The Christian Atheist: A Review
June 2, 2015
G.D.O'Bradovich III
How can esoteric writing exist?
It exists because not everyone reads or understands information, or the lack thereof, in the same manner. I have been reading the allege writings of the Church Fathers to determine, to my satisfaction, if they are, as Hardouin maintains, atheistic. When an acquaintance, who I shall name RJ, mentioned the book “Christian Atheist”, I decided to read it, since no one reads the alleged writings of the Church Fathers today, but Christian books are sometimes on best seller lists.
If the purpose of the alleged writings of the Church Fathers is to overturn Christianity and create an atheistic world view, then the potential for atheistic thought should be found in modern books. I have borrowed “Christian Atheist” from RJ, but I was warned not to take ideas out of context. Either RJ has not read any of the 520 pages on my website, or he thinks that I have an agenda other than the facts. Regardless of his motivation, I eagerly assented to not take anything out of context. The spirit is willing...
The term “Christian Atheist”, of course, is nonsensical in a historical context. “Christian Atheist” is only possible when Christianity is removed from the historical church, that is, when Christianity becomes a belief system and nothing more. Unfortunately, just what to believed to be a “Christian” is never stated nor implied, so it is impossible to discover “heretical” or wrong ideas, since there is no standard. There are several examples in the text of the results this new “Christian” belief.
These examples could be simply described as hypocritical, for these “believers” say one thing, yet do another. But since we do not not know their belief or beliefs, we only make the assumption of their beliefs and fall into the error of labeling them as hypocrites. Legally, this described as “assuming facts not in evidence”.
Numbers in brackets refer to page numbers. I have not included text that one would expect to find in a religious or Christian publication, however I have included text that is either atheistic or impious.
As always, the Gentle Reader will determine the value of my commentary.
It exists because not everyone reads or understands information, or the lack thereof, in the same manner. I have been reading the allege writings of the Church Fathers to determine, to my satisfaction, if they are, as Hardouin maintains, atheistic. When an acquaintance, who I shall name RJ, mentioned the book “Christian Atheist”, I decided to read it, since no one reads the alleged writings of the Church Fathers today, but Christian books are sometimes on best seller lists.
If the purpose of the alleged writings of the Church Fathers is to overturn Christianity and create an atheistic world view, then the potential for atheistic thought should be found in modern books. I have borrowed “Christian Atheist” from RJ, but I was warned not to take ideas out of context. Either RJ has not read any of the 520 pages on my website, or he thinks that I have an agenda other than the facts. Regardless of his motivation, I eagerly assented to not take anything out of context. The spirit is willing...
The term “Christian Atheist”, of course, is nonsensical in a historical context. “Christian Atheist” is only possible when Christianity is removed from the historical church, that is, when Christianity becomes a belief system and nothing more. Unfortunately, just what to believed to be a “Christian” is never stated nor implied, so it is impossible to discover “heretical” or wrong ideas, since there is no standard. There are several examples in the text of the results this new “Christian” belief.
These examples could be simply described as hypocritical, for these “believers” say one thing, yet do another. But since we do not not know their belief or beliefs, we only make the assumption of their beliefs and fall into the error of labeling them as hypocrites. Legally, this described as “assuming facts not in evidence”.
Numbers in brackets refer to page numbers. I have not included text that one would expect to find in a religious or Christian publication, however I have included text that is either atheistic or impious.
As always, the Gentle Reader will determine the value of my commentary.
Hi, my name is Craig Groeschel, and I'm a Christian Atheist. [17]
Craig was not a Christian Atheist, but is presently a Christian Atheist.
Christian Atheism is a fast-spreading spiritual pandemic... [17]
With God's help, perhaps we can learn to know and walk with God more intimately [27]
Perhaps we can, perhaps not. The careful reader will find many examples of words that are conditional.
God, you are good. Nice work. [32]
God has provided a date. Impiety.
94 percent of Americans claim to believe in God or a universal spirit. [33]
Neither “God” nor “universal spirit” was defined in the text, so we can not know what this information is meant to convey.
