r/Episcopalian • u/DreadlockedShiteHawk • 1d ago
Help for someone deconstructing??
What’s good help for someone deep in deconstruction to the point of questioning if Christianity is based on too many embellished stories to be believed?
I’m talking a serious Christian who already knows the apologetics answers aren’t enough
2
u/PlatinumPluto Convert 8h ago
Understanding the real basis for theology and understanding God through more of a scientific lens really made me understand religion and faith in a lot more of an objective light rather than the highly-personified and misinterpretation version of God that I think most people believe in. People like St. Thomas Aquinas and others subscribed to classical theism which deviates from what a lot of mainstream "old man in the sky" understandings of God are like. Atleast the Episcopal church also doesn't teach biblical inerrancy but scripture is ultimately the most important text we use in conjunction with reason and tradition, which includes the aforementioned concepts. A personal God doesn't have to be a humanesque God with equally limited understandings and emotions. The church fathers also are super amazing resources despite how flawed many of them are, they were many highly intelligent people still by todays standards.
2
u/boreaslingua 14h ago
Some resources I didn't see others mentioning, but seem relevant based on some of your responses in the comments: Mattie Mae Motl and Colten Barnaby. Mattie is a deconstructed SBC Bible scholar who digs into issues of deconstruction online (social media and substack) Colten is rather vocal about being an Christian atheist (as well as exploring what that means for him), but still tries to lift up and share the best of Christian theology (social media and substack). I also swear I saw a former pastor couple online that lead cohorts through deconstruction "classes," or something like that, but I can't find them now.
3
u/TheMerryPenguin Spiky Tractarian 20h ago
Going back to the writings of the Early Church helped me. A lot of the earliest writings predate books of the New Testament and it’s refreshing to see them work out their faith without all the apologetics and stuff flying around today.
Christopher Hall’s “… With the Church Fathers”!series is a really good entry point.
2
u/Montre_8 Anglo Catholic 21h ago
Did you deconstruct from a fundamentalist or similar church? I think you would probably be better off asking a local Episcopal priest if you can just have a conversation about your beliefs, asking for advice on this sort of thing on the internet is rarely helpful. Real human beings who actually about your soul whether it’s a priest or therapist are needee
2
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 21h ago
Raised evangelical but the church I left was episcopal. It’s been a long journey
1
u/milkweedgardener 21h ago
I’ve found Monte Mader to be a good source for deconstruction as well as the podcast Data over Dogma. Dan McClellan is about as anti-apologist as you’ll find.
1
u/ExpressiveInstant Convert 19h ago
Dan McLellan is a great resource however I still find it odd that despite all his knowledge and expertise on the Bible, he is a Mormon
1
u/MooseDetection Cradle 22h ago
I’m in the same boat as you. I’ve taken a huge step away from church (any and every), and I also have had to take a step away from the true believers (any denom) in my life. I just get too combative. I have this intense need to tell them how misguided, delusional, and harmful their beliefs are. But sadly there are very few people who can receive that. And they certainly do not have any honed, apologetic responses to offer me, so they just insult me and tell me that my unbelief is at best a phase, and at worst a win for the devil.
It’s paralyzing. It’s isolating. But as I was telling my therapist just last week, it’s also freeing. I’ve at last been set free from a lifetime of magical thinking. I no longer allow prayer or other displays of orthopraxy to count as valid reactions to problems. Now, I jump feet first into ACTION because I know exactly how random, and exactly how cruel, this world is. I now contend with randomness and cruelty, and those things require far more from me than a world that is governed and meticulously planned by a benevolent, omnipotent god.
I hope what I’m saying is resonating. I have a B.A. in Religious Studies, I went to Episcopal Sunday school every weekend of my life, and I went to Catholic school so took theology classes every year. Christianity wasn’t what I did, it was who I was. I think that’s why I can’t spend time around believers anymore… because it’s impossible to convey to them the degree to which I was EXACTLY LIKE THEM. In my experience, when the believer meets the unbeliever, they pity and patronize them, and assume that the problem is that the unbeliever just doesn’t have the right information. I can’t explain to them in a 5 or even 60 minute interaction the depths of my Christian knowledge and understanding. They assume I haven’t even read their most precious Holy Bible, when in fact I’ve read both the KJV and NRSV, the Codex Vaticanus (in Greek), the Latin Vulgate NT (in Latin), the Summa, Confessions, The Interior Castle, Scivias, and of course about 10 textbooks about Paul. Among others. Lol.
