This article could not be more timely and relevant to the current culture wars centered around religion. The distinction you suggest is on the mark. It absolutely describes the tension between what I would refer to as thoughtful Christians and Evangelicals blindly worshiping a book and distorted ideology that has little resemblance to the higher ideals of Christianity.
Two quick stories. 15 years ago, I was a member of a small, highly diverse, progressive, innercity Episcopal Church. Being white, I was in the minority. We had an unusual structure during our 11:00 am communion service. Rather than a traditional sermon, after the three lessons and the psalm were read people were given five or 10 minutes to contemplate what struck them about the day’s lessons. They were then invited to share a word or phrase. Once everyone had a chance to speak, they were asked to expound upon why they found it significant. The discussion was then wrapped up in a summary by the celebrant.
One particular Sunday the question of salvation by grace through forgiveness arose, and one of our members speculated as to whether Hitler or Jeffrey Dahmer could ever be forgiven. I suggested that if they were truly sorry at the end of their lives, even people who had committed such horrendous crimes would be entitled to salvation. It is likely we would meet them in heaven. This was met with extreme outrage and much consternation. Many made comments such as I would never want to be in a heaven that allowed these kind of people in. Even in a progressive church that was welcoming to all, there were limits on those who were entitled to be part of the membership. I would have considered this church to have been Christ centered, but obviously even it had characteristics of being a bound set like many fundamentalist churches.
Yesterday, one of the more irreverent members of a prayer line that I participate on posted a rather disturbing segment from 2 Timothy 4:3-4, which obviously was drawn from a very fundamentalist literalist version of the Bible. Here is what it said:
“ There is going to come a time when people won’t listen to the truth, but will go around looking for teachers who will tell them just what they want to hear. They won’t listen to what the Bible says, but will blindly follow their own misguided ideas.”
Many times when people post something, I say nothing. But I couldn’t let this one go. I pointed out that we had to be careful about using versions of the Bible that were more propaganda than an accurate translation of scripture. I noted that the dead giveaway was use of the word ”Bible” in the quoted section. There was no such thing at the time 2 Timothy was written. To the outsider, the section cited may seem innocuous us, but to those of us on the prayer line we know that it refers to the fact that we are to take the literal standards of conduct in the Bible as sacrosanct and ordained by God. There was nothing innocent about citing this particular version.
Immediately after posting my response, an extreme fundamentalist who is also a member of the prayer chain, posted a lengthy reply saying that people do not want to follow God‘s word and society is godless and taking us all to hell because people just ignore it and come up with their own standards of conduct. If I didn’t like what God had ordained, why did I hang out with such unthinking Christians whose book I so clearly despised? Maybe I needed to come up with my own religion.
This went on for some time until some more thoughtful members suggested that the respondent knock it off. The purpose of the prayer line was to share prayer needs and inspirational Bible verses, not engage in theological and political discussions. I couldn’t agree more. I had my part in the controversy, but certain things I just cannot let go that I find too egregious.
The point is that this particular situation is easily understandable if we use your concept of a bound set versus a centered set. The original poster of 2 Timothy and the person who pushed back against me come from congregations with a bound set form of Christianity. Paradoxically, the prayer chain was formed by a group that is more Christ centered and less of a bound set – more like the church I described earlier.
When I think about the current debate regarding Christianity and the extreme criticism by many of religion as a source of oppression and destruction, I have always been a bit perplexed in the sense that I am still a Christian, though also a transgender woman. The Christianity that I practice has nothing to do with the intolerance of the bigots. The values I espouse are shared by many of organized religion’s most vocal critics. Rephrasing the cultural discussion within the framework of bound versus open sets helps to simplify and focus the discussion of these kinds of issues. I think you’ve done a great service by writing your article. I hope that those who are passionate about the subject will read it and consider what you have shared. It will likely help clarify much of the confusion surrounding the debate. Well done.