For many people, the very idea that you could know God on a relational level seems unlikely, unrealistic, unattainable. [33]
This is an agnostic or Deistic statement.
Obviously, there is more to the whole Christian thing than just believing in God. [35]
It is not obvious, but can be deduced that there are more, since “Christian” was used and not theist. Whatever the "more" is, it is not universal across Modern Christianity.
And a relationship with God naturally will flow out in daily attitudes and actions. [35]
Our behavior determines our relationship with God.
God is interested not only in our actions, but...also in our attitude toward him. [36]
God is interested in our attitude or “a settled way of thinking or feeling about someone or something”.
Or we think we're Christians because...it's not like we're Buddhists. [36]
People identify with Christianity as a default, they are not Jews or Muslims, therefore they are Christians.
There's kind of a buzz, a constant conscious awareness that as my day unfolds, God is orchestrating things and sending people into my life. [39]
At other times, God may not feel as close. [39]
Sometimes, we may not feel God's closeness. This is inappropriate and possibly a cause of scandal for immature readers.
What do you call God?...Dear eight-pound, six ounce Baby Jesus? [42]
This is impious.
Shame was a direct contributor to my years of Christian Atheism, just as it is for many others. [49]
God want to renew our hearts and minds... [52]
This is the root of a challenge for many Christian Atheists: belief in God doesn't automatically result in the belief...that God loves us. [60]
Why should a belief in anything result in the belief that love is an aspect of that belief is not explained.
Oddly, our disbelief doesn't necessarily question whether God can or does love people. [60]
The author elaborates on the oddity by writing that “God can” love people. It is only odd if the person is a Deist.
It isn't only our sense of guilt that prevent us from believing that God loves us-sometimes it is a simple sense of insignificance. [63]
When Christian Atheists look at the world...we wonder why God would love people as insignificant as we are. [63]
This is an agnostic rhetorical statement.
That doesn't seem possible, let alone likely, and surely God has bigger things on his mind. [63]
This is the use of reason is insufficient to understand why the “God of the universe” would be be interested in one planet out of thousands.
If these stories tell us anything, it's that we're in good company if we've ever felt like we're not good enough or important enough to be loved by God. [64]
We note the uses of the conditional word “if”.
When we finally understand that God actually loves us, it changes everything. [66]
We note the use of the seemingly superficial word “actually”. The second definition of actually is” used to emphasize that something someone has said or done is surprising.”
If you're a pastor and you tell the congregation that there is no way God could love such a ragtag bunch of sinners, I cannot guarantee such a pleasant outcome. [68]
As we learn from events surrounding Socrates and Jesus, people do not want to hear the truth.
God loves us because God...is...love. [69]
God...is....love. Conveys...no...information.
Life has trained many of us to think of love as temporary and conditional. [69]
Our experiences have taught us to be realize that love is conditional. The condition of love is the presence of acceptable behavior.
Why would God love you? Because that's who God is: he's love. [71]
One again, we are told that God is love.
He [the pastor] admitted the church prayed, but he also affirmed that no one in his congregation really expected anything to happen. [75]
Pastors lead people in prayer with the expectation of nothing. It would increase the likelihood of success to do something than to wish for something.
He reminded me that Jesus suffered for me, so I shouldn't complain. [77]
We forget that God loves the prayers of imperfect people... [78]
Is it that the reader forgot this information, or he never heard this idea before?
In the middle of a conversation with the creator of the universe, I sometimes remember that I haven't shaved the back of my neck in over a week or that we're running low on toilet paper. [78]
This is an impious statement.
When you acknowledge that the God of the universe is honestly, truly excited to hear form you-... [78]
Move the focus from yourself onto God. [78]
We just aren't sure our prayers will make a difference. [79]
Unbelief in the power of prayer is a statement from an agnostic.
[You] may still sense God's loving presence as you grow to know him. [80]
You may sense it or you may not.