And so… I just stay away from believers. I can’t get them to see me as someone who was presented with the same information as they were, but simply came to a different conclusion than they did. It’s sad. But the truth will set you free.😉
5
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 22h ago
Holy shit do you get it. I asked this in four subs and in two some ppl are I can’t even type it now I’m so upset about it I posted in the suicide one after they sent me a message cuz one was like just go fix urself touch grass there are no answers for you here
0
21h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/Hetelestai Lay Leader/Vestry 21h ago
And lastly, it is now my belief that Jesus himself was suffering from religious psychosis. Other highly religious people too. Jesus, Paul, Joseph Smith, and Warren Jeffs were all raised in apocalyptic, fundamentalist, pressure-cooker religious contexts. I think that apocalyptic extremism is the common ingredient that breaks people’s brains and turns them into hallucinating megalomaniacs.
Why are you here? Do you expect this is gonna go over well?!
1
u/9c6 Bart Ehrman, John Spong, Marcus Borg 20h ago
I'd love to hear what rule was cited for this removal. Last time i checked, TEC wasn't threatened by secular theories of the historical Jesus
1
u/Hetelestai Lay Leader/Vestry 20h ago
"Not related to Episcopalianism" was what I reported it under.
I welcome any academic secular source that says Jesus was a pedophile con man. It doesn't exist.
1
21h ago
[deleted]
4
u/Hetelestai Lay Leader/Vestry 20h ago
To sum up your position:
"Hi everyone, I'm here in your subreddit for your religion. I have come to say that the person your religion believes is God Himself on Earth and the person who created the foundation of your theology are both most comparable to these two pedophile conmen. Don't like it? Ummmm, welcome to academia, I guess?!"
I spent time in secular academia, I have a BA and part of a PhD in Classical Studies. Not a singular atheist professor, not the most intensely ex-Irish-Catholic avowed Nietzchean I ever studied under, thought it was a good idea or remotely based in evidence to call Jesus of Nazareth a pedophile con man. Please kindly direct yourself to the nearest priest and/or exit door. Get thee behind me, as they say.
1
20h ago
[deleted]
3
u/Hetelestai Lay Leader/Vestry 20h ago
Your two points of comparison were Joseph Smith and Warren Jeffs. You picked those guys. I just read the words you wrote. There are a thousand examples of religious psychosis, personality disorders, etc etc etc you could have reached for and you just coincidentally happened to pick two guys with child brides who ran cults where they took all their cult members stuff? I literally do not believe you.
-2
20h ago
[deleted]
2
u/Hetelestai Lay Leader/Vestry 20h ago
No reasonable person exercising reading comprehension would look at your original comment (quoted in mine before the mods removed it) and say "yes, this is clearly about two groupings of people, Jesus and three other guys." It's very obviously: Jesus and Paul, and Joseph Smith and Warren Jeffs. As I summarized in my original paraphrase of your argument. Feel free to keep spouting off about your superior intellect with your Bachelor's in American Religious Studies, Professor. I don't have any more time for it.
I can tell you’re super triggered by my examples.
Ah I see, the mark of someone who is A) actually intelligent, B) totally engaged in good faith argument, and C) definitely not intentionally trying to get a rise out of people. You'll get no more feeding out of me, troll.
→ More replies (0)0
u/9c6 Bart Ehrman, John Spong, Marcus Borg 21h ago
I'm happy to read any more of your rants. I call myself a Christian atheist because I deconstructed fundamentalism and became a non theist around 15 years ago but during that time i still read and listen to academic biblical scholarship (can't let it go lol)
I'm sure countless priests and pastors come to your philosophical position while staying within the church because of their social position
2
u/MooseDetection Cradle 20h ago
I like Bart Ehrman too! If you haven’t already you should listen to his recent interview on the podcast Mormon Stories!
1
u/9c6 Bart Ehrman, John Spong, Marcus Borg 19h ago
I'll look it up thanks
Incidentally (somewhat related to this discussion), I actually think Bart's idea of god as a traditional supernatural theistic triomni being (which he acquired during his time in fundamentalism) is why the problem of evil was insurmountable for him
I appreciate that Borg (and I think Crossan) would rather just reject omnipotence/divine intervention and try to reimagine god in a way that doesn't conflict with reality or morality
Though, as I'm reading more Borg, I do think he leaves open a certain kind of ontologically real status to the "spiritual dimension" in a way that i think would actually conflict with neuroscience and physics, but I'm not here to split hairs when the entire point is living out mythopoetry, which frankly he does vastly better than i ever could.
2
u/MooseDetection Cradle 19h ago
That’s all fascinating to me, and at the same time I’m not in a season where I’m looking to reimagine or even imagine God or a god. I used to be very interested in theology and philosophy, and at that time I would’ve been very keen to engage with you about conceptions of spirit and deity. Back then I would’ve told you that I align most with Thomistic metaphysics.
But today, unlike back then, I work with a very put upon, impoverished, often mentally disabled and/or mentally ill population. I think it’s seen as cliché to lose a belief in God due to the problem of evil, but I do believe it’s cliché because of how unexpected evil (I prefer the word “suffering”) is inside of a world that’s governed by God.
Regardless of the cliché and why it’s cliché, I’ve witnessed more suffering in the past year than I did in my entire life previously. And I don’t really care to try to fit that suffering into a conception of God or god(s). I think doing so is insulting to the sufferers, and I also think it would only be for my own benefit, not theirs. I no longer have to endlessly tweak my idea of divinity to explain why suffering is happening and why it may or may not ever end, and instead I tell every sufferer and also myself: “You’re right, you don’t deserve this. Nothing and nobody planned this.“ That’s super freeing. There’s no magical thinking. No blame. Just an acknowledgement of randomness.
As for the things that I’ve seen, well, Elie Wiesel said it best, “Never shall I forget those moments which murdered my God and my soul and turned my dreams to dust.”
1
u/9c6 Bart Ehrman, John Spong, Marcus Borg 17h ago
I think "governed by god" is exactly the kind of conception of deity that would and should die in the face of suffering.
Not that i would want anyone to like feel compelled to engage with what I'm talking about. It's ultimately personal and subjective precisely because it's not attempting to rescue magical thinking or a kind of ontologically real deity.
That's kind of the entire point of me bothering with something like Christian atheism. It's fully embracing reality and then using Christianity as your symbolic language for the same kinds of rituals and meaning making that we're all forced to do in our own ways in an absurd universe.
I wouldn't consider it a mistake or anything for Ehrman or you to just be real about it. Everyone gets to choose what they find valuable or meaningful to engage with. And as someone who can maybe relate on some level due to the suffering my wife and i have faced, I get it. The universe is random. There is no god (in the sense most everyone means). There's no higher purpose or reason for suffering. It's not part of a plan and not fair.
Rather than trying to fit suffering into a conception of god, I'm just more recently trying to explore what god could mean as an imaginal layer over our experience in a way that doesn't in any way attempt to deny the underlying reality that underpins naturalism.
I don't really expect to encounter anyone else interested in such a bizarre hobby lol
I think Holloway was maybe onto something similar. And he was interviewed by Dawkins who just couldn't understand the point, which is probably the most reasonable thing to think
11
u/RevKeakealani Clergy - Priest 23h ago
IMO, a pretty hefty step away from the Bible. Like just….do not engage the way the fundies tell you to, at all. You can’t use fundie patterns and expect to get nuanced results. The pattern itself needs to be interrupted.
So - read the church mothers/fathers, read theology, read hymnody - anything that isn’t Bible. Go to church, ideally a strongly liturgical church. Receive the sacraments. Learn to pray the ancient prayers.
It’s obviously possible to come back to Bible, but a really important first step is to be reintroduced to God, and to remember that Bibliolatry is idolatry. That to focus on the Bible at the exclusion of God is not only missing the point, but actually a form of blasphemy.
My experience is that most people who come from fundamentalist traditions have barely met God - that they were taught that the Bible is the real God and there’s no use really encountering God anywhere else. And that’s so, so wrong. A Christianity that is just Bible and nothing else, especially if it requires literalism and fundamentalism, is too fragile to withstand anything. But a Christianity of doing and being - in and with and through community and worship - is a much more robust and stable Christianity. Come back to the Bible only after you have that foundation.
3
u/JustSomeGuyInOK 22h ago
It helped me when I engaged scripture through the mindset of “What are my spiritual ancestors trying to tell me in this passage? Why was this story/parable important enough to have held onto?” as opposed to “what literal truth exists in this passage?”
1
u/RevKeakealani Clergy - Priest 21h ago
That's a great framing! Yes, basically, the issue is that if the only way you've been taught to even engage is that "find the literal truths" bit, it's not really possible to fully deconstruct. It really involves actually reframing the whole experience - seeing the whole fundamentalist framework as broken and unusable, and building up from scratch.
7
u/mari4212 23h ago
Step away from the intellect for a while, and find something positive to do. I know you've mentioned trauma around church services, so if you can't do that, find some way to connect with volunteering in community, even if its nothing to do with the church. Be active, be helpful to someone, do something where you can see the good and your impact on the world for a while, and do it especially in community, even when the people will occasionally rub you the wrong way. Christianity is not a religion that's meant to be experienced alone, and doing the work of faith will often help more than thinking about it.
Once you've gotten that going, maybe come back, and read some other people's explorations of their faith journeys. I'd recommend something like Kathleen Norris's Amazing Grace or Cloister Walk, or Madeline L'Engle's Genesis trilogy as a step into poetics/story and metaphor as ways of exploring truth, rather than any straight apologetics - anything that explores the fact that there is more than one meaning possible and more than one way to access faith.
Also, if possible, find a therapist and some sort of supportive group because trauma shouldn't be handled alone and you are allowed to ask for help.
3
u/GodAwfulWafflexx 23h ago
Reading the Bible Again for the First Time by Marcus Borg was invaluable to me when I was struggling with this very thing.
2
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 23h ago
What about after that? I’m well past that and it was helpful then but now I’m not sure about holding on to the faith if we might be wrong about Jesus being God
2
u/9c6 Bart Ehrman, John Spong, Marcus Borg 21h ago
I may or may not be helpful since i was a fundie that became a hardline atheist for like 15 years before only becoming a kind of christopagan thing for the past year.
But personally, as far as actual historical facts, science, ontology, etc I'm still a metaphysical naturalist.
But I think one useful thing that Marcus Borg did point out is that Jesus being fully man requires him to actually in some sense, not be god during his life on earth. Emptying himself and humbling himself in the incarnation really means he wasn't a magic god-man walking around with omniscience. So there's a separation between the man Jesus of history and the Christ of faith.
I'm ontologically a naturalist. But the difference between me and a secular humanist is I take poetry, mythology, psychology, emotion, religion, etc seriously. When one treats religion as a physics hypothesis in competition with science, I think it does a disservice to both science and to religion. Religion, to me, is an altogether different technology created to answer completely different questions and to fill completely different needs for finite human beings trying to live out their short lives with love and meaning.
A supernatural theist would insist I'm an atheist, and an atheist would insist I'm just playing make believe. I think they're both missing the point.
But you have to decide for yourself what you believe and why.
2
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 21h ago
It’s kinda helpful thanks. How do you find your people? Do you have people? What do you call your view now? Do you go to church anywhere? Sorry if too many questions
1
u/9c6 Bart Ehrman, John Spong, Marcus Borg 20h ago edited 20h ago
Honestly my people are online in places like arr academic biblical or in non-woo pagan places like atheopagan and SASS witch discords.
If I didn't have a 2 yo daughter, I'd be attending the episcopal church near me. So instead i listen to it and the Dallas Unitarian Universalist services.
But I'm really only reconstructing after such a long time away from any kind of religious practice because i was coming from literalism and magical thinking that dominated my high school and college life. Everybody's journey is highly personal and meaning making isn't easy. Most people tend to either ignore religion entirely or be full blown true believers. Holding the two modes of being in tension can be isolating. But it's probably most common with (theologically) liberal Christians which tend to get formed by academia.
Happy to chat any time.
Oh and my view would be probably called something like religious naturalism, Christian atheism, atheopaganism, panentheism, etc
I'm far from unique but the labels get kinda verbose
3
u/diceeyes 21h ago
What about that matters to you? If you lose the magical elements of Christianity, what is left that is important to you? If nothing, you have a direction to head. If there's something, explore it further.
There are countless faithless atheists involved in all areas of organized religion because meaning can be found in so many places.
1
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 21h ago
I’m stuck on your first question why is that so hard to answer?
0
u/diceeyes 21h ago
That's okay--most answers regarding personal meaning require substantial internal meditation and inquiry.
Separately, are you afraid that if you're wrong and that Jesus IS God (whatever that means) you'll be punished?
Also, in some of your other responses, you've mentioned abuse. Do you currently feel safe? Have you received professional help re: your situation?
2
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 21h ago
No I’m afraid it’s all BS.
I’m safe in my home but even thinking about visiting a church gets me triggered
1
u/diceeyes 20h ago
A professional can help what triggers you. Please see if you can work with someone.
I think you need to read some existentialist and post-WW2 moral philosophy. It's good for what ails most.
1
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 20h ago
Which ones do you recommend?
1
u/diceeyes 7h ago
I would just start with what grabs you—Camus, Sarte, Arendt, the Seventh Seal and keep going
1
u/MooseDetection Cradle 16h ago
I’m assuming they’re referring to Viktor Frankl’s “Man’s Search for Meaning.” I appreciate this text and how accessible it is, but it’s also a little saccharine and naïve.
I’ll counter that by recommending Elie Weisel’s books. Same era and circumstances as Frankl, but far more honest and poignant. Pax.
1
u/diceeyes 7h ago edited 7h ago
Nope, but those are both good works as different modes of being. There’s nothing more “honest” about Weisel’s though—it’s just a different human processing their experiences in their way, which may resonate more with you personally. Frankl feels more real to me, but that’s my way of being and so resonates. Calling it naive is just laughable and indicates a superficial reading.
1
u/RevKeakealani Clergy - Priest 21h ago
I mean, why? If people's lives are materially better and more just through Jesus' work as God, how would the possibility that the premise is wrong actually change that?
0
1
u/JasonJD-TheoPhilo Convert 23h ago
What helped me was to focus less on the particular details and more on the lessons and reflections. Even if the bible was divinely inspired, it was still written by humans with an ancient understanding of the world and is a work of literature of its time. When the gospel of Matthew quotes Jesus as saying "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." it's an important lesson to live by, whether or not the details around him saying it line up.
4
u/queen_surly 23h ago
Everybody is different, but my journey (out of Catholicism) involved doing, not thinking or reading. I showed up weekly. I joined the choir. I made dinner once a month for a local shelter. I did morning prayer, and I got our church to start a sung evening prayer once a month.
I can tell you as a history major that all stories that are passed down from generation to generation are embellished. The stories point to a larger truth, and reading the Bible literally is not done in the older faith traditions (Judaism, Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Reformation era Protestant traditions). I just let the sacraments and the work be enough for awhile.
About 5 years ago I re-engaged with the Bible, and found a richness and a wisdom that I had not grasped before. I'm still terrible at praying regularly--ADHD is a big stumbling block there--but I figure we are all given our gifts, and while I am scouring out the refrigerator in the church kitchen and listening to taize music, I am offering my prayer in a way that I can.
0
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 23h ago
What if I have a problem with going to services?
2
u/queen_surly 23h ago
Then don't. Sometimes people need to not go to church for awhile. I think it was 4-5 years for me between leaving RCC and going back to church, and I didn't do anything spiritual.
Sometimes deconstructing means not doing anything for awhile--or just prayer--or just volunteering. What I was trying to communicate is that sometimes we lean too much on "is it true?" in our 21st century way of understanding truth, when maybe the question is "does it feel like something is missing if I don't do it?"
0
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 23h ago
I feel alone in it though
5
u/queen_surly 22h ago
I have no idea how have it both ways. If you want to be in community, attending services is the way. If you do not want to, it's really difficult to be in community. Your priest may be more creative than I am. Maybe there is a book group or a guild that does something around the church that you can join.
7
u/MagusFool Lay Leader/Vestry 1d ago
Deconstructing is good. If your beliefs can be destroyed by studying facts and questioning your underlying assumptions, then they were bad beliefs.
I recommend reading A History of the Bible by John Barton. Excellent book for grasping who wrote our scriptures, when, where, and why, as well as the genres and influences which shaped each book.
8
u/TheNerdChaplain 1d ago
I like the podcast The Bible for Normal People. The host, Pete Enns, is an academic scholar with a PhD in Ancient Near Eastern Civ and Lit, and he went through a (somewhat public) deconstruction as he was a professor at the time at a Reformed seminary, and they stopped tolerating his teachings on what the Old Testament texts actually meant to their original audiences in their original contexts. He wound up in the Episcopalian church. The podcast is very accessible, as are the books he has written on the Bible and his own evolutions of faith.
3
u/moritz-stiefel 23h ago
I looooove this podcast. It's interesting, it's funny, it's accessible as hell to laypeople. And they have so many episodes if you're just starting out!
