Reddit reviews Jesus for the Non-Religious

Ah yes, wonderful! The Catholic church would agree with you about Genesis, as would I. I find it possible to appreciate parts of the Bible so much more when I understand that its supposedly historical accounts are riddled with metaphor and augmented with stories and miracles to enhance meaning. A really neat book on this subject is Jesus for the Non-Religious, by John Shelby Spong. I HIGHLY recommend it, and I'm an atheist. While I ultimately disagreed with some of his final premises and conclusions, I thought it was a tremendous work to rationalize a belief in and worship of Jesus. Here's a review from a secular organization, which still praises it.

Thank you for acknowledging my nonbelief. I appreciate that. As for "god v. science," I agree that I don't think there is a necessary dichotomy. Even such ardent atheists as Richard Dawkins have admitted that there is a possibility that a designer was involved in the origin of life, even though that conclusion is not supported by evidence and abiogenesis is a more compelling theory. And I will be the first to admit that there are still many questions that need answering about the origin of the universe, though the assumption that a "first cause" was responsible is flawed. What I hoped to hint at above is that even though there is no intentional enmity or conflict, as you say and I second, there are better ideas than a god to explain things once attributed to gods. It is entirely possible that Poseidon is still somehow responsible for the weather by controlling air pressure and humidity, but we have rejected any claims to his existence because it does not make sense anymore. Science does not set out to disprove the existence of gods, it merely moves forward, leaving old ideas behind it. I should also note (for the trolls out there) that I do not perceive science as an "alternative" to religion, nor do I have "faith" in it, nor is it the only means by which people can leave their religion; such descriptions and claims are misleading and untrue.

EDIT: Links, for sheer justice.

TL;DR Yay, science! I agree that the Bible should be read allegorically; read Jesus for the Non-Religious! Science doesn't seek to conflict with religion, nor does it render supernatural entities impossible; it just makes them obsolete and highly improbable by explaining things better, with more evidence.

Also, I really appreciate this conversation :-) Thinking about this stuff is fun and engaging.

I am so there with you.

The challenge with some of the louder atheists voices is that, while they are factually and logically correct, they let the big, fat target of dinosaur-riding literalists dismiss all value from any sort of spiritual or religious inquiry. You shouldn't have to feel constrained by that sort of black-and-white dichotomy.

My advice is: 1) feel free to call yourself whatever you would like, 2) believe whatever you can square with both your intellect and your heart, 3) don't feel swayed by anyone who says you can only believe A if you also believe B and don't believe C. Some people find comfort in boundaries. You may not.

If you are true to yourself, you will end up confusing a lot of Christians and non-Christians. It'll be worth it.

I will probably get crucified by the diehards and traditionalists, but for me personally, as a science/math/engineering-loving rationalist, I can not believe that Jesus literally walked on water or that he literally rose from the grave. I can not believe in a proverbial heaven. I can not believe in an anthropomorphic, supernatural God that intervenes in human history. I can't literally believe much at all about the Bible, other than that there is some great wisdom written down by very wise people a long time ago.

For a long time, I avoided the tough questions that you are wrestling with by sweeping many of them under the rug as "mysteries of faith" and relying on my gut experience of the divine, something like, I often feel the presence of something divine, so God must exist, and if God does exist, then I guess God could do A, B, and C. But no, at the end of the day, I can not believe in physics defying miracles. I just don't. I read some Christian apologetics. What I read is comforting if you already believe or really want to believe, but ultimately, I didn't find any of it convincing.

Once I just admitted it and stopped wrestling with trying to believe the illogical/impossible, it really freed me up to explore what is important to me. I can believe in the idea of divinity, that there is intrinsic worth and numinous beauty within the cosmos and within human life that goes beyond just our material value.

I can love Jesus, the concept of Jesus, the stories of Jesus, the celebration of what Jesus represents. I can believe that his example and teachings are a path that will bring me closer to communion with the divine and with other humans. So I can call myself a Christian, attend church, and do whatever else that brings me closer to God and Christ.

You might want to take a look at the book Jesus for the Non-Religious by John Shelby Spong.

tl;dr -- You can follow Christ and not believe the illogical/impossible, but a lot of people won't get it

Perhaps something like this?

Look up Jesus for the Non-Religious by John Shelby Spong.

It is VERY different from Lee Strobel's car crash of a book. Probably not exactly what you were expecting either.

Jesus for the Non-Religious by John Spong

Jesus for the non-religious Here a scholar points out the massive flaws in the attempts to make Jesus a divine being predicted by prophecy. Also he shows the Bible to be bunk. Yet, he tries to cherry pick and make an argument that Jesus was a great teacher. It's a half-step towards atheism.