(Part 2) Top products from r/OpenChristian

I've enclosed a few links that I have saved in my bookmarks. It isn't a huge about but it will give you a good start. If you are really interested I highly recommend checking out The Bible Now by Elliot Friedman, it does a much better job at explaining biblical interpretations much better than I ever will.
Some of these sites are obviously bias but, again, its a great place to start. I would love to give you more links but I have to dig though my USB for my notes and its all the way down in college (3 hours away). Here's what I can give you right now.

• The Daily Banter did a pretty good article on it and it can be found Here
  
• This site is probably my favorite. It does a really great job at looking at translation issues that arise with biblical versus. Obviously, none of these articles are subject only to versus about homosexuality but can be applied to basically everything in the bible. here's the link to that
  *I also really enjoyed reading this link. Mostly because of the external sources they have at the bottom of the page that I'm pretty sure helped me dig deeper into others areas to better understand the subject. Not to mention, its very great at showcasing all the belief systems that Christians have about homosexuality and why they have them. That link is here
  EDIT: I hope I did the formatting correctly. I'm a new user to reddit via laptop.

Sounds like faith to me! ;) Whilst it's an uncomfortable journey it seems like a very necessary one. There's no rush to sort all of this out and it's not something that can happen quickly. You're not stupid and it's ok to grapple with things and be a bit obsessed with things for a while!

I was sitting in church this morning (charismatic, non-denom church), listening to the sermon and thinking- why does this stuff feel so difficult to connect with? The guy was talking in absolutes that would have felt to me 15 years ago like something I could jam with, but right now all that rises up out of me is counterarguments and questions. I didn't really know why I was there. I felt like he was talking from a place that I couldn't go back to- that I didn't even want to go back to, even though I couldn't fully explain to myself why that might be.

Have you ever tried crystalising a list of questions out of these doubts and questions that arise? Then perhaps prioritising them in terms of what feels most foundational, studying and reading around the areas that seem most important to you?

Something I've found quite helpful is the Liturgists' list of axioms of faith as it kind of gives me some boundaries to bounce off of when I'm pinging around in my doubts and thoughts. Their podcast is also great for people who are questioning and hoping to reconstruct their faith. It's possible to deconstruct and reconfigure your faith, but as you've identified, it may end up looking a bit different.

Whilst these are personal questions of faith to figure out for yourself, I think it's really important to not be alone in it- to find people to dialogue with who are unshockable if you say 'hey, I'm not really sure if I believe in God today'. To be cynical and spiky with whilst you work things out.

It can be frightening to wonder whether or not God exists, particularly if you come from a denomination which emphasises experience and relationship. Something I've found myself doing as my 'quiet times' (pah- what are they?!) have diminished completely over the years is to pay attention to the times when I feel driven to voice my thanks to God, and also when I've felt driven to ask God for things. I'm not sure where these impulses would go to if my faith disappeared entirely. A book by Brian McLaren called Naked Spirituality deals with this, along with different stages of faith- the black and white/in out stage, the desire for knowledge and information stage, the disorientation, doubt and wilderness stage and then the stage where everything just comes together in a beautiful way and you attain transcendence and direct access to absolute truth. (Just joking, it's not quite like that! Would be nice though hey?!)

It's helped me to realise that no-one has their shit entirely together. (And the people that think they do probably just haven't realised this yet- I should know, I was one of them!)

Happy to dialogue with you if you have any questions- all the best with your journey either way!

TL;DR It's messy. Life is complicated, Faith is complicated, Epistemological questions are complicated, Christianity is complicated. And that's ok. (if a bit uncomfortable at times.)

Experimental moral psychology and moral neuroscience tell a very different story.

It turns out that morality is much more intuitive and emotional than pretty much everyone wants to admit. Being a moral philosopher or religious person seems to do very little to actually change our moral actions, but does a lot to change our self-report of how we view ourselves morally. However, things like feeling good, smelling fresh bread(positive impact) or fart smell(negative impact), being in a clean or dirty room, or being reminded of our mortality all do in fact vastly impact our moral judgement and actions.

As to your view of the primacy of Christianity, my view on that is highly influenced by the dual process theory defended by Joshua Greene that posits that we all have both more emotive and more calculating moral hardware.

It is true that the ancient Greeks chose the primacy of the calculating side while the Christians largely promoted the emotive side, but historically the ancient Greeks were in the minority. All the major religions that have succeeded also have a large focus on compassion, and many say that is what religion is for. Religion is that which enabled us to connect ourselves into groups larger than the familial, and the religions that have survived are the ones that allow us to do that most effectively.

