Faithlore
The Invented Reality
John Fulling Crosby
Faithlore
The Invented Reality
Copyright © 2018 John Fulling Crosby. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, no part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without prior written permission from the publisher. Write: Permissions, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401.
Resource Publications
An Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers
199 W. 8th Ave., Suite 3
Eugene, OR 97401
www.wipfandstock.com
paperback isbn: 978-1-5326-5318-6
hardcover isbn: 978-1-5326-5319-3
ebook isbn: 978-1-5326-5320-9
New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright 1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Manufactured in the U.S.A. 05/22/18
This book is for questers, skeptics, humanists, freethinkers, doubters, and all those who cannot accept canned theological answers to life’s great questions. Some of these folk are Christians in the traditional sense of the word. Others are churchgoers who feel restless and somewhat compromised. For eleven years, I dwelt among and preached to this latter group. They were, for the most part, enjoyable to be with, mostly because they were not shirtsleeve Christians, but seekers of truth. To them and their kin, I dedicate this work.
I want to thank Joe Lee, Michael Shermis, Rob Hongen, and Sandy Dolby for their stalwart support, ranging from ideas to expertise to art. And thanks to the Humanist/Freethinkers of the Unitarian Church of Bloomington, Indiana for their ongoing encouragement.
Preface I
Revealed Theology Versus Natural Theology
Of first order is the necessity to separate by definition authoritative or “revealed” religious traditions from so-called “natural” religions, or religions arising out of natural expressions of plant, animal, and human life and nature as part and parcel of all creation, including the cosmos of both micro (quanta) and macro. An appeal to nature and/or to the forces of nature, including worship of the sun and the rhythms of our solar system and the galaxies of the universe (deism), is not to be equated with a godhead or god force that foreordains every human being into a personal I-Thou relationship with itself. Another way of saying this is to say simply that theism presupposes personal and intimate relationship between the theistic Godhead/Creator and the creature into which this God has breathed the ruach, or the breath of life (Gen 2:07; 6:17; 2 Sam 22:16).1
Traditionally, Christian theism is both immanent and transcendent. Historically speaking, deism is usually defined as being transcendent only, not immanent. Deism has been the dominant theology espoused by William Paley.2 Spinoza’s pantheism (God is All) and panentheism (God is in All) may be considered philosophical offshoots of deism and modern expressions of spiritualism
In contrast with natural theology, revealed or authoritarian/authoritative theology claims that God, Yahweh, Elohim, or Allah is the omnipotent and omniscient almighty force transcending the universe. Through revelation, the god force has revealed, and continues to reveal, its divine intention for all humankind (or at least to the faithful who seek to know its will).
Throughout these pages, the underlying question is this: to what extent are we justified in making the claim that nearly all religious or theological language is folkloric in nature, especially claims regarding Christian theistic propositions? Is there any empirical evidence, other than personal religious experience (anecdotal),3 that claims theism to be both valid and true? In short, is there any evidence to the contrary; i.e., is there any evidence that theism is not folklore, faithlore, or lore?
1. All Scripture references in this book are from the NRSV.
2. Paley, Natural Theology.
3. James, “Varieties of Religious Experience.”
Preface II
A Forenote on Hermeneutics, the Principles of Interpretation
Hermeneutics is the art and science of interpretation, most usually the principles of interpretation involved in the interpretation of the sixty-six books of the Christian bible. Hermeneutic principles include, but are not necessarily limited to, literal interpretation, liberal interpretation, anagogical (mystical) interpretation, neo-orthodox interpretation, moral, allegorical, feminist interpretation, historical interpretation, LGBT interpretation (lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender), mythological, and folkloric interpretation.
Traditionally, the hermeneutic is only one part of biblical translation. Exegesis, in tandem with hermeneutics, is the dominant and necessary art and science of textual translation and textual criticism. Exegesis includes the higher (or historical) criticism and the lower (or textual) criticism. The lower criticism includes spelling, grammar, sentence construction, word choice, word organization, and flow.
Introduction: Faithlore Reality
Never would I have dreamed, kneeling before fifteen or so Presbyterian ministers in June of 1956 at my ordination as they laid their hands on my head, that one day I would rise up and claim that the belief system in which I was being ordained was lore. “Faithlore,” as a play on the word “folklore,” is still lore. Usually, but not always, it is not factual truth, nor is it usually connected in any manner with so-called empirical truth. Whether it is emotional or spiritual truth depends on the frame of mind of the believer.
Lore is based on myth. Myth is often based on wishful thinking. I grew up thinking this way (unconsciously) all throughout my philosophy major at Denison University and theological degree at Princeton Theological Seminary—and then on into eleven years as a minister and pastor. In the tenth year, my wishful thinking came crashing down into a swamp of useless pretense.4 Nevertheless, in my final year of ministry, Jesus still remained somewhat of an exemplar to me.
I concluded that Jesus’ god was nothing more than the creation or invention of Jesus’ own mind. Jesus’ own faith was lore. And if lore was an invention of Jesus’ mind, I certainly could now accept that I had allowed Jesus’ lore to become my lore. Lore was an invention of my creative sapiens brain, entirely capable of dominating my thought.
The intervening fifty years as a university professor and marriage/family therapist have been good
