What do you think?
Rate this book
With or Without God: Why the Way We Live is More Important than What We Believe – Radical Reform and Compassionate Spirituality for the Modern Church
Envisioning a future in which the Christian church plays a viable and transformative role in shaping society, Gretta Vosper argues that if the church is to survive at all, the heart of faith must undergo a radical change. Vosper, founder of the Canadian Centre for Progressive Christianity and a minister in Toronto, believes that what will save the
400 pages, Paperback
First published March 18, 2008
42 people are currently reading
499 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews
September 4, 2023
Vosper really wins my respect as a church pastor devoted to critical thought, practical responsibility, honest discussion, and a woman’s perspective on what matters. Her mainline church denomination is losing members, aging, and increasingly seen as irrelevant to both global society and modern understandings of spirituality. Yet she repeatedly sees that efforts to incorporate new insights on the Christian tradition or pursue new priorities for service are rejected by the remaining base of members. Her response is quietly responsible:
"No matter what it might be that we are reconsidering, if we find it in need of overhaul, we have to decide if it is worth our time and energy to tackle the problems and try to right them. Whether it is an old car, a long-term relationship, or a system of accounting, if we take a long look and see it’s not working, we have to decide what we’re going to do about it. If we undertake to set about righting things, we need the tools and the know-how to do it well."
To meet that challenge, she's willing to both listen carefully and raise the most challenging questions the church faces. For example, the traditional teaching and liturgy of the church hold that we are sinful by nature, and unable to overcome our inadequacies by our own efforts. The believers commonly conclude that their hardships and sufferings are “deserved.” But then we hear that someone very important loves and accepts us regardless of all our failings. We may feel a load of guilt and shame lift from our shoulders. At the same time, however, we understand that our salvation from despair depends on meeting the requirements for membership in a God-endorsed community. Vosper asks: "Could it be that what is lifted from our shoulders in those powerful moments is not our own unworthiness but the weight of the doctrines of the church?”
Overall, Vosper is remarkably optimistic about the potential for building real communities of mutual help, spiritual friendship, and engagement in problem solving. To me, it seems like she’s trying to lift an almost impossible weight.
"No matter what it might be that we are reconsidering, if we find it in need of overhaul, we have to decide if it is worth our time and energy to tackle the problems and try to right them. Whether it is an old car, a long-term relationship, or a system of accounting, if we take a long look and see it’s not working, we have to decide what we’re going to do about it. If we undertake to set about righting things, we need the tools and the know-how to do it well."
To meet that challenge, she's willing to both listen carefully and raise the most challenging questions the church faces. For example, the traditional teaching and liturgy of the church hold that we are sinful by nature, and unable to overcome our inadequacies by our own efforts. The believers commonly conclude that their hardships and sufferings are “deserved.” But then we hear that someone very important loves and accepts us regardless of all our failings. We may feel a load of guilt and shame lift from our shoulders. At the same time, however, we understand that our salvation from despair depends on meeting the requirements for membership in a God-endorsed community. Vosper asks: "Could it be that what is lifted from our shoulders in those powerful moments is not our own unworthiness but the weight of the doctrines of the church?”
Overall, Vosper is remarkably optimistic about the potential for building real communities of mutual help, spiritual friendship, and engagement in problem solving. To me, it seems like she’s trying to lift an almost impossible weight.
December 10, 2008
I was curious to read this book by a United Church minister. It was interesting and I agree with some of her views, but she goes too far. She has gone further than liberal Christianity.
I agree the Bible is a man written piece a literature. She wants to throw it out. Metaphors are not to be trusted, she says. They can be interpreted in too many different ways. We are better to take the good things from it like love, compassion, hope, etc. and throw it away. It's not of any value for these modern times. I agree there's a lot of crap in the Bible, like stories of God telling people to kill every man, woman, and child in a settlement. These are ancient people trying to justify their atrosities. I think the Bible needs to be interpreted better by clergy to their congregations, not thrown away. Adam and Eve, Noah's ark, the whole Jesus story has a lot of valuable metaphors that will always be true. And like any good literature, it is open ti individual intrepretation. And their will always be fanatics. Throw away the Bible, Quran, and they will find something else to be fanatic about.