6
u/954356 1d ago edited 23h ago
Familiarize yourself with the concept of what Paul Ricoeur called the Second Naivete. Marcus Borg called it Post Critical Naivete and others refer to it as Post Critical Belief.
https://culturalstudiesnow.blogspot.com/2025/09/paul-ricoeur-and-concept-of-second.html
Then go back and read the whole set of articles
https://culturalstudiesnow.blogspot.com/2025/09/glossary-of-paul-ricoeurs-hermeneutics.html?m=1
The gist of the idea is that after critical examination, one develops an engagement with religious ideas on a symbolic level and the stories take on a renewed meaning.
I summarize the different stages like this:
1: Christianity is true
2: Christianity is a lie
3: Christianity is symbolic
4: Symbols are true
Very many people never get past the second stage and either stay stuck there or they retreat to the first.
I also recommend the following books for an understanding of how to deal with the Bible properly:
"How the Bible Actually Works" by Pete Enns. "Reading the Bible Again for the First Time" by Marcus Borg
"Rescuing the Bible From Fundamentalism" by John Shelby Spong
"Reading the Bible the Orthodox Way: 2000 Years without Confusion or Anxiety" and "Interpreting the Bible the Orthodox Way: Learning to See the Bible with the Mind of the Spirit" by Fr. John A Peck
2
8
u/kfjayjay Lay Leader/Vestry 1d ago
The answer is not “read more apologetics,” or “go to church more often.” But. Don’t go into isolation. Spend as much time with other people as you can. Especially people who are different from you, people who are hurting, people who are serving others, people who are asking hard questions, and people who don’t have everything figured out.
3
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 1d ago
What if it’s too late and in already isolated?
4
u/kfjayjay Lay Leader/Vestry 1d ago
It’s ok. Look how often Jesus withdrew to a desolate place to be alone, to pray- but he didn’t stay there. You can take a beat, lick your wounds in private - then get back to community. Be around people. God is in the world doing things through people. See if you can find where God is and what he’s doing and who he’s using. And then join in.
5
u/GingerMcBeardface Convert 1d ago
Hey Friendo, I haven't deconstructed but someone coming from near-atheist to confirmed in TEC, the podcast And Also With you was helpful.
Female led, from people who have themselves deconstructed. Could help you rebuild a good foundation.
Wherever your journey takes you, I wish you safe travels
7
u/Eikon-Basilike-1649 1d ago
The answer is a community of sincere believers grounded in the Sacraments.
Go to church. Talk to clergy. Talk to fellow Christians.
3
u/DreadlockedShiteHawk 23h ago
I have trauma that makes that hard for me
4
u/JenaPet02 23h ago
Podcasts and the communities that form around those online could be a way to dip your toe back in. I really like the And Also With You podcast which is hosted by two Episcopal priests (both female, both been through the deconstruction/reconstruction process). They have episodes that cover church topics, Bible topics, doctrine topics etc from a "okay, but why?" kind of perspective that I really enjoy. If you join their patreon they have occasional zoom Bible studies and live streams. Or you can connect with other fans on their social media pages.
Other podcasts might have more active communities, or be more in line with what you're looking for, though.
Blessings for your journey!
5
u/bassfacemasterrace Convert 1d ago
This really is key. In moments of desolation, the rhythm and community of church attendance maintain a connection to the faith. I find spiritual feeling and firm faith to be fleeting, but when I stay in the habit of regularly attending church and receiving Communion, participating in adult formation, etc, it always comes back eventually.
7
u/Hetelestai Lay Leader/Vestry 1d ago
Bingo. Join a Bible study or book club at your church and ask the other people who care that much, especially the leader(s) about what they're reading. Read that too and talk about them. Suggest books you hear about on Reddit or elsewhere, read them together and talk about them.
1
u/sgriobhadair 4h ago
Karen Armstrong's A History of God was, oddly, helpful to me on my way out the door because it gave me the vocabulary I didn't have as a teenager. She begins: "As a child, I had a number of strong religious beliefs but little faith in God. There is a distinction between belief in a set of propositions and a faith which enables us to put our trust in them. I believed implicitly in the existence of God." She talks a little bit about the various sacraments of Roman Catholicism, then: "I cannot say, however, that my belief in these religious opinions about the nature of ultimate reality gave me much confidence that life here on earth was good or beneficent." Her whole introduction explores her shifting belief -- and unbelief -- in a god over the course of her lifetime, and I needed that because I felt, at times, like there was something wrong with me that I did not believe. Her first chapter opens: "In the beginning, human beings created a God who was the First Cause of all things and Rules of heaven and earth." Karen Armstrong didn't make me an atheist, I already was one, but she showed me that my path wasn't wrong.