[Your] prayer will often change your heart or perspective. [80]
The more often we pray, the more our daily lives will be infused with a God-conciousness. [82]
God-conciousness was not defined. However, it sounds like Oriental mysticism.
“He [God] can speak through people, circumstances, nature, and through his written Word. [83]
We note the use of the conditional word “can”, however we are uncertain if God does speak through these.
The God of the universe is ready to hear from you. [90]
However, we presume He is not concerned with your personal grooming or toiletry needs.
If God is fair...If God's fair...I seems reasonable, then, to conclude that either God isn't fair or he's powerless. [94]
We encounter the use of reason. The conclusion, “powerless”, is the same conclusion that Epicurus reached concerning God.
Why would God allow someone who's been faithful for years to lose everything but his life, just to settle some cosmic argument? That hardly seems fair. [96]
Mr. Groeschel doubts the reasonableness of the story of Job. Atheist.
God is not a finite person. He is a spirit who created everything. [101]
It seems that the author is unaware of the Incarnation. We have have learned that God is a spirit who loves and created everything.
But the good news is that God is not fair. [101]
Perhaps, I took this out of context, perhaps I didn't. As a philologist, I thought the good news was the Gospel...
If the wages of sin is death and we're sinners, then we deserve death. [102]
We note that the use of the conditional “If” and “then” changes the intended meaning of Saint Paul. If we do not agree with the premise, then we can not agree with the conclusion.
When we don't understand something about God, some people are tempted to discredit him completely. [105]
Where “some people” are understood as atheists.
For some reason, it's human nature to place blame. [105]
We are undecided if it is human nature or learned behavior from our culture.
He [God] may allow it [pain], but he doesn't cause it. [106]
We note the use of the conditional word “may”. The author seems uncertain if God allows pain.
As a struggling Christian Atheist, I have my doubts and questions about God...I don't have to understand everything to believe something. [108]
Doubts about God are more accurately assigned to agnostics, not atheists. We doubt the author does not “understands everything”, but we concede he can “believe something.” In fact, one can know nothing, yet believe something.
As a Christian Atheist, I felt justified in my bitter hatred... [115]
Later I stumbled across another one of Jesus' annoying commands. [118]
We note the impiety of finding more “annoying” commands from the Master.
This predator never apologized. He never attempt to right his wrongs. He never begged for our forgiveness. [120]
The author has difficulties with the lack of specific behavior that he assumes the “predator” should exhibit.
The last days of Max's life... he asked Christ to forgive him and make him new. [121]
We understand why the there are so many rational Atheist Christians. For all the wrongs that Max did, what can we understand from this story? How one lives, that is, one's behavior, is of no consequence for all one has to do is to ask Christ' forgiveness and Heaven is assured. This is scandalous.
Some are simply bound by a false belief. [129]
We agree.
I can now acknowledge that I was trying to...compensate for my own feelings of unworthiness. [131]
We wonder the genesis of these “feelings of unworthiness”. We also inquire to the standard of being “worthy” of what?
Many Christian Atheists give up hope. [133]
We agree that many people lack hope.
Before you can tap into God's life-changing power, you have to eliminate the excuses. [135]
Once one stops making excuses and acting, God will intervene. Said another way, when one acts, things will be accomplished; no God needed. Atheist.
The following is perhaps the most esoteric writing in the whole book. I was forced to reread it five time to be certain I understood what was being related. Therefore, I have included the entirety of the paragraph.
The following is perhaps the most esoteric writing in the whole book. I was forced to reread it five time to be certain I understood what was being related. Therefore, I have included the entirety of the paragraph.
We knew our attitudes were displeasing to God, but we continued becoming negative and critical of others.
We tried to explain to our friends that we didn't want to criticize others, but they didn't get it. When we realized that we were allowing our friends to influence us negatively, we decided to gently distance ourselves.
We started hanging around different friends.
It may sound cruel, but “bad company corrupts good morals.”