She also throws out God. She not only doesn't like the paternal connotation of the word God, she doesn't like alternative name like the Divine or the Ground of all Being. She says God is unknowable and he, she, it, or that doesn't answer prayers and therefore what's to praise. She advocates praying for humanity to love and for compassion, etc. Praying to that spirit, god (with no capitalization) within us. Well I choose to believe in a God--whatever God is--a spirit, a dimension, and maybe a diety--who knows? My own personal experience found a presence that goes beyond coincidence and I'l live my life with that hope.
So very interesting book. I understand and respect her opinion, but I'll stick with my Liberal open interpretation of Christianity and not go this far....at least for now.
So very interesting book
I agree the Bible is a man written piece a literature. She wants to throw it out. Metaphors are not to be trusted, she says. They can be interpreted in too many different ways. We are better to take the good things from it like love, compassion, hope, etc. and throw it away. It's not of any value for these modern times. I agree there's a lot of crap in the Bible, like stories of God telling people to kill every man, woman, and child in a settlement. These are ancient people trying to justify their atrosities. I think the Bible needs to be interpreted better by clergy to their congregations, not thrown away. Adam and Eve, Noah's ark, the whole Jesus story has a lot of valuable metaphors that will always be true. And like any good literature, it is open ti individual intrepretation. And their will always be fanatics. Throw away the Bible, Quran, and they will find something else to be fanatic about.
She also throws out God. She not only doesn't like the paternal connotation of the word God, she doesn't like alternative name like the Divine or the Ground of all Being. She says God is unknowable and he, she, it, or that doesn't answer prayers and therefore what's to praise. She advocates praying for humanity to love and for compassion, etc. Praying to that spirit, god (with no capitalization) within us. Well I choose to believe in a God--whatever God is--a spirit, a dimension, and maybe a diety--who knows? My own personal experience found a presence that goes beyond coincidence and I'l live my life with that hope.
So very interesting book. I understand and respect her opinion, but I'll stick with my Liberal open interpretation of Christianity and not go this far....at least for now.
So very interesting book
June 15, 2014
When a woman minister of a congregation of a major Protestant denomination in Toronto describes herself as "an atheist," one sits up and takes notice. Gretta Vosper has written a very courageous book. She is not afraid to speak out in order to restore integrity to religion at a time when ministers are afraid to preach what they learned in theological college and congregants privately think they are the only ones who don't believe what they hear from the pulpit. In 648 pages of great research Vosper examines all the books (scholarly and popular) which criticize traditional religion, explains that 'security' is why humans need a god in the first place, describes the psychological stages of the growth of the imagination and many other topics. She offers a vision and plan for conserving a community based on ethics and spiritual values. Her congregation is already at work on the practical problems of language and upset this entails. I do not recommend this book for anyone who does not believe without cynicism in the power of the core message of love in Christianity. If you cannot accept that the Bible was written by human beings you will not like it. On the other hand, if you think your imagination has progressed and matured normally since childhood, you will pounce on Vosper's insights. I consider it a heartening, potentially world-view-changing book about a complex subject that needs active attention. My husband's review of it posted on www.amazon.ca is much more extensive.
January 26, 2010
Warning: Don't read this if you're uncomfortable having some of your basic beliefs questioned. This is definitely progressive theology. While much of it rang true for me, it gave me a great deal to think about. There were some things I just couldn't agree with either.
January 23, 2016
This book! OMG I had no idea such undercurrents were swelling in the world of the church.
This a brave confrontation between a woman of the church and the monolithic industry it has become. It questions everything believers were taught to take as gospel for the faithful, and it certainly challenges the stereotype of Christian identity for those who see only its blindness.
I will write more on this asap
This a brave confrontation between a woman of the church and the monolithic industry it has become. It questions everything believers were taught to take as gospel for the faithful, and it certainly challenges the stereotype of Christian identity for those who see only its blindness.
I will write more on this asap
November 11, 2020
While I am happy to leave church to the fundamentalists (as Vosper warned would happen, if progressive Christians do not re-imagine church) and find a better way to live in community with others, I am also moved by her vision of how church can be re-imagined to truly benefit society and provide community. I strongly recommend this book to any Christian who is looking for ways to live and talk about their faith without being bogged down by fundamentalist dogma and the exclusivity therein.
