.
“It’s never going to work”, Nan’s Notebook
“I am not a believer.
I left Christianity nearly 20 years ago and have not regretted my decision for one single moment.”
– – – – – – – – – – – –
.
.
More and more I wonder why we have made “believer” synonymous with “faith and/or religion” – which means “believing” is now “believing” in a proscribed and defined deity. And is the cause of much verbal warfare (and far worse) … of many institutions and the ongoing “warfare” over their legitimacy/supremacy assumed AND legitimacy/supremacy challenged.
(all of which “gets in the way” a tad)
.
.
I was a believer of many things before I became a “believer”.
I still am.
I believed in love – and still do. I believed in hard work and getting up again – and still do. I believed in kindness – and still do. I believed I shouldn’t be rude – and … I believed my mum and dad knew everything – and … I believed my big brother was awesome – and still do. Just not in the idolising/hate way I used to.
.
In short, my living is founded on beliefs of all kinds. And those beliefs changed and still change. My “believer” belief no different.
“I am not a believer.” Is like saying I am dead. Unable to believe anything anymore. Beyond belief. Literally.
.
I am.
A believer and always will be.
.
But what I believe … Now that changes constantly.
.
.
I see Jesus being a believer.
Of love. Of kindness. Of meeting each where each is in that moment. Of not labelling or categorising or compartmentalising. Of allowing and empowering. Of enabling and liberating. Of changing for me as I change for me.
.
.
As for the “factual” and “literal” healing and miracles and superpowers and dying and resurrecting and the “evidence” of the bible …
Which must include all that sacrifice and slavery and original sin not eating bacon sandwiches and genocide (repeatedly) of the Old God …
I don’t need that to be true as I don’t need the New God and the cross to be true.
.
For if I need that to be true to be a “believer” … what else do I “need”?
.
So, when Nan comes along and blows great big holes in my “believing” (she has written a superb book challenging the “believers” beliefs) … then where do I go and what do I “believe”?
.
.
And all that Old God “badboy stuff” … ?
.
My reading is that loads of that (going back to the Garden and forwards) was a crafted and superstitious and controlling bigging-up of “my God is bigger than your God” rhetoric. Because there is no point in being “Chosen” if your God ain’t the Biggest Baddest Top Table God.
.
But – If I read the bible right … I don’t think Jesus needs anything.
Which is the power of love without any conditions at all.
.
Maybe that’s why we struggle with love.
We need it to be conditional.
So we argue about “the conditions” …
.
.
which (conveniently) puts off the “love” bit.
.
Church Set Free 
Since you linked to my post, I naturally wanted to visit. 🙂 After reading what you wrote, I’d like to share why I use the terminology: “I’m not a believer.”
First, based on the topic of my post (which was related to politics and religion), I wanted to make it clear at the start that I don’t “believe” in religion — of any shape or size. Since Christianity is the prominent faith in the U.S., most people would assume this means I’m not a Christian (a correct assumption). While some prefer to refer to themselves as an atheist, I have my reasons for avoiding this title.
Now, above and beyond all that I just wrote, thanks for visiting my blog … even if you don’t like my self-imposed title. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Nan, and thank you. I understand the why – and know you don’t use the atheist title.
The reason for grabbing your opener is simply a growing unease that the title “believer” (also used as a “universal” in the UK – and with the same assumption as you describe). An unease that the term makes a fluid-changing-living-thought-process (across everything we all do our whole lives – religious or not) into an inert-static-religous-noun: “A Believer” – if not literally then certainly by assumption.
And that I think is unhelpful. It sets up a divide between “believer” and “unbeliever” and makes finding common ground (of which there is much) much more difficult. Leaving aside those who like the labels, most I have talked with don’t distinguish much between “labels”. Preferring instead to see the goodness in others, the kindness and unnecessary generosity, the “good stuff” no one “labels” but so many do. Love seems to be common ground – that and hope and “humanity”. Against that common ground -the labeling of mass sections of the human race isn’t helpful I think.
And please keep writing. You make me think. 🙂
(my own lineage is a journey many take: cultural Christian, lapsed Christian, committed Christian, constricted Christian, liberated ex-“Christian” – and now free to explore an all-inclusive epicentre of love without condition)
LikeLike
Yes. I agree. Love should always be in the forefront.
Having said that … I think you’ve been part of the blogging world long enough to know that labels are part of the culture. Whether that’s good or bad doesn’t really come into play. It just “is.”
Anyway, thanks for your response. Enjoy your day!
LikeLike
😯😯😯
“just is”?
Isn’t that the reason for so much debate? One post defends a “just is” belief – and the comments fly-in demanding to know the logic and evidence for “just is”
🤓🤓🤓
LikeLike
Well, yes. What you say is true. But I was directly referring to the use of labels. People are going to use them regardless.
LikeLike
An interesting conversation….Thanks…. Julia
LikeLike
Thank you, Julia
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] … following-on from a post/conversation yesterday: Church Set Free: “Putting off the ‘love bit’” […]
LikeLike