If you honestly want to change, surround yourself with people who will help, people who believe you can do it. [138]
The Groeschels continued to criticize people and we read that their friends did not “get it”. It seems obvious that those friends understood what the Groeschels were doing and were displeased. The Groeschels realized that their friends were, in fact, being critical of them, (insert irony here), and found new friends. The moral of the story: Hang with people who believe your attitudes are displeasing to God.
But when the night sets in, I stare at the ceiling, feeling alone, afraid to trust God completely. [146]
The Christian Atheist may do everything humanly possible to ensure a situation's positive outcome, and still worry. [150]
We agree people do everything in their ability and still worry because the great majority of happenstances are out of our control.
Worry is a control issue. [150]
We agree.
As Christians, we can be tempted to “overdo faith.” I put that in quotes because it would be more accurate to it's “underdoing personal responsibility.” [151]
We encounter a criticism of modern Christianity where believers have no responsibility, since it is all in God's hands. The author identifies what could be understood as irrational behavior or lack of responsibility. (Insert appropriate daily headline here.)
From pages 152 to 153 the author discusses how God does things in people's lives, but in reality the author is giving good advice. No God required. Atheist.
Wisdom is all about the simple, often tiny, obvious things, done consistently, one at a time. [153]
While this definition of wisdom is incorrect, it does correspond to the “12 habits that highly effective people do differently.” In this sentence are found two examples esoteric writing. Error of fact: the incorrect definition and alluding to something, without providing credit. If one accepted the author's definition of “wisdom”, one would not put the definition into the Google search box to find references to “12 habits of highly effective people”.
Who do we believe in more? Ourselves or God? Our actions and decisions will reflect that. [158]
The actions and decisions were to reduce unnecessary expenses.
“Next we did what was wise. We made aggressive cuts. [157]
Once again the decision to cut indicates he believes in “ourselves” more than God.
“Is it just me, or is it odd for some to believe that viewing a movie could be wrong for me because of my profession, but complete acceptable to other Christians, just because they don't preach on the weekends? [164]
If may seem odd, but as we have learned: All Christians are equal, but some are more equal than others. Said another way, there are different stances on various issues, because there is no agreed upon standard.
We venture into extremely dangerous territory when we start to believe that God's ultimate plan for us is our happiness. [165]
If God's ultimate plan for us is Heaven, then either Heaven is not happiness or there is no God. Atheist.
If we believe that God wants us happy above all else...we wrongly believe that God exist to serve us.[165]
We find it curious that it is not written “If we wrongly believe that God wants...”
To the Christian Atheist, the holy God of the universe is quietly transformed into a cosmic soda machine. [165]
God must deliver and do what we ask. [165]
The “God of universe” is changed into a capricious genie, sometimes granting wishes, sometimes not. It would seem better if God did not exist and that people's time would be better spent doing than wishing. Atheist.
The problem is, what seems right may not always be right. [166]
The issue of seeming and being is highlighted. How to know the difference?
First, God doesn't' want us to be happy when it causes us to do something wrong or unwise. [167]
Unfortunately, the author does not indicate what is either “wrong” or “unwise”.
God doesn't' want you happy when you're doing something wrong or unwise. [168]
We encounter an example of esoteric writing; inexact repetition.
The way we spend our time, money, and thoughts leaves little doubt [169] [that we are Atheistic Christians.]
Our culture has conditioned us to believe that the things we don't have are the things that will make up happy- [169]
No evidence was presented to indicate our culture, or any culture, has the described effect.
Is that my spiritual enemy tempting me to be generous? No, it must be God. [177]
No comment necessary.
As much as I tried to argue, the feeling simply wouldn't subside. [178]
Not wanting to disappoint what I thought was God's quiet voice... [178]
The author did not know it if was God's voice or his “spiritual enemy”.
And I had that same sense again-that God wanted me to give everything I had in my wallet. [170]
It must be the devil tempting me to be generous again. I immediately entered serious negotiations with the voice I thought was God's. [179]
Several years later, the author now assigns tempting to the “devil” and again he is unsure if he hears God's voice.
It might be easy to trust God when the stakes are low. But when the stakes get high, it's temping to trust in money. [179]
When the states are high, there is no reason to risk money, because “To me, more money always equaled more security.” [181] We speculate that Groeschel is a believer in Pascal's wager.
We might say that we trust in God, but our actions show what's really going on. [180]
We learn the author has issues with two types of people; those who lack personal responsibly and those people who act responsibly.
The actions of many Christian Atheists indicate that they worship money instead of God. Some even live as though they believe that God exists to help us acquire more money and things. [182]
The author alludes to the either the God “Mammon” or the God who was never named, but was called the “Rich One”, since he released neither souls nor coins.
We've always lived debt-free and beneath our means so we could save and invest for the future. [187]
We are uncertain if the author approves of this responsible behavior, since it seems to demonstrate lack trust or faith in God.
This principle seems to come to my kids naturally. [190]
It may seem natural, but it is only the effect of their environment.
Out of seventy-three professions, only organize crime member and drug dealers scored lower than televangelists. [197]
We recall that Churchlife.tv is the creation of the author.
I believe one of he main reasons people don't share their faith in Christ is that they don't really believe in hell. [199]
The author alludes to a problem of Modern Christianity; the belief in Christ does not necessitate a belief in Hell.
Research shows that while almost three out of four people believe in heaven, less than half believe in hell. [199]
This result is only possible with Modern Christianity where it is a belief system only. This is also an example of the buffet that is Modern Christianity, taking what one likes and ignoring the remainder.
If we really believed in heaven and hell-and we sincerely cared-wouldn't our actions be transformed? [200]
We conclude that among Atheist Christians, less than half believe in hell; while almost 75% believe in Heaven. We also conclude that they are not concerned with “saving” people, since they do not believe in a Hell to save unbelievers from experiencing for eternity.
Intellectually I believe in both heaven and hell. But practically-the way I live daily- doesn't reflect the urgency of my claimed beliefs. [202]
The author's actions or behaviors are supposedly at odds with his beliefs. We seem to have a contradiction. A contradiction indicates an error in reasoning. The contradiction is removed unless of course, the author accepts that some people, perhaps most people, will go to Hell and he is indifferent to their fate. The author's views are aligned with the views of Atheist Christians.
If I really believed, my life would look much different than it does. [202]
The author admits that he is not, in fact, a believer, for if he were, his life would be different. Atheist.
I think I can be a better Christian without the church than I can with the church. [218]]
Who wants to hang out with a bunch of people who claim to believe in something, then live differently the rest of the week? [218]
These statements are not by the author, but by an anonymous waiter. These are examples of the immunity of the writer. We can not be certain that these are the author's views or not.
[God] never intended for his believer to be independent. He wants us dependent on one another and on him.” [223]
If we can not be certain that God is fair, or desires our happiness, it would not be prudent to write about God's intentions towards independent believers. We question whether God wants us dependent on one another or not.
“Belonging to a local church also provides accountability... [224]
We recognize accountability applies only to behavior, not to beliefs.
“A Church Full of Broken People”
I finished the preparatory work for this book in under four hours. This rapidity was not because I am a quick reader or note taker, but after reading “Purpose Driven Life” eight times, and select writings attributed to Irenaeus and to Origen, I knew what to look for regarding atheism, irreverence and impiety.
It seems that the author has identified a problem or phenomenon he has described as “Christian Atheism”, and while we concede that we like the word play of the title and enjoyed the philology of certain words found randomly in the text, we have not learned anything of interest.
I propose the behavior that Mr. Groeschel is describing is the inevitable result of Protestantism and is Agnostic. It seems that people believe in Christ, but are uncertain about God. It seems more accurate to affix the term “Agnostic Christianity” to this epidemic. By placing their trust in Scripture only, a standard existed and everyone knew the standard. One may have disagreed with it, but everyone knew it. Unalterable and inerrant Scripture changed between the years 1800 and 1900, as Americans removed the Apocrypha from the Bible. Gentle Reader, we are in the unenviable position that we conclude that there two types of inerrant Scripture: those with the Apocrypha and those without.
As Christianity was divorced from the historical church and Christianity devolved into a belief system, we are not surprised that people can claim to be “Christian” (whatever that means) while not believing in “Hell” (whatever that is). They can claim to be Christian, but not believe that Jesus was fully God (Arianism). They can claim to be Christian, but that Jesus was only a man and not the Christ until baptism, (insert various Gnostic systems here). They can claim to be Christians but believe the Crucifixion occurred on a Wednesday and that Christ and the Archangel Michael are one and the same. Will anyone state that these people are not Christians? Some Christians claim only one or two sacraments, not seven. Some Christians claim to be saved, that is, have knowledge of Salvation (Gnostics).
They have no standards, no definitions, just subjective feelings.
We can understand that certain individuals want to criticize those who save money as lacking in faith, while attributing lack of responsibility to those spend beyond their means. This behavior is irrational and while most people will reject the irrational, many will not.
Certain people will state that the precepts found in the book of Leviticus are applicable to Christians. While they seem eager to apply the moral laws to Christians, they seem less certain when it comes to applying animal sacrifices. We reasonably conclude that the book Leviticus only applies to the tribe of Levi, not to Gentiles or to Christians.
Other people try to impose the laws found in the book of Deuteronomy to Christians. While they seem eager to apply the some moral laws to Christians, they seem less certain when it comes to applying other laws. We reasonably conclude that the book of Deuteronomy only applies to the tribes of Israel, not to Gentiles or to Christians.
It seems that the author has identified a problem or phenomenon he has described as “Christian Atheism”, and while we concede that we like the word play of the title and enjoyed the philology of certain words found randomly in the text, we have not learned anything of interest.
I propose the behavior that Mr. Groeschel is describing is the inevitable result of Protestantism and is Agnostic. It seems that people believe in Christ, but are uncertain about God. It seems more accurate to affix the term “Agnostic Christianity” to this epidemic. By placing their trust in Scripture only, a standard existed and everyone knew the standard. One may have disagreed with it, but everyone knew it. Unalterable and inerrant Scripture changed between the years 1800 and 1900, as Americans removed the Apocrypha from the Bible. Gentle Reader, we are in the unenviable position that we conclude that there two types of inerrant Scripture: those with the Apocrypha and those without.
As Christianity was divorced from the historical church and Christianity devolved into a belief system, we are not surprised that people can claim to be “Christian” (whatever that means) while not believing in “Hell” (whatever that is). They can claim to be Christian, but not believe that Jesus was fully God (Arianism). They can claim to be Christian, but that Jesus was only a man and not the Christ until baptism, (insert various Gnostic systems here). They can claim to be Christians but believe the Crucifixion occurred on a Wednesday and that Christ and the Archangel Michael are one and the same. Will anyone state that these people are not Christians? Some Christians claim only one or two sacraments, not seven. Some Christians claim to be saved, that is, have knowledge of Salvation (Gnostics).
They have no standards, no definitions, just subjective feelings.
We can understand that certain individuals want to criticize those who save money as lacking in faith, while attributing lack of responsibility to those spend beyond their means. This behavior is irrational and while most people will reject the irrational, many will not.
Certain people will state that the precepts found in the book of Leviticus are applicable to Christians. While they seem eager to apply the moral laws to Christians, they seem less certain when it comes to applying animal sacrifices. We reasonably conclude that the book Leviticus only applies to the tribe of Levi, not to Gentiles or to Christians.
Other people try to impose the laws found in the book of Deuteronomy to Christians. While they seem eager to apply the some moral laws to Christians, they seem less certain when it comes to applying other laws. We reasonably conclude that the book of Deuteronomy only applies to the tribes of Israel, not to Gentiles or to Christians.
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Galatians 5:1
Our American culture does not, as a whole, embrace dictators. When we encounter people who refuse to attend church, the waiter as an example, we can not but feel that they highly value their independence.
All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. 1 Corinthians 6:12