May 12, 2014
Modern scientific discoveries and historical analyses are increasingly challenging traditional religious beliefs. Some respond to these challenged by denying the science, becoming ever more entrenched in their traditional, literalists understandings of religion. Others, concluding that science has shown God to be an entirely human construction, have rejected religion entirely. In the middle, mainstream liberal religion faces diminishing attendance and support, and is in danger of becoming irrelevant.
This book is an argument for a different approach, one that acknowledges the atheist conclusion that the theist God who can act in the world is, in fact, a product of our imagination. The author argues, quite passionately, that we don’t need such a God. Instead, she argues for “god” as an abstract concept that embodies the ideals we value the most: Love, Compassion, Justice. In her vision, we are all called to become this “god” to each other, in community, supporting each other as we strive to bring these values into reality in our world.
It is a compelling argument, but one that is not likely to persuade wide swaths of the population. For conservative believers, the call to reject the idea that God actually exists will be impossible to accept, and few of these believers will take the time to read these arguments to their conclusion. For those who have rejected religion entirely, while they may be willing to consider her arguments, I’m not sure how many would feel the need for the trappings of religion in the manner the author envisions.
This book probably will speak only to that small group of people who, like me, continue to feel an emotional connection to religion, even as we rationally conclude that beliefs of our church have no basis in reality. Unfortunately, I don’t know how many of us will have the courage to respond to her call to bring her vision of a non-theist church into being.
If you are curious about what a “God-less” church would look like or how it would function, I would encourage you to read this book. For those who can keep an open mind and reserve judgment, I think that this vision of a church for the future should, at a minimum, provide a different perspective for thought and discussion.
This book is an argument for a different approach, one that acknowledges the atheist conclusion that the theist God who can act in the world is, in fact, a product of our imagination. The author argues, quite passionately, that we don’t need such a God. Instead, she argues for “god” as an abstract concept that embodies the ideals we value the most: Love, Compassion, Justice. In her vision, we are all called to become this “god” to each other, in community, supporting each other as we strive to bring these values into reality in our world.
It is a compelling argument, but one that is not likely to persuade wide swaths of the population. For conservative believers, the call to reject the idea that God actually exists will be impossible to accept, and few of these believers will take the time to read these arguments to their conclusion. For those who have rejected religion entirely, while they may be willing to consider her arguments, I’m not sure how many would feel the need for the trappings of religion in the manner the author envisions.
This book probably will speak only to that small group of people who, like me, continue to feel an emotional connection to religion, even as we rationally conclude that beliefs of our church have no basis in reality. Unfortunately, I don’t know how many of us will have the courage to respond to her call to bring her vision of a non-theist church into being.
If you are curious about what a “God-less” church would look like or how it would function, I would encourage you to read this book. For those who can keep an open mind and reserve judgment, I think that this vision of a church for the future should, at a minimum, provide a different perspective for thought and discussion.
October 18, 2013
I am reading this for a second time. Such a profound book, especially when you consider it is written by a Minister in the United Church of Canada. Fascinating and honest look at why churchs have empty pews and why it does not mean the end of good or rise of evil. This will be a hard read for some as she questions our idea of God and sees god as a collective spirit in us all. She avocates praying for our plant, our race, our souls and not praying for God to handle or give us our answers. I like and believe in the idea of humans taking responsibility for our own souls, planet, fellow man instead of sending word out to someone else to do it for us.
December 2, 2014
Ms. Vosper presents a very intriguing and well-thought out idea. I wasn't sure what to expect, but was pleasantly surprised - and I liked that.
While I couldn't say whether I would entirely agree with her presentation, the book is thought provoking and gives the reader a lot to ponder about.
While I couldn't say whether I would entirely agree with her presentation, the book is thought provoking and gives the reader a lot to ponder about.
September 6, 2011
Interesting take on the new way forward for Christian churches. Many good ideas and thoughts.
