For example, I believe that:
Religion is a human construct
The symbols of faith are products of human cultural evolution
Jesus may have been an historical figure, but most of what we know about him is in the form of legend
God is a symbol of myth-making and not credible as a supernatural being or force
The Bible is a human product as opposed to special revelation from a divine being
Human consciousness is the result of natural selection, so there’s no afterlife
In short, I regard the symbols of Christianity from a non-supernatural point of view.
And yet, even though I hold those beliefs, I am still a proud minister. But I don’t appreciate being told that I’m not truly a Christian.
To be honest, I have only read the summary. I do not have the stomach for the full article. But it made me think how amazing it is that this kind of thing can be said proudly in a church context when in any other context it would be anywhere from risible to offensive.
eg ‘I’m a socialist but I do not believe in state management of resources for the good of the people.’
eg ‘I’m a capitalist but I do not believe in free markets.’
eg ‘I believe in democracy but not in free elections.’
eg ‘I am a physician but let’s not take seriously all that do no harm stuff.’
eg ‘I am a lawyer, but believe me, the constitution, fair trials, the rule of law – all that stuff is meaningless and outdated.’
It’s when you transpose it to other contexts like this that you see the essential vapidity of the claims made by the Presbyterian minister.
If he actually cared about the incoherence of his position he ought to take a bit of time and read ‘Thomas Wingfold, Curate’ by George MacDonald.
“But I don’t appreciate being told that I’m not truly a Christian.”
Sorry to hear that.
But you are going to be hearing it a lot more, because you aren’t.