try to be empathetic and understand the other side, but it’s difficult for me to see that people who believe these things about God don’t see how difficult it is for others of us to just go along quietly and drink the kool-aid.

    Reply
  2. bls Avatar
    bls

    Well, perhaps our failure to communicate is in the idea of Substitutionary Atonement – which I don’t hold to. And I doubt many Episcopalians do, either.
    I honestly don’t know what the meaning of the Crucifixion is. There are at least seven different ways that people understand this event, and I’m not even sure which one I hold to. But I can tell you that today I am intensely sad, and today I understand that Jesus literally took the sorrows of the world upon His shoulders. I don’t see how people survive the sorrows of life without being able to look to God and know that He is not a remote, distant being but that He lived and died with us here on earth.
    I just came back from singing at the funeral of a 24-year-old girl, beloved of her family and friends and widely admired by all. The Church was absolutely packed. Her family are among the nicest people I’ve ever met; it seems unfair that this would happen to them. But it happens to many people, because life is unfair. My faith, though, tells me that Christ was with her at the moment of death – and that He has called her to a better place. How could this be, if He was just a man who died 2,000 years ago at Golgotha? I hold to the idea that He was life and light and that the grave could not hold Him – that by dying He destroyed death forever. That’s what the Resurrection is, and perhaps that’s why the Crucifixion had to occur. I don’t know.
    My faith also tells me that her family needs to know this; they need to pray for light perpetual to shine upon her. How could they bear their sorrow otherwise? And it’s not a matter of forcing oneself to believe something one doubts; once you take this idea into your heart, it is so convincing that it overpowers doubt.
    Multiply that story by thousands and millions, and it’s not too hard to understand why people love the story and the person, I don’t think. Christ is the man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; the world needs the idea (and the reality) of such a man.

    Reply
  3. currahee Avatar
    currahee

    The most obvious explanation for redemption in Christ’s sacrifice is that there was already a long tradition of human and animal sacrifices to various deities and spirits in pre-Christian societies. It wouldn’t take much to reframe his death at the hands of a mob.
    I have an additional belief: the spectacular death of a special man was the act required to raise the world’s consciousness. How well known would Christ have become if not for Calvary? How else could people pre-Christian societies be prompted to discard animistic beliefs, reflect on their own sinfulness by examining the kinds of personal failings that would lead them to assent to such a horrific act, and seek personal Redemption by modeling Christ’s behavior?

    Reply
  4. bls Avatar
    bls

    (And that’s why, BTW, I think it’s still crucially important to tell a Christian story that doesn’t rely on Substitutionary Atonement. I’m not averse, either, to thinking in a new way about the Crucifixion. But we’re going to have to try to understand why this story resonates so strongly with people, and has for 2,000 years, if we do it.)

    Reply
  5. Tink McGathy Avatar
    Tink McGathy

    I happened upon your blog while researching faith obstacles. I assure you that you have what it takes to “get” the traditional story. It comes through faith and approaching it from a non linear model. People by nature like to break down things in a mathematical approach… ie. a=b and b=c therefore a=c. Getting to the point where the Holy Trinity is bigger than an a,b,c model is where you’ll have a break through. It’s like taking algebra to a calculus level. I was like this until I finally left room in my “equations” for the unexplainable or the “God variable.” I believe we will never be able to define the God variable in logical human fashion until we are face to face in the glory of His presence.
    My only question for you is are you questioning God or asking God questions?
    Please don’t be offended by my intrusion into your blog.
    God bless you man,
    Tink McGathy

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts