Diary: The "New Fundamentals"

Mainstream biblical scholarship has made discoveries which thoroughly shatter the fundamentalist worldview. Unfortunately, the discussion in Christendom is divided between fundamentalists, who reject mainstream biblical scholarship and science in general outright so that they can live in their own delusional realm, and religious moderates, who seem to want to simply ignore these findings and refrain from discussing them as much as possible. I say that this is unfortunate, because the result of this strategy is that it allows fundamentalists, who have a clear and coherent message, to propagate themselves and gain converts from the pool of liberal Christians who are partly indoctrinated into Christianity but who lack the knowledge that would render them immune to fundamentalism. The reality of this situation makes liberal Christians part of the problem, whereas if they embraced reality openly they could be part of the solution.

I would ask all Christian churches, scholars, clergy, and laity to openly address the following assertions, modeled after "the fundamentals" fundamentalists embrace:

We acknowledge that the following claims, supported by mainstream biblical scholarship, are true and accurate to the best of our knowledge:

1. No aspect of the New Testament was written by anyone who ever knew a pre-crucifixion Jesus, and when placed in the order of their composition, the books of the New Testament show the evolution of the Christian story.
2. The doctrine of the virgin birth, presented only in Matthew and Luke, did not literally occur, and the nativity story is very nearly 100% mythology with no basis in historical fact. Jesus never claimed to be divine in nature.
3. Jesus never taught the doctrine of the atonement, but rather this was a later theological invention.
4.The earliest accounts of the resurrection describe it as being spiritual rather than physical in nature. There was no empty tomb, and any appearance stories that suggest a physically resurrected body were not part of the original tradition.
5. The Second Coming and Day of Judgment, as described by Jesus and Paul in the New Testament, were set to occur in the 1st Century CE. Since these did not occur within the time frame presented by Jesus and Paul, there is no indication that they will ever occur. The existence and nature of the afterlife is an open question, but there is no indication whatsoever that belief in Jesus is necessary for admission into heaven, nor that lack thereof results in condemnation to hell.

I realize, in presenting this, that I'm putting liberal Christian leaders and churches in a tight corner. Not all Christian leaders have the mettle of a John Shelby Spong or a Chris Hedges, and I think that liberal Christian leaders realize that in the face of assertions like this there are individuals who just won't want to be Christians at all anymore. However, I think that they may still agree to be honest anyway, given that the viability of their movement continuing at all will require their embracing reality--since conservative Christians have already cornered the market on cold comfort. Still, I'm reminded of what Lewis Black said about liberals and conservatives in polotics--"You have the Republicans who have bad ideas and the Democrats who have no ideas."

For a useful online walkthrough of mainstream biblical scholarship, check out "The Rejection of Pascal's Wager"
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/