Are Agnosticism and Atheism Compatible with Christianity? (Jesus, ritual, moral)

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by spiritually inclined

Interesting!

However, I can easily see some of the more liberal churches transforming into something that is so different from what Christianity has ever been. If Christianity can expand beyond theism to include agnostics and atheists, and rituals and myths are understood in symbolic ways, I could easily see the incorporation of elements from other religions. (Actually, this has already happened in Christianity, and probably in every religion, though it is rarely admitted.) Certain churches may then evolve to something that becomes post-Christian. That is what happened to the Unitarian and Universalist churches that merged to become the Unitarian Universalist Association.

Does Religious Naturalism, Religious Humanism, and Pantheism ever incorporate Christian elements, such as Holy Communion?

James

I can't say... you've listed quite a mix. Christian atheists don't practice Holy Communion, and if they did, it wouldn't be Holy or Communion.

[spiritually inclined]

They never practice it? Couldn't they interpret the ritual in a less canibalistic way?

James

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by spiritually inclined

Interesting!

However, I can easily see some of the more liberal churches transforming into something that is so different from what Christianity has ever been. If Christianity can expand beyond theism to include agnostics and atheists, and rituals and myths are understood in symbolic ways, I could easily see the incorporation of elements from other religions. (Actually, this has already happened in Christianity, and probably in every religion, though it is rarely admitted.) Certain churches may then evolve to something that becomes post-Christian. That is what happened to the Unitarian and Universalist churches that merged to become the Unitarian Universalist Association.

I'd say that the Universalists were mostly still Christian right up until the time of merger (and beyond), but that is definitely what happened to the Unitarians.

Do you consider the Quakers to be post-Christian? (Tho I don't think you'll care for their decided lack of ritual.)

[spiritually inclined]

I don't know much about the Quakers other than that they are very progressive. Don't they still put an emphasis on Christ and the inner light of God, however?

I could definately see them becoming post-Christian in the future, though.

James

[Random]

NO. Atheism is to be considered an errant belief for an orthodox Christian believer (as in just plain wrong) and Agnosticism is too wishy-washy to matter anyway, Christian or no.

There are non-theistic explanations for and interpretations of Christianity, and in fact these are the more correct ones, but intellectually it boils down to First Cause or no cause @ all (Uncaused). Somewhere between the two positions lies the truth...

[rojse]

Aetheism is the belief that God does not exist as there is no proof.

Agnosticism is idea that God may or may not exist.

Christianity is belief in God, and Jesus, and so forth. You would be quite well versed in this.

Agnosticism may be compatible with Christianity, as Agnostics do not believe or disbelieve in God. Aetheism, however, is incompatible, as they "know" god does not exist, which contradicts the Bible and the Christian belief.

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by rojse

Aetheism is the belief that God does not exist as there is no proof.

That's one form of atheism. The other is a simple lack of belief in god(s).

Originally Posted by rojse

Agnosticism is idea that God may or may not exist.

That's the popular definition. The philosophical definition is that it is impossible to prove whether or not god(s) exist.

Originally Posted by rojse

Aetheism, however, is incompatible, as they "know" god does not exist, which contradicts the Bible and the Christian belief.

What about the idea that not everything in the bible is to be taken literally?

[spiritually inclined]

NO. Atheism is to be considered an errant belief for an orthodox Christian believer (as in just plain wrong) and Agnosticism is too wishy-washy to matter anyway, Christian or no.

There are non-theistic explanations for and interpretations of Christianity, and in fact these are the more correct ones, but intellectually it boils down to First Cause or no cause @ all (Uncaused). Somewhere between the two positions lies the truth...

And what if liberal interpretations of Christianity are not concerned with the first cause? It's considered metaphor, similar to neo-pagan atheists?

Agnosticism may be compatible with Christianity, as Agnostics do not believe or disbelieve in God. Aetheism, however, is incompatible, as they "know" god does not exist, which contradicts the Bible and the Christian belief.

Churches have long been aware of inconsistencies within the Bible, and now they are becoming more and more outspoken about it. The Episcopals have been applying critical study of the Bible for about 100 years now, according to Spong. There are many, many Christians who would disagree with you about taking everything in the Bible as the literal word of God, sent directly from heaven.

James