In my view supernatural religion in the large is relatively neutral, but such beliefs have the problem of, especially in times of threat and fear, turning into fundamentalist tribal certainty systems that promote in-group out-group dichotomies where all sides are equally sure that, as the Nazi's wrote on their belt buckles, "GOTT MIT UNS", that God is with and for us.

I freely admit to being influenced by Christianity, but that in the large it is not as morally superior as you claim and in history has much less impact then you suggest. I do however find compelling certain ways of interpreting Christianity that concentrate on freeing us from the fear of loss of meaning and death(whole series here), that of their nature directly contradict fundamentalist, high certainty theologies. That it turns out that this view is much more historical than the evangelical view of the 1730s and later that now dominates our discourse in America, which I think is clearly so poisonous to our culture.

Edit: If you're interested in learning more about moral psychology and moral neuroscience, this book review of the best book on the topic will get you started, and the author of the review interviewed many of the psychologists on his podcast.

There's a Revelation of the Magi out there--a rather late creation, second or third century, but it apparently has some pretty interesting theology. When Jesus is born, the star of Bethlehem embodies the child and baby Jesus preaches to the wise men, claiming that the star-child is the root truth of all religious belief or something like that. Kind of an "all truth is God's truth" kind of story, but it leaves the possibility of non-Christian salvation very open. Great mythic image, the Magi.

This is the link to buy the NOAB on Amazon:

New Oxford Annotated Bible

It’s offered in a variety of formats, but I think the hardcover (which is akin to a textbook binding) is the best value.

The paperback binding makes the physical book too flimsy in my opinion. I have a similar Bible, the HarperCollins Study Bible (edited by scholars of the Society of Biblical Literature), in paperback and its “floppiness” drives me batty.

NOAB is in its fifth edition, but it is not substantially different from the fourth edition, so you can buy a used copy of the latter for under $20 USD. The third edition is also a good buy—it still incorporates the NRSV as the base text and can be had for $11 USD used. There were substantial changes between the third and fourth editions, including formatting and layout. (Some folks actually like the font used for the biblical text in the third edition over the one used in subsequent editions.)

As for reading strategies, you might like the brisk pacing of Mark (usually considered the first Gospel to be written and used as a literary source for Matthew and Luke, both of which include other material such as the birth narratives not covered by Mark). The Gospel of John, thought to be composed much later, is structured quite differently for various theological and rhetorical purposes.

The NOAB study notes will prove helpful as you read the biblical text, as well as the book introductions and a number of essays that are found in the appendices. Keep in mind that the individual biblical scholars who were engaged to write the notes are working against space limitations (lest a 2400-page book become a 4800-page book), so some of their annotations will be brief as a result. If you have more questions concerning the text there are other specialized resources available (e.g., individual commentaries) in which scholars have more space to address various questions one may pose of the text.

Such a good point. There is so much in the Bible that is problematic. If we just decide to excise everything we dislike, what we have remaining is no longer the Bible — but something of our own creation, disconnected from tradition and the witness of the church immemorial. It’s like a Jefferson Bible of sorts.

I just watched (trans guy) Austen Hartke’s video on the book of Judges. The last few minutes talk about a horrendous sexual assault that occurs. His suggestion (from Phyllis Trible’s Texts of Terror) is that the terrible stuff in the Bible can help us navigate the terrible stuff in our own time. The Bible reflects the human experience — with all of its flaws, shortfalls and terrors — and we impoverish ourselves if we don’t confront them. Yes, this takes a hermeneutic where we don’t accept everything at face value, where we have to wrestle with the text. That’s tough for a lot of people. A lot of people need something perfect and certain to put their trust in, which unfortunately(?) the Bible doesn’t provide — only God does, right?

Like you said, there is so much theological richness in Paul. He’s a very complicated figure, and throwing out the good with the bad is harmful for our theological imagination. I honestly think Paul is more “feminist” than we realize. The Pastorals and the 1 Cor. interpolation were probably not written by him. He had women in leadership in most all of his congregations. I already mentioned the Gal. “no male and female in Christ.” His reversals, like you mentioned — “the strong are weak/the weak are strong” — were gendered statements in a world where strength was associated with masculinity and weakness was associated with femininity. He likens his vocation as apostle to that of a mother (see Beverly Gaventa’s Our Mother Saint Paul ). These are great resources. (That’s not to say he wasn’t a misogynist; he obviously was.)