October 12, 2017
I admit I didn't read this in its entirety. I got her main point pretty early on--Christians should abandon their commitment to ideas she sees as outdated and harmful, among them the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus, original sin, the need for redemption through Christ and the Church, and the monotheistic God in general. In short, dump the core ideas of Christianity. Instead, replace them with belief in the spirit of goodness in people, or some such, and focus on doing good works. Well, this message is not new--atheist thinkers have been calling for this for over a hundred years. It seems that the logical outcome of this message is to abandon the idea of Church entirely and join/create some secular organization. After all, if ideas like "God" or "sin" are harmful because of their association with oppression, colonialism, etc., then how much more harmful the idea of the Church itself must be, seeing how it was the Church which actually perpetuated these injustices? So why not just quit the Church, as many people have done, and join some secular or humanist organization?
So I kept flipping through the pages, skimming, skipping around... searching for any coherent explanation as to why the core principles of the Christian Church need to go, but the Church itself needs to stay. And it just wasn't there. But you know what WAS there? Complaints about how ministers who rejected Church principles got fired by their congregations or voted out by the Church hierarchy, horror of horrors, oh the horrible injustice of it. But why does Vosper even see it as a problem? If the Church is to abandon its claim to divine authority, as she demands, then ministers in the Church are nothing more than fancified motivational speakers. If their audience or their sponsors don't like their spiel, why shouldn't they simply stop paying them? After all, people like Dr. Phil and Theresa Caputo the Psychic Medium don't expect corporate sponsors to pay them for telling people things they DON'T want to hear. And they certainly would not expect their audience, no matter how gullible, to still keep shelling out cash after being told that pop psychology is in fact pseudoscience, or that their deceased loved ones are in fact just dead meat rotting underground.
So where does Vosper's sense of entitlement come from? Well, I don't know, actually. All I know is that she is completely disillusioned with every single core principle of the organization she works for. Yet she refuses to simply leave and join one of the many secular organizations whose principles are a perfect fit. But I do have my suspicions about what's going on, and what I suspect is that she simply doesn't have the moral strength to do the hard work of standing by her convictions. Because she, and ministers like her, are actually not qualified to be leaders in an organization (secular OR religious) that does "good works". These actually require concrete skills that accomplish things, like management, accounting, marketing analysis, logistics planning, or, god forbid, even scientific and technological knowledge. Whereas Vosper is only qualified in lecturing other people on how THEY ought to do something good. Her chances of landing a similarly cushy job at, say, the Red Cross or Greenpeace are slim. And that's why she just won't quit the Church, no matter how harmful and oppressive it supposedly is. She feels entitled, for no discernible reason, to have her cake and bite the hand that feeds her, too. Maybe it's supposed to be a religious article of faith. You know, to replace the ones that are such oppressive reminders of colonialist/patriarchal entitlement.
TL;RD: Vosper's book is a very detailed explanation of how she doesn't just want to get paid for telling people some bullshit that they want to hear, no sir--she wants to get paid for telling them some bullshit that SHE wants to hear. And TBH, her BSing skills are not bad, so she gets points for style. But I've been spoiled by BS with exciting things like plot and characters (heck, even the Bible has them!), and her self-serving exposition just doesn't meet my inflated BS standards.
So I kept flipping through the pages, skimming, skipping around... searching for any coherent explanation as to why the core principles of the Christian Church need to go, but the Church itself needs to stay. And it just wasn't there. But you know what WAS there? Complaints about how ministers who rejected Church principles got fired by their congregations or voted out by the Church hierarchy, horror of horrors, oh the horrible injustice of it. But why does Vosper even see it as a problem? If the Church is to abandon its claim to divine authority, as she demands, then ministers in the Church are nothing more than fancified motivational speakers. If their audience or their sponsors don't like their spiel, why shouldn't they simply stop paying them? After all, people like Dr. Phil and Theresa Caputo the Psychic Medium don't expect corporate sponsors to pay them for telling people things they DON'T want to hear. And they certainly would not expect their audience, no matter how gullible, to still keep shelling out cash after being told that pop psychology is in fact pseudoscience, or that their deceased loved ones are in fact just dead meat rotting underground.
