Charting a New Reformation, Part XXI - The Sixth Thesis, Atonement Theology

Column by Bishop John Shelby Spong on 12 May 2016 24 Comments
Please login with your account to read this essay.
 

Question

I’ve been reading your book, The Sins of Scripture, and it has really opened up my mind to see God in a whole new way. As a child of incest, I’ve always had a hard time with “God the Father” talk. When I came into Christianity, I understood the concept of God, but was confused about Jesus. Now I feel like I can relate to Jesus, but I truly don’t understand God. I’m comfortable thinking that God is not a person and that God cannot rescue or punish, but then God becomes this big question mark. The term “mystery” fits well, but then I’m left feeling a little flat, specifically wondering how do I pray to such a God? If this God has no real authority or influence over my life, then are prayers really necessary, even heard?

Thank you so much for your work on trying to evolve and explain Christianity.

Answer

Dear Susan,

Thank you for your letter. I have identified you in this column only with an initial since your letter revealed so much personal data.

I share your concern. For many, parental names for God bring up a flood of good memories, but there are a number of dysfunctional families in our world and human, parental experience is not always positive. I recall a family in my early ministry dominated by an abusive father. The idea that “God’s Commandments” require that we “honor our father and mother” was more than the children of this family could tolerate. So often we apply universal principles to situations where human experience renders these principles null and void. This is why ethics must always be situational!

In my current column series, entitled Charting a New Reformation, I have been or will be (depending on when this particular letter is published) dealing with both the issue of God and the meaning of prayer. Both subjects are, however, far too complex and complicated to be answered in a question and answer format.

Let me simply observe that almost everyone since the dawn of humanity begins with the concept of God as something like a person. If one remains there, neither God nor prayer will ever make sense. Can we then move to a non-personal language for God? This is not easy but ultimately, I believe we must learn to develop a non-personal concept of God that we as persons can still access. When I say that, however, my religious language begins to sound like gibberish.

It helps me to separate the God experience from the God definitions. Is the experience of transcendence real or is it delusional? If it is real, how do we talk about it? Maybe instead of trying to define God, we should limit ourselves to trying to define our experience of God. There is a difference. When I say that I experience God as the meaning of life, the source of love and the ground of being, what I am saying is that God is somehow present in the life I live, the love I share and being that I am. So living, loving and being become the manifestations of God in me. Prayer then becomes not an activity in which I seek God’s help, but a part of what it means to share life, to increase love and to enhance being. In this process, we have moved very far away from the supernatural parent figure in the sky, to whom our petitions are traditionally addressed. So walk with me, if you will, through the present series in my column, join the online discussions and let us see if we can find a new way to talk about God, who is real and the activity of prayer that is not petitions to a supernatural being.

John Shelby Spong

 

Comments

 

24 thoughts on “Charting a New Reformation, Part XXI – The Sixth Thesis, Atonement Theology

  1. WordPress › Error

    There has been a critical error on this website.

    Learn more about troubleshooting WordPress.