On Being an Agnostic Christian: The Severely Abridged Version

Version 1.0, 6-6-06

Contents

• Introduction
• My epistemic situation
• Theology
  
  • The problem—the too-fertile field of possibility
  • Effects—avoidance and restraint
• Apologetics
  
  • Overarching themes—abduction, naturalism, and the varieties of doubt
  • Revelation—the central conflict
  • The persisting converse—tenacity and apologetic potential
• Spirituality
  
  • Spirituality itself—the mystery of meaning and the perplexities of practice
  • Spirituality and theology—an unfinished puzzle
  • Spirituality and apologetics—the inspiration of the Bible and the interpretation of experience
  • Effects—inertia, isolation, and laissez-faire evangelism
  • The persisting converse—vestigial spirituality and Christianity’s merit
• The way forward

Introduction

The original version of this essay is very long, which I know is a barrier to reading it. So here’s a shorter version. The structure of this essay mostly follows the structure of the longer one, so if you want more explanation on a point I raise here, see the same section in the original. The section headings link to the same sections in the longer version. Also note that there are a few extra sections in the original that I had to cut out.

I describe myself as an agnostic Christian because I’m uncertain about many aspects of my faith, yet I still consider myself a Christian. My doubts throw the future of my beliefs into question, but my hope is to stay a Christian and to grow in my faith. I wrote this essay to give myself a clear starting point for future study and for interacting with other people on my spiritual state.

My epistemic situation

Basically, I am struggling to understand Christianity deeply while wrestling with issues of intellectual responsibility in the religious realm. I am an evangelical Christian, and I like being one and want to grow in my faith. But I see that the reasons I have right now for being a Christian aren’t entirely solid, and when I ask myself how reasonable (or livable) Christianity seems to me, the answers are discouraging.

So I feel the need to step back and examine, as fairly as I can, the epistemic strengths and weaknesses of both evangelical Christianity and the alternative theologies and worldviews, so that I can come as close as possible to the best explanation for the world and human experience.

My feelings of loyalty to evangelical Christianity and my tendency to see all viewpoints as equally plausible could get in the way of this search, although if Christianity is true, my loyalty to reason could get in the way of my loyalty to Christianity. This is a conflict I call the loyalty-truth tension. Balancing those possibilities is a challenge.

Theology, apologetics, and spirituality are three major areas of Christian thought, and uncertainties can exist in all three.

Theology

The problem—the too-fertile field of possibility

Theological questions have to do with the details of Christian belief. Christians disagree with each other about almost every theological question. So which views are the right ones? Overall, I’m willing to affirm the core beliefs of Christianity, but beyond those any choice seems arbitrary without more study than I’ve done so far. I do have theological default positions, derived from my upbringing and my own dabblings, and some of them I feel rather strongly about. But I’m very aware that with more study, I might change my mind about them. I might even side with the heretics on some issues, though I doubt it.

Sometimes I think that if I studied the Bible more extensively, I would arrive at satisfying conclusions, that the answers are there if you just think carefully enough. But sometimes (more often these days, I’m afraid) I think the answers just can’t be known.

Effects—avoidance and restraint

My thoughts on these questions are undecided enough that I tend not to think or talk about theology much. I almost think discussing theology is a waste of time, at least for me at this point in my life. To make any real headway I’d need to work out my hermeneutic and other issues of theological method.

The same hesitancy goes for living by these beliefs, which is where theology intersects with spirituality. I’m reluctant to pursue actions very enthusiastically when they are based on a belief with so much uncertainty behind it. So I generally don’t, and my spiritual life is correspondingly weak.

Apologetics

Overarching themes—abduction, naturalism, and the varieties of doubt

Apologetic questions have to do with the foundational tenets of Christianity and whether Christianity as a whole is true.

For me, the main competitor to the Christian explanation of the world is the naturalistic one. I tend to look at life from both of these perspectives in an inner dialog, though for now I ultimately side with Christianity, if only because it’s a safer bet.

Some of my doubts have more to do (for now) with the strength of the arguments we have for certain beliefs than with the beliefs themselves. The beliefs I have in mind are the basic formal doctrines of Christianity. You could say I’m a de facto fideist on these central points. But I do want to investigate them rationally, so I can only hope that a good case can be made for them.

However, some of my doubts have become more entrenched. Where my faith primarily falters is at the inspiration of the Bible, which I’ll explain in more detail below.

Revelation—the central conflict

One of the central Christian tenets is that the Bible is God’s Word. If the Bible is divinely inspired in some sense, then it would obviously be wrong to treat it as merely human. But how can we tell the difference between a divinely inspired book and a merely human book? And how can we tell that the Bible is of the divinely inspired kind?

If we acknowledge that the Bible was inspired, what does that mean? One more liberal option is that the Bible writers were only indirectly inspired. They were simply theologians trying their best to interpret the awesome events they had witnessed, and God