It's a big question you're asking. Lots of people have dedicated their lives to studying it and unfortunately the answer won't ever be known unless God decides to break His silence or the mystery is revealed after we die. The simplified answer though is what you say, the split between Judaism and Christianity is the interpretation of Jesus. A central theme of the Old Testament is a prophesy of a redeeming king to lead the Jewish people. The debate is whether or not Jesus was the fulfillment of the prophesy or just another teacher. The Christian faith requires one coming to the conclusion that Jesus is the messiah the Old Testament prophets spoke of and accepting Him as such. Rob Bell is great but if you're looking for a more academic approach to the Christian faith and its interpretation of Jesus, I would recommend reading NT Wright. He has a book on Jesus that has been very fundamental to my understanding of Him and I think would serve a good way to understand what the Christian religion says claims about Him.

https://www.amazon.com/Simply-Jesus-Vision-What-Matters/dp/0062084399/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1504703893&sr=1-1&keywords=simply+jesus+n.t.+wright

Honestly, I've found it more helpful to critique literalism and fundamentalist hermeneutics, rather than trying to justify something by "putting things in context." as /u/JesterWales pointed out, if the early church even had something commensurable to our modern ideas of "homosexuality" they would certainly be very homophobic.

However, I don't wanna discourage you from learning things. I just don't think you're going to learn much if you're looking for a specific hermeneutic outcome (i.e. the Bible is pro-LGBT or whatever).

That said, there's a lot of scholarship out there on this. Dale Martin, Bernadette Brooten were both mentioned elsewhere in this thread. But I think you'd also benefit from reading Luke Timothy Johnson's commentary on Romans and Richard B. Hays' Moral Vision of the New Testament (especially chapter 16).

That is a perfectly normal reaction. A lot of times there are physical, biological, or practical issues in our lives that can hamper our ability to pray and connect with God. Unlike periods of spiritual desolation (which are typically addressed by simply sticking with your Rule and waiting it out) the underlying issues typically need to be addressed. It sounds like you are doing that and I commend you on continuing!

Gerald May might be someone you want to look into more. He was a psychiatrist and spiritual director. I know he talks about depression in Care of Mind/Care of Spirit and in Dark Night of the Soul (where he points out the dark night is not the same thing as depression!)

Perhaps a good study bible, like the https://www.amazon.com/New-Oxford-Annotated-Bible-Apocrypha/dp/0195289609 ?

​

It's filled with commentary from academics of different faiths. The aim is to be scholarly. Many notes describe literary structure, context, etc.

​

So she'd be reading the primary source (well, translated), with hopefully about as unbiased as you could hope for commentary.

So there are multiple ways you can look at any problem. In relation to beliefs, there are also multiple ways you can arrive at a reason for believing something.

It seems like one of your biggest issues currently is believing God exists, which to me translates to having difficulty finding a reason to believe in God. Additionally, it seems as if you've been looking at the whole issue of God's existence, atheism, etc. from a perspective of truth value.

However, what I'm suggesting is try to look at them from a perspective of cost/benefit in the actions they generate.

Example belief to run a cost benefit analysis on: I should go to church every week

• Cons: I lose about an hour a week
  
  
• Pros: I find that I behave more morally throughout the week if I do go. Actually, there are studies (specifically dishonesty in this case actually) demonstrating an increased moral conduct upon being reminded to be more moral
  
  
• Conclusion: I will go to church weekly to increase my moral behavior.

Whoah, there is way too much in here for me

But, broadly speaking, it seems like you're up against the challenge of fitting a mechanical, game-rulebook way of looking at Scripture to reality. What you probably don't realize is that that's not only the best way to look at Scripture, it's not even the most respectful way to look at Scripture - it frankly trivializes this amazing set of books.

Can I ask you to try an amazing book? Things Hidden by Richard Rohr. It blows apart the mental model of Scripture you've got right now and shows you one so, so much better.

Also, do you have a better church than the one that taught you the broken way of thinking you've got right now?

Greta Vosper is a pastor in the United Church of Canada. She's a self-identified atheist, and has very left-wing ideas.

The United Chaplain at my school pointed me towards her. The chaplain said that she doesn't agree with everything Vosper says, but it offers interesting ideas.

http://www.amazon.com/With-Without-God-Important-Believe/dp/0062294857/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1398234192&sr=8-1&keywords=greta+vosper

These might be good for your list,

Homophobia and the Politics of Biblical Translation from the Jottings blog.

Sex and the Single Savior by Dale B. Martin.

“The Story of Reality: How The World Began, How It Ends, And Everything Important In Between” - Gregory Koukl.

The Story of Reality: How the World Began, How It Ends, and Everything Important that Happens in Between https://www.amazon.com/dp/0310525047/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_tai_niHPAbGE270Y0

When I was first asking these questions, this book helped a lot.

https://www.amazon.com/Changes-That-Heal-Henry-Cloud/dp/0310606314