"A lot of religious Christians talk about, 'The Good News is you can be happy, you can be fulfilled, you can have the answers.' And I'm saying, 'The Gospel is: life is shit and you don't have the answers and that's good news.' (cont'd)
'And people will go, "That's not good news! That's terrible news!" No, that's great news. You embrace your brokenness, you embrace your anxiety and unknowing and you will find yourself happier..." (cont'd)
The more you think you can know stuff, the more you will hate to be around people who think differently, the more afraid you will be of different ideas. (cont'd)
... The more you think you can be happy, whole, and complete, the more you'll be unhappy because you never get that thing that will make you complete and, if you do, you realize it's not that great."
-- Peter Rollins
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I found philosophy later in my Christian life. I found its approach and abuse in greater Christendon in the realm of apologetics to be insufficient.
That's why I can read Nietzsche's "Parable of the Madnan" and read it as lament; not at all how it is read by non-theists.
While I understand the often touted line "If God does not exist, all is permissible/lawful," (depending on translations) the spirit of the phrase is scattered all around Dostoevsky's "The Brother's Karamazov." Admittedly, I've never read it.
But I cannot help but sense pain in the madman's speech: "How could we drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun?"
Recent events involving my family, again, voluntelling me to intervene with a cousin who is struggling with depression and other unresolved issues. For the first time, it made me really angry and I wasn't sure why at first. I have been digging into that for a while now [1]
I started thinking about it today in light of a paper I'm writing for class. I unearthed some memories that had long since been forgotten or suppressed (I never know these days). But I realized I have a lot of resentment over how my mental health was treated vs. my siblings. [2]
Technically, being the "oldest" in my family, I was the experiment kid and none of my three parents were really equipped to deal with my disposition. I can remember being depressed, not sleeping, and sitting in front of a computer for hours on end. [3]
"Backsliding is a sin. Doubt is a sin. Questioning is a sin. The only proper relationship is submission to those above you... " /1 (Quote cont'd in thread)
"... the abandonment of critical thought and the mouthing of religious jargon that is morally charged and instantly identifies believers as part of the same hermetic community." /2 (cont'd)
"The psychiatrist, Robert J. Lifton, describes this heavily-loaded language, the words and phrases that allow believers to speak in code, as 'thought-terminating cliches.'" /3
I either say the Bible is true and hand this person a “win” or I say the Bible is wrong. Hello, Euthyphro. What this question assumes is that I share the same interpretation as they. Because I believe a woman can (and should) preach in church, I must be anti-Bible.
Here’s where the fun begins: I am a seminary student and I take the Bible very seriously. Nowhere in scripture does it say a woman cannot preach that is not preempted by a societal or ecclesiological issue. It’s giving Paul pre-eminence over Jesus and ignoring all context.
🧵1) I don't know if my view is appreciated or puzzling to the professor and students in my seminar course on the conquest narratives. It's been enlightening in some ways because it has started to prove my theory that there is a hermeneutic for those who are #ActuallyAutistic
🧵2) I have been quite appreciative of the voices I have connected with, especially here on Twitter (@robertjmonson, @JoLuehmann, etc) that have expanded the space of interpretation I take into consideration when approaching the biblical text.
🧵3) While one cannot be wholly objective about a text (Hermeneutics 101), it has helped me develop a stronger empathy for "interpretations from the edge," minority and philosophical interpretations. Admittedly, this also stems from my own baggage with Evangelicalism.
I was brought up in the church ruled by Francis Chan, Mark Driscoll, and Matt Chandler. The real shift away from that happened in 2016 when I was diagnosed #actuallyautistic and then the election within weeks of each other.
Having my eyes opened to both my own disability as well as the violent level of blowback I got for admonishing others in the church showed me it does indeed take faith to move mountains.
My story now in Christianity is that I continue my education in interpretation of the OT. But being on the outside of hermeneutics by a matter of neurophysiology has shown me new voices. I almost hate that I bought into the Acts29, alpha-male, “complimentarianism” rhetoric.