So where does Vosper's sense of entitlement come from? Well, I don't know, actually. All I know is that she is completely disillusioned with every single core principle of the organization she works for. Yet she refuses to simply leave and join one of the many secular organizations whose principles are a perfect fit. But I do have my suspicions about what's going on, and what I suspect is that she simply doesn't have the moral strength to do the hard work of standing by her convictions. Because she, and ministers like her, are actually not qualified to be leaders in an organization (secular OR religious) that does "good works". These actually require concrete skills that accomplish things, like management, accounting, marketing analysis, logistics planning, or, god forbid, even scientific and technological knowledge. Whereas Vosper is only qualified in lecturing other people on how THEY ought to do something good. Her chances of landing a similarly cushy job at, say, the Red Cross or Greenpeace are slim. And that's why she just won't quit the Church, no matter how harmful and oppressive it supposedly is. She feels entitled, for no discernible reason, to have her cake and bite the hand that feeds her, too. Maybe it's supposed to be a religious article of faith. You know, to replace the ones that are such oppressive reminders of colonialist/patriarchal entitlement.
TL;RD: Vosper's book is a very detailed explanation of how she doesn't just want to get paid for telling people some bullshit that they want to hear, no sir--she wants to get paid for telling them some bullshit that SHE wants to hear. And TBH, her BSing skills are not bad, so she gets points for style. But I've been spoiled by BS with exciting things like plot and characters (heck, even the Bible has them!), and her self-serving exposition just doesn't meet my inflated BS standards.
October 10, 2013
I really liked this book. United Church of Canada minister Gretta Vosper promotes being honest about what we believe even when preaching or singing hymns or reading Scripture. She believes in bringing modern and post-modern biblical scholarship to bear on the theological life of mainstream churches. Her theological views are pretty radical, but that doesn't bother me, since my own are not dissimilar. The only issue I have with this book is that implementing it is quite unrealistic in my context. Vosper's snapshot of the "average believer" may hold true in Toronto and other metropolitan areas, but it is not even close to what I run into on a daily basis in a rural Bible-belt region of the country. Maybe in Vosper's context the way forward is to get rid of old, out-dated "theospeak," and find new ways to be a community of faith. In my context, the issue is how to fashion a community out of a group of people whose views range from traditional Christian orthodoxy through evangelicalism of the American variety, all the way to cutting edge liberal/progressives like me. Vosper's book doesn't help much with this challenge.
December 2, 2015
This book is fantastic! Gretta Vosper is energetic and passionate and carries that through her entire book. I kept waiting for her to tire and settle down, but nope! Absolutely intoxicating.
I don't think this book will have wide appeal with a Christian audience, unless they're like me and in the range of sort of to entirely over it. She makes a compelling argument for the man-made nature of God, religion, Christianity, the Bible, etc. If that's not something you want to hear, then you shouldn't read this book.
However, if you're open to hearing that, then please, please, please read this book! I thought this book was going to be something of an atheist manifesto but it is decidedly not that. It's a book that says arguing about god is missing the point altogether. Yes, religion is a man-made thing, but that's not even the important part! The important part is that we pick up the broken pieces and re-build something much, much better. I'm sold!
Now if only I lived in Toronto. I'd be a fan girl.
I don't think this book will have wide appeal with a Christian audience, unless they're like me and in the range of sort of to entirely over it. She makes a compelling argument for the man-made nature of God, religion, Christianity, the Bible, etc. If that's not something you want to hear, then you shouldn't read this book.
However, if you're open to hearing that, then please, please, please read this book! I thought this book was going to be something of an atheist manifesto but it is decidedly not that. It's a book that says arguing about god is missing the point altogether. Yes, religion is a man-made thing, but that's not even the important part! The important part is that we pick up the broken pieces and re-build something much, much better. I'm sold!
Now if only I lived in Toronto. I'd be a fan girl.
January 4, 2015
What should the post-Christian society church look like? To Vosper, the answer is one where language, creed, worship, and even the concept of God are fundamentally altered. what follows is a church where faith is left to individual interpretation, where creeds are malleable based on "uncomfortable" verses, as well as language that is "inclusive" to everyone but God. the need for a "new" church is an important one and in light of scientific and continued social progress in society, is one that cannot be quibbled about. A concrete plan that states what the church IS, as opposed to a once solid figure fading to shadows, is not one that is strong enough to contend for the faith in future.
April 10, 2016
As a member of the United Church,I was curious to read this book as it has been causing a quite 'stir' among some members of our church recently. It was interesting read and I agree some what with a few of her views BUT she goes too far & is "throwing the baby out with the bath water". The United Church is known for their liberal views but this is just too much. She is currently under review by the church & I don't see how she can expect to remain an ordained minister within this church.
February 5, 2012
Here's a lady who is happy to have church go on without God as a part of it, and in so doing presents some great ideas on how us humans can come together as community. On the other hand, she didn't have to get rid of God to such the degree in order to create a church significant and safe to more of us humans.
August 5, 2016
May be offensive to some but will definitely give you something to think about. Those with strong religious beliefs should embrace many of Vosper's ideas without fear of loss. Definitely found myself reviewing world around me considering concepts & ideas presented in this book. Won on Goodreads which did not influence my review.
September 16, 2013
A brave viewpoint of God and religion. Food for thought for this day and age.
February 25, 2024
Gretta Vosper, whose United Church congregation in Toronto we have visited, provides some remarkable perspectives in her 2008 book (published by Harper Perennial). Well worth consideration. I will transcribe a couple paragraphs from her first chapter:
"What the world needs in order to survive and thrive is the radical simplicity that lies at the core of Christianity and so many other faiths and systems of thought - an abiding trust in the way of love as expressed in just and compassionate living. Out of the multitude of understandings of religion, spirituality, and faith; out of the varying views of the origins, nature, and purpose of life; out of the countless individual experiences of what might be called divine; out of it all may be distilled a core that, very simply put, is love. This core message carries its own authority. It needs no doctrine to validate it, no external expert or supernatural authority to tell us it is right. Love is quite demanding enough as a foundation, sufficiently complex and challenging without the requirement of additional beliefs, unbelievable to many. The 'church' the future needs is one of people gathering to share and recommit themselves to loving relationships with themselves, their families, the wider community, and the planet." -p 4
"I am not, in any way, attempting to wrest from anyone his or her sense of a relationship with God or Jesus. If that sense moves people to live lives of justice and compassion, I heartily celebrate it. They live with God and honour life through their belief. My intention is, rather, to provide a model for a way of life, a way of faith, a way of gathering together for those who either do not believe in the supernatural elements of religion or do believe but do not feel we can make absolute, universal claims about it; for those who cannot accept church doctrines but who deeply and passionately believe in the goodness and rightness of love; for those who have to ignore, reword, or quietly object to much of what is said in a typical liberal church service, and long to listen, learn, sing, pray, and speak in terms that make sense in the pew, the home, the workplace, and in the quest for a more humane world; for those who see religion as a way of living oriented to ultimate life-enhancing values or for those who live this way but don't like the word 'religion;' for those who have no need of "God" - it is for these people I write." -p 18
"What the world needs in order to survive and thrive is the radical simplicity that lies at the core of Christianity and so many other faiths and systems of thought - an abiding trust in the way of love as expressed in just and compassionate living. Out of the multitude of understandings of religion, spirituality, and faith; out of the varying views of the origins, nature, and purpose of life; out of the countless individual experiences of what might be called divine; out of it all may be distilled a core that, very simply put, is love. This core message carries its own authority. It needs no doctrine to validate it, no external expert or supernatural authority to tell us it is right. Love is quite demanding enough as a foundation, sufficiently complex and challenging without the requirement of additional beliefs, unbelievable to many. The 'church' the future needs is one of people gathering to share and recommit themselves to loving relationships with themselves, their families, the wider community, and the planet." -p 4
"I am not, in any way, attempting to wrest from anyone his or her sense of a relationship with God or Jesus. If that sense moves people to live lives of justice and compassion, I heartily celebrate it. They live with God and honour life through their belief. My intention is, rather, to provide a model for a way of life, a way of faith, a way of gathering together for those who either do not believe in the supernatural elements of religion or do believe but do not feel we can make absolute, universal claims about it; for those who cannot accept church doctrines but who deeply and passionately believe in the goodness and rightness of love; for those who have to ignore, reword, or quietly object to much of what is said in a typical liberal church service, and long to listen, learn, sing, pray, and speak in terms that make sense in the pew, the home, the workplace, and in the quest for a more humane world; for those who see religion as a way of living oriented to ultimate life-enhancing values or for those who live this way but don't like the word 'religion;' for those who have no need of "God" - it is for these people I write." -p 18
October 17, 2017
Her premise may be flawed - she thinks a lot of people would like to have the sense of community they had from going to church, but can't handle all the ... religion. It was my experience, that no one liked church and once the threat of eternal damnation no longer seemed plausible (and their neighbors quit going), they were happy to stay home on Sunday morning. But she has obviously given this years of thought and work (I guess, as you would expect from an atheist minister) and I admire that. Also, anyone who confirms my opinion of the Bible - that it's at least 50% horrific and/or disgusting, (and not TAWOGFAT) rates a few stars.
Jesus' list of thing that prevent ethical living - evil thoughts sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance, and folly (Mark 7:1-23). "if you wipe out religious ceremony, you're still going to have people who live ugly lives. If you wipe out the things on this list, the world will immediately be richer and more beautiful - and not just for some, for everyone."
Jesus' list of thing that prevent ethical living - evil thoughts sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance, and folly (Mark 7:1-23). "if you wipe out religious ceremony, you're still going to have people who live ugly lives. If you wipe out the things on this list, the world will immediately be richer and more beautiful - and not just for some, for everyone."
January 11, 2018
Because of the work of people like Peter Rollins, John Caputo, etc., I've been motivated to take secular concerns & arguments more seriously, and I'm very interested in bridging the gap between theism and atheism. This year I'll be reading a lot of atheist & agnostic books as a result.
Gretta Vosper, who's infamous for being an atheist minister in the United Church of Canada, wrote With or Without God almost 10 years ago now. To my knowledge, she only started identifying as atheist a couple of years ago, and in this book she writes as a "non-theist". I can essentially guarantee that the vast majority of traditional/conservative Christians who read this will either be made extraordinarily angry or challenged so deeply by it that they might have an existential crisis. If you're in that camp, please take my warning seriously. That aside, I loved the book and think it's truly ahead of its time.
Gretta Vosper, who's infamous for being an atheist minister in the United Church of Canada, wrote With or Without God almost 10 years ago now. To my knowledge, she only started identifying as atheist a couple of years ago, and in this book she writes as a "non-theist". I can essentially guarantee that the vast majority of traditional/conservative Christians who read this will either be made extraordinarily angry or challenged so deeply by it that they might have an existential crisis. If you're in that camp, please take my warning seriously. That aside, I loved the book and think it's truly ahead of its time.
December 19, 2023
If you have read any of Bishop Spong's books, this is for you. It's a refreshing look at what Christianity could be without the traditional mythologies such as angels, the parting of the Red Sea, raising of the dead, praising adultery, and the belief the earth and its people were created somewhere around 4500 years ago.
While these and many other examples may be accepted as parables, they are far too often regarded as the absolute truth.
The author emphasizes the future of Christianity lies in its basic precepts: Love, Understanding, Acceptance, Tolerance, Helpfulness, etc. It's time to change the message!
So, why 4 stars rather than 5 stars? It's a relatively minor issue that may not bother others. The author has an annoying habit of being repetitious. The message doesn't need as many strings of adjectives, not as many repetitious phrases to make the point.
While these and many other examples may be accepted as parables, they are far too often regarded as the absolute truth.
The author emphasizes the future of Christianity lies in its basic precepts: Love, Understanding, Acceptance, Tolerance, Helpfulness, etc. It's time to change the message!
So, why 4 stars rather than 5 stars? It's a relatively minor issue that may not bother others. The author has an annoying habit of being repetitious. The message doesn't need as many strings of adjectives, not as many repetitious phrases to make the point.
May 17, 2019
A well throughout and rigorously argued case for the post-theism church. The break down of all the reasons is wonderful. Followed by the reasons for the change and why even bother doing this. Can be dry at points but Vosper does her best to add her own wit to keep the book moving. I love how she references all her ideas and books. Very much enjoyed.
"As light into light, we pray 🙏"
"As light into light, we pray 🙏"
August 12, 2016
I need to re-read this book before I can offer a better review - it packs a lot in it's 300+ pages.
That said, I understood the author's argument as being that the Christian church's doctrines and much of it's practices are obsolete and no longer relevant for peoples needs today, which explains much of it's relative decline. She offers not merely some new ideas, but a fundamentally new purpose for the church.
Gretta Vosper is a controversial figure, as a practicing minister in the United Church who disavows belief in many of it's core doctrines. She argues that the church needs to be re-purposed to a commitment to ethical living in a spirit of community, without the "anchor" of two-thousand years accretion of supernatural doctrine and practice which sometimes supports, but often undermines, this way of life.
She writes very well, and her arguments are well worth taking the time to absorb (more than I was able to devote on the first reading). It isn't hard for me to agree with much of what she argues as I am agnostic, if not atheist. But I would suggest this to anyone who is prepared to examine their own assumptions and preconceptions. This may or may not change your mind but it will certainly give your mind a workout!
Lastly, it seems to me, if I'm getting her right, that she views the church mainly as a potential vehicle to achieving this purpose of developing and supporting this purpose of radical ethical living - it's "Christianity" doesn't really matter. The same argument would therefore apply to the mosque, the synagogue and the temple. I presume that the reason she doesn't address this is that she is writing for a Christian audience.
Personally, I think that , in our era of more and more of us choosing to limit our information sources to those that confirm our existing worldviews, books like this that intelligently and (I would argue sympathetically) challenge our preconceptions are well worth the time and effort.
That said, I understood the author's argument as being that the Christian church's doctrines and much of it's practices are obsolete and no longer relevant for peoples needs today, which explains much of it's relative decline. She offers not merely some new ideas, but a fundamentally new purpose for the church.
Gretta Vosper is a controversial figure, as a practicing minister in the United Church who disavows belief in many of it's core doctrines. She argues that the church needs to be re-purposed to a commitment to ethical living in a spirit of community, without the "anchor" of two-thousand years accretion of supernatural doctrine and practice which sometimes supports, but often undermines, this way of life.
She writes very well, and her arguments are well worth taking the time to absorb (more than I was able to devote on the first reading). It isn't hard for me to agree with much of what she argues as I am agnostic, if not atheist. But I would suggest this to anyone who is prepared to examine their own assumptions and preconceptions. This may or may not change your mind but it will certainly give your mind a workout!
Lastly, it seems to me, if I'm getting her right, that she views the church mainly as a potential vehicle to achieving this purpose of developing and supporting this purpose of radical ethical living - it's "Christianity" doesn't really matter. The same argument would therefore apply to the mosque, the synagogue and the temple. I presume that the reason she doesn't address this is that she is writing for a Christian audience.
Personally, I think that , in our era of more and more of us choosing to limit our information sources to those that confirm our existing worldviews, books like this that intelligently and (I would argue sympathetically) challenge our preconceptions are well worth the time and effort.
January 5, 2017
This was an excellent book. The only reason that the book doesn't get five stars was because of the writing style. The book is highly provokadive, and generated fantastic discussion. While her proposals are a bit extreme, the church should consider them.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Currently reading
June 26, 2011looks promising
December 17, 2013
Wonderful book :)
August 24, 2015
A must read by all those in leadership position in church. It will help make the church relevant in this the 21st century.
June 22, 2015
Is she throwing the baby out with the bath? I prefer to build some moral and ethical ideas on tradition and concepts that people have grappled with over time.
April 17, 2017
Greta Vosper is an atheist minister under tremendous pressure from her denomination, the United Church of Canada, for her theological position. Her book lays out in great detail the reasons for her position and why she feels religion and the progressive Christian church still have the potential to be extremely relevant and important in the 21st century. She is very forthright, clear and non-defensive in explaining her position. I agree with her, and I found arguments compelling but I found her book somewhat tedious and overly long. For me there was really nothing particularly new here, except the courage it took for her to say it. And that courage is something that deserves acknowledging because most ministers who share her views do not have that courage. She is not as alone as the church wants us to believe. Vast numbers of us agree with her theological conclusions, but have given up on the church and its ministers. She holds out some hope or at least recognizes the potential for benefit a very much reformed church could offer the world. Hers is a great test case for the Church of Canada, or for any progressive Christian denomination, to see if our lack of faith in the church's integrity is justified or not. I hope she prevails, but I think the odds are not in her favor. But much much more is a stake here, however, than a single person's job. Her book makes that clear. A compelling argument can be made that religious fundamentalism is the greatest threat to world peace and, indeed, to the survival of the planet there is.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews