What do you think?
Rate this book
The Christian Agnostic
[From the Author’s Preface] I am writing for the "Christian agnostic," by which I mean a person who is immensely attracted by Christ and who seeks to show His spirit, to meet the challenges, hardships and sorrows of life in the light of that spirit, but who, though he is sure of many Christian truths, feels that he cannot honestly and conscientiously “sign on the dotted line” that he believes certain theological ideas about which some branches of the church dogmatise; churches from which he feels excluded because he cannot “believe”; His intellectual integrity makes him say about many things, “It may be so. I do not know.” I have always been attracted by these same lovable men and women who rarely have anything to do with organised churches but who would never act dishonourably or meanly, who are full of generosity and helpfulness if ever one is in trouble or need, who bear their own troubles with magnificent courage, who never complain or grumble or gossip or run other people down. I wanted to write for them…
320 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1965
18 people are currently reading
299 people want to read
About the author
Leslie D. Weatherhead
75 books16 followersLeslie Dixon Weatherhead was an English Christian theologian in the liberal Protestant tradition. Renowned as one of Britain's finest preachers in his day, Weatherhead achieved notoriety for his preaching ministry at City Temple in London and for his books, including The Will of God, The Christian Agnostic and Psychology, Religion, and Healing.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
November 6, 2010
"I am writing for the Christian agnostic, by which I mean a person who is immensely attracted to Christ and who seeks to show his spirit, to meet the challenges, hardships, and sorrows of life in the light of that spirit, but who, though he is sure of many Christian truths, feels that he cannot honestly and conscientiously 'sign on the dotted line' that he believes certain theological ideas about what some branches of the Church dogmatize." - Leslie Weatherhead
First off, my rating of four stars is given largely for the incredibly thought-provoking ideas put forth by Leslie Weatherhead in this book, and for the liberating emotional response I had to some of those ideas. I'd have given it five stars except some of his later arguments aren't as well supported as the others, and some of the arguments feel dated. Were I to rate the writing style on its own merits, it would have been closer to two or three stars due to excessive quotations (which tend to make this read like a high school research paper) and a proclivity for mild repetition.
Second, I discovered this book after a friend of mine described himself as an atheist agnostic. "Doesn't that just make you agnostic?" I asked in ignorance. I later looked up the definition and found myself wondering if there were such a thing as a Christian agnostic, because if so, I was pretty sure at this point I was one. This all led me to Weatherhead's book, written in the 1960s. It seems to be out of print, but I was able to find a used paperback online for a decent price. I'm sure you can, too.
So, what are some of Weatherhead's ideas? First, he believes that there are essentials of the Christian faith that one can know with certainty. This certainty, he says, comes from "the authority which truth itself possesses when it is perceived to be true by the individual concerned." Yes, this seems to make truth too subjective, but he says the alternative is to delegate authority to someone else's subjective decision of what's true. Someone like the Pope, for example. "Truth may certainly be true whatever my opinion may be, but it has no authority with me until I perceive it to be true." For those other non-essentials, he chooses to remain agnostic and mentally set them aside as "awaiting further light."
An example of something he places in this category is the idea of the Virgin Birth. The doctrine is of no importance at all, he says, otherwise it would have been part of the missionary message of the early church. The gospel of Mark never mentions it, and neither do the writings of Peter, Paul and John. "Divinity is not proved by having one parent instead of two. It could be argued that such a person is removed from us and could not have been truly man. As to sinlessness, we men are a wicked lot, but all the evil in our children does not come from us. Mothers can pass on evil as well as fathers, and sinlessness cannot be physically determined." And he goes on to say that Jesus himself never mentioned the circumstances of his birth, and throws doubt on the word that is translated as "virgin" in the Bible text. He tells the reader not to accept or reject the Virgin Birth, just to put it aside.
One of the more difficult concepts for me to explore is the idea that some of the sayings attributed to Jesus may not be accurate or authentic. Having grown up in a particularly fundamentalist branch of the Church, I was specifically taught that you can't simply pick and choose what you believe Jesus said; if it's written in the Bible, he said it. Further, I was essentially taught that the Bible was word-for-word the infallible Word of God. However, over the years I've come to believe that this view just doesn't hold up given, for example, the two varying accounts of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 (things are created in different orders) and the variations in the facts and events surrounding the gospel stories. Weatherhead says, "I cannot make myself believe that Jesus spoke certain words which are completely out of character with the total impact which his personality makes upon me, derived from all four Gospels, from the experiences of the saints, and from my own poor but sincere thought of him after half a century's meditation and experience. I must, I feel, judge the Bible by Jesus, not Jesus by the Bible, written as it was by fallible men who sometimes contradict one another, and who must sometimes have been mistaken in their estimate of him." While on the subject of the Bible, he questions the traditional doctrine that its writers could be more inspired than anyone else. "I regard the late T.S. Eliot as much more inspired than the author of the Song of Solomon. The late C.S. Lewis' Screwtape Letters would willingly be given a place in the sacred library had the list of books not been closed."
For most of the book, his arguments are compelling and he backs them up with seemingly sound logic and reason. However, it's when he attempts to discuss subjects like death and the afterlife that his arguments become more speculative and, in my mind, less convincing. The chapter on Death and Survival, for instance, is full of anecdotal evidence of life after death -- essentially ghost stories and tales from seances -- punctuated with statements that such "evidence" should be hard to deny. And while he truly does seem convinced, for my part, these chapters just make it easier to mark these ideas down as "awaiting further light."
I'm doubtful that my summary here does any justice to the book as a whole. For what it's worth, I highly recommend this book to everyone willing to question what they believe, regardless of what they believe.
First off, my rating of four stars is given largely for the incredibly thought-provoking ideas put forth by Leslie Weatherhead in this book, and for the liberating emotional response I had to some of those ideas. I'd have given it five stars except some of his later arguments aren't as well supported as the others, and some of the arguments feel dated. Were I to rate the writing style on its own merits, it would have been closer to two or three stars due to excessive quotations (which tend to make this read like a high school research paper) and a proclivity for mild repetition.
Second, I discovered this book after a friend of mine described himself as an atheist agnostic. "Doesn't that just make you agnostic?" I asked in ignorance. I later looked up the definition and found myself wondering if there were such a thing as a Christian agnostic, because if so, I was pretty sure at this point I was one. This all led me to Weatherhead's book, written in the 1960s. It seems to be out of print, but I was able to find a used paperback online for a decent price. I'm sure you can, too.
So, what are some of Weatherhead's ideas? First, he believes that there are essentials of the Christian faith that one can know with certainty. This certainty, he says, comes from "the authority which truth itself possesses when it is perceived to be true by the individual concerned." Yes, this seems to make truth too subjective, but he says the alternative is to delegate authority to someone else's subjective decision of what's true. Someone like the Pope, for example. "Truth may certainly be true whatever my opinion may be, but it has no authority with me until I perceive it to be true." For those other non-essentials, he chooses to remain agnostic and mentally set them aside as "awaiting further light."
An example of something he places in this category is the idea of the Virgin Birth. The doctrine is of no importance at all, he says, otherwise it would have been part of the missionary message of the early church. The gospel of Mark never mentions it, and neither do the writings of Peter, Paul and John. "Divinity is not proved by having one parent instead of two. It could be argued that such a person is removed from us and could not have been truly man. As to sinlessness, we men are a wicked lot, but all the evil in our children does not come from us. Mothers can pass on evil as well as fathers, and sinlessness cannot be physically determined." And he goes on to say that Jesus himself never mentioned the circumstances of his birth, and throws doubt on the word that is translated as "virgin" in the Bible text. He tells the reader not to accept or reject the Virgin Birth, just to put it aside.
One of the more difficult concepts for me to explore is the idea that some of the sayings attributed to Jesus may not be accurate or authentic. Having grown up in a particularly fundamentalist branch of the Church, I was specifically taught that you can't simply pick and choose what you believe Jesus said; if it's written in the Bible, he said it. Further, I was essentially taught that the Bible was word-for-word the infallible Word of God. However, over the years I've come to believe that this view just doesn't hold up given, for example, the two varying accounts of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 (things are created in different orders) and the variations in the facts and events surrounding the gospel stories. Weatherhead says, "I cannot make myself believe that Jesus spoke certain words which are completely out of character with the total impact which his personality makes upon me, derived from all four Gospels, from the experiences of the saints, and from my own poor but sincere thought of him after half a century's meditation and experience. I must, I feel, judge the Bible by Jesus, not Jesus by the Bible, written as it was by fallible men who sometimes contradict one another, and who must sometimes have been mistaken in their estimate of him." While on the subject of the Bible, he questions the traditional doctrine that its writers could be more inspired than anyone else. "I regard the late T.S. Eliot as much more inspired than the author of the Song of Solomon. The late C.S. Lewis' Screwtape Letters would willingly be given a place in the sacred library had the list of books not been closed."
For most of the book, his arguments are compelling and he backs them up with seemingly sound logic and reason. However, it's when he attempts to discuss subjects like death and the afterlife that his arguments become more speculative and, in my mind, less convincing. The chapter on Death and Survival, for instance, is full of anecdotal evidence of life after death -- essentially ghost stories and tales from seances -- punctuated with statements that such "evidence" should be hard to deny. And while he truly does seem convinced, for my part, these chapters just make it easier to mark these ideas down as "awaiting further light."
I'm doubtful that my summary here does any justice to the book as a whole. For what it's worth, I highly recommend this book to everyone willing to question what they believe, regardless of what they believe.
May 7, 2020
Though some of the examples may be dated, this is an important work in how to begin to think about the nature of christian theology as a rational human being. Without this book, I would no longer be calling myself a Christian.
November 17, 2015
I’ve often contemplated many of the things that Weatherhead writes about in this book. I’ve never read a book quite like this, which takes the hard questions of Christianity head-on, without shrinking from them or coating them in ambiguity.
This book will be difficult for some to digest, particularly those harboring intense theological indoctrination. Such people will, no doubt, scream heresy and toss this book in the garbage at their first encounter with Weatherheads iconoclasm. However, I would encourage such people to read this book through before formulating their final opinions about it.
I would strongly recommend that any reader stay in prayer intermittently while reading this book, constantly beseeching God for the clarity and peace. Prayer will help one maintain the perspective that God is God and that all the minute ramblings and postulations that men may perform, no matter how much they may appeal to our reason, merely scratch the surface of fully knowing God. Read this book with humility and take from it that which enhances your ability to understand and leave anything that frustrates you alone.
This book goes a long way in explaining how Christianity is a way of life and not a mere theological system. Many should read this book to understand how nothing more is really necessary beyond the simple openness of the Christian love that Jesus demonstrated so dramatically for us. We need not insist that anyone follow elaborate rules, rites, theologies, doctrines, or creeds, unless it feels right to them. The only real prerequisite is to open oneself to love others unconditionally and to let God into these relationships. The most effective way to a greater knowledge of God is through the experience of unconditional love.
Revelation is progressive. Once we embrace love, the rest will come on its own. Christ admitted those into discipleship who merely agreed to be with him and allowed his disciples to develop their own personal creed from their own experiences. That’s what the Christian Church should do. But for the Christian Church to invite others into experience means that the Christian Church must be “having” such experiences. I’m not talking about the experience of Sunday School or chapel; I’m talking about experiences of Christian action in the world, so that Christ can be really felt. It would be much more effective to invite your unbelieving neighbor to minister to the poor, help a sick neighbor, visit prisoners, read to illiterate children, or other actions of love than it ever would be to simply invite them to church. Let them find the physical church after they first experience the love. Revelation is progressive.
In this book, Dr. Weatherhead suggests that many Christian doctrines and rituals have nothing to do with expressing Christian love. Weatherhead asserts that it is time for the world to dismiss the lies, superstitions, distortions, and mythology with which the joyously simple message of Christ has been overlaid. Weatherhead contends that unless we can break out of the prison of literal Bible readings, false expressions, ancient creeds, antiquated hymns, and ridiculous expectations of one another, we will continue to repel many from the far more glorious truths inherent in simple expressions of Christian love.
Our five senses give us only a minute amount of knowledge in comparison to all that God knows. Algebra, which appears orderly to me, might well seem disorderly nonsense to an uneducated person. Cutting an unconscious mans body might seem purposeful cruelty to an uneducated savage, but a surgeon views it differently. To bridge this sort of enormous communication gap, Jesus drew word-pictures called parables. Parables help men see the truth in their own hearts. Today we have to recognize that similar communication gaps exist in our society and that bridging these gaps is how we bring new people to Christ.
In the paragraphs below I visit some of the major concepts that Weatherhead espouses:
The Virgin Birth
Jesus never mentioned the Virgin Birth, neither was it for centuries any part of the missionary message of the church. Mark never mentioned it, nor Peter, Paul, or John. Matthew goes to great lengths to show that Jesus was descended through Joseph from David, which seems meaningless if Joseph was not his father. Otherwise, wouldn’t it make more sense to trace the lineage of Jesus through Mary? Mary was descended from Aaron, not David.
Does one really have to believe in the Virgin Birth to believe in Jesus and to experience the love of Jesus? Does Jesus’ accomplishments have more to do with how he entered the world or what he was and did and said while he was in the world?
If Jesus draws me near to God, why do contentious particulars about whether or not Jesus had an earthly human father matter? Could the account of the Virgin Birth be a parable to help us all understand that we all have a heavenly father and that every man, to the extent to which he is good, is a revelation of that heavenly father? Jesus taught men to call God “father”. Jesus refers to his brothers, sisters, and mother as those who do Gods will, in contrast to his hereditary lineage.
If we take the Virgin Birth literally to mean birth without sexual intercourse, than we have to ask ourselves if Jesus was wholly human or not. If Jesus was not fully man, the whole religious significance of God becoming man is brought into question. Perhaps the appropriate symbolism is that of being “born again”, as in being spiritually re-born of God, with the implication that God is father to those who follow his will. From this perspective, God is father of not only Jesus, but also of all of us that follow him. Being re-born spiritually is to be released from the hereditary nature and purified into the spiritual nature. It is the manner by which we transcend from physical to spiritual beings. Because spiritual re-birth occurs without intercourse it is, so to speak, a “virgin” birth of the spirit.
Who was Jesus?
We assume that Jesus was sinless, but we have no way of proving that Jesus was sinless. In Luke 18:19 and Mark 10:18 Jesus asks: “Why ye call me good? Only God is good.”
Man, to the extent to which he is good, reveals the nature of God. Jesus was a vessel full of God. Jesus contained as much of God as has been poured into any man and likely lived on a moral level so high that his temptations were more subtle than we have the spiritual sensitivity to even discern as temptation at all.
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus was God. The Bible says that Jesus was the “Word” of God, it says that God was in Christ, and it says that Jesus was the Son of God; but it does not say that Jesus was God. Jesus prayed to God. Jesus did not encourage people to worship him, he encouraged people to worship God. Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man.
About Miracles
In Matthew 21:21, Jesus said that if one has sufficient faith and does not doubt they can tell a mountain to throw itself into the sea and it will be done. Jesus clearly worked many miracles but implied that others could learn to do miracles. We should ourselves be seeking how to cure people and other amazing things. But clearly, Jesus was more interested in demonstrating servitude than his miraculous abilities. The most dramatic miracle is that wherever Jesus is sincerely followed, men’s lives are changed, period.
What does it mean to believe?
Religious truth has no authority until it authenticates itself in the mind of the believer. Believing is accepting something as true because you see it to be true, not because it is imposed upon you. To be told “I am forgiven by God” does not do anything for one unless they accept readily the truth that God forgives.
If one has only reached religious convictions on the word of another then they, in reality, may have no true convictions. If ones religion has been incessantly pounded into them as a child, perhaps exploring their doubts will bring them to a more authentic faith. It is one thing to be told the Bible has authority because it is divinely inspired and quite another to feel one’s heart leap out and grasp Biblical truths. Revelation is progressive and each step along the way entails a personal acceptance of truth. As the author says, “‘seeing’ is the work of each soul for itself”.
The reason religion seems bland to many is because they have accepted the authority of the church but never really accepted what Christ stands for. Christianity is much more than theological doctrines that must be “believed”. Christianity is a way of seeing the world and living in the world. Christ never said you must believe this and that! Instead Christ said, in Luke 12:57, “why do you not of yourselves judge what is right?” The author remarks on what this means:
“A statement is not true because it is in the Bible, let alone in the Prayer Book. It is not true because Paul says so, or the Pope says so, or because John Wesley says so. It has the authority of the truth only when our own individual insight can leap up and recognize it and possess it as our own.”-Leslie Weatherhead
Having faith does not mean accepting intellectual propositions that seem preposterous. When Jesus spoke of Faith, he meant trust. One man Jesus healed by faith did not even know who had healed him and certainly had absolutely no concept of any theology about Jesus! When Jesus told people their faith had healed them he meant their “trustful expectancy” in something that breaks with convention, prejudice, biased upbringing, and peer pressure.
Taking the Bible literally
Did God converse with a snake in Hebrew? In Psalm 137:8-9, does it really say: “Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the rocks”? Does the Bible say that the flesh of swine is not to be eaten, that usury is wrong, and that wages earned one day are not to be kept back till the next morning? Do we today want to follow the rules for a Levitical priest in 700 B.C.? Did God really turn a terrified woman into a pillar of salt, order massacres, and allow his devoted servant Job to be visited with diseases and pain? Did a donkey really speak as related in 2 Peter 2:16? Were the parables that Jesus told actually factual events or simply related as examples? Does it matter whether the parables actually occurred or whether Jesus was simply drawing an analogy? Does a story have to be factually true in order to convey an important moral truth? Just asking.
Why did Jesus die the way he did?
Is there any legitimacy in the ancient Jewish custom of murdering animals for remission of sins? Would the God you know in your heart really condone such a slaughter? The Psalmists cries in 51:16 and 40:6: “Thou hast no pleasure in burnt offerings.”
Can justice really come from undeserved suffering? Is sin a debt that Jesus paid for with his death? Did Jesus experience some measure of suffering that in some fantastic ledger-account balanced the degree of sin in the world? The prodigal son, the woman taken in adultery, and the boy let down through the roof were all forgiven immediately; they did not have to await any sacrifice and neither do you when you are forgiven in the here and now. It is not that Christ had to die to pay someone or some price or to level some scale – Christ had to die because that’s what it took to get through to us! To get us to see! That’s what it took to make a big enough splash to get our attention, even today. That’s what it took to introduce a catalyst into the world that would begin progressive change.
So is there reality to the contention that Jesus’ suffering on the cross removed all of the sin? The trouble is that sins are not taken away! My sin and every man’s sin remains in the world, working still their evil in us and in the lives of others whom we have hurt. Such sin is diminished only when we forgive those who have hurt us (bear the transgression) and accept forgiveness from those we have hurt and from God. And even if our sin doesn’t appear to hurt another, but is simply a sin against what God stands for, then God bears the transgression! God bears the transgression for all our sins. This is what Christ demonstrated to us, how to bear transgressions and therefore how to also accept forgiveness! It is through forgiveness that sin is eliminated from the world. The Kingdom is of God is predicated upon men forgiving one another, God forgiving men, and the beautiful utopia resulting therefrom.
Christ forgave those who wronged him even as they were wronging him. The suffering Christ bore is the most radical example of non-violent forgiveness of assailants ever witnessed. This business of “turning the other cheek” was (and still is) a truly radical concept. It is the concept that permeates and sustains Jesus’ teaching. The purposeful restraint of backlash and retribution allows the assailant (or sinner) to understand immediately that they are forgiven. Just as the Prodigal son, we may return repentant into joyous fellowship. It is a concept so profound that it convicts the spiritual disciple to similarly hold steadfast to the truth, even in the face of his own death.
Jesus’ death is permanently etched into the consciousness of humanity. Jesus was willing to die for what he stood for, to refuse to lie, to refuse to conceal that he was a Son of God, to refuse to participate in the violence of self-defense. Jesus said: “No man taketh my life from me, I lay it down of myself.” It was not something that overcame him, it was something he purposefully did in order to carry God’s message into time, as an acted parable. The message is to go on loving and refusing evil and violence even in the face of it, without reprisal or answering violence, until men see what sin is and turn from it with loathing.
Through his death, Jesus also illustrated for us the spiritual re-birth that we now know that we can achieve. Like Jesus, we must grow our spiritual self to the point that when we sacrifice our physical body we may live on in the spirit. The only exit from the physical world is death, but unquestionably Jesus survived death and proved his survival to his followers many times. In first Corinthians 15:6 it says that on one occasion he appeared to 500 people at once. How else can we account for eleven men in hiding, terribly disappointed and disillusioned, suddenly becoming missionaries within six or seven weeks of his death and preaching his resurrection and eventually suffering themselves as martyrs’, laying down their lives for the truth? His disciples had a spiritual experience of him after his death and we have a spiritual experience of him today. He is unmistakably alive in spirit. Speaking of the disciples’ continuation of his spirit, Weatherhead writes:
“They went out through the known world, preaching, teaching, healing, inspiring, and, in spite of opposition, hostility and persecution, they won men and women everywhere to the new way. Nothing could stop them, not even the might of Imperial Rome, and is there in literature a more thrilling story than the story of that radiant Christian witness, of that infectious Christian living, of that unquenchable enthusiasm? It is depressing to find so rarely that exuberant living in the modern church.” –Leslie Weatherhead
So what it is that squelches exuberance in the church today? Perhaps it is not so squelched as some may first deduce. Weatherhead cites an eloquent Monia Furlong about this as follows:
“Within the strange, sprawling, quarreling mass of the churches, within their stifling narrowness, their ignorance, their insensitivity, their stupidity, their fear of the senses and of truth, I perceive another Church, one which really is Christ at work in the world. To this Church men seem to be admitted as much by a baptism of the heart as of the body, and they know more of intellectual charity, of vulnerability, of love, of joy, of peace, than most of the rest of us. They have learned to live with few defenses and so conquered the isolation that torments many. They do not judge, especially morally; their own relationships make it possible for others to grow. It does not matter what their circumstances are, what their physical and mental limitations are. They really are free men, the prisoners who have been released and who in turn can release others.” –Monia Furlong
The ability to alter the body with the mind
It is widely accepted that the ability to heal is very much a mental process. This has been demonstrated through the use of placebos, faith healings, and other means. Dr. Weatherhead cites the example that it has been factually proven that one can burn the flesh of a hypnotized person and raise a blister by simply telling the patient that one’s finger or fountain pen is a red-hot iron. Weatherhead suggests that such mental powers may have been the way in which Christ disposed of his physical body, accomplished miracles, and materialized at will after his death. This is exemplary of the subordination of the physical body to the mental spirit, such that the physical body is nothing less than a mere tool manifested by the spirit for its use when it needs it.
What matters most is that Jesus’ personality has clearly survived physical death and is still recognizably active in the world. After appearing physically to the senses of his followers, Jesus was eager to make them experience him independent of their senses, in the spirit. Jesus wanted his followers to know him as always present, even when they could not see, hear or touch him. Jesus is actually nearer to mankind by being spirit-to-spirit with us. Jesus said: “Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed.” Jesus said in John 15:4: “Abide in Me and I in you”. The power of the spirit is not a mere enhancement of man’s own facilities; it is a supernatural endowment. The secret of the power is to be possessed by the spirit of God. It is a power that was demonstrated by Christ.
DUE TO THE LENGTH OF THIS REVIEW IT IS CONTINUED IN THE COMMENT SECTION BELOW
This book will be difficult for some to digest, particularly those harboring intense theological indoctrination. Such people will, no doubt, scream heresy and toss this book in the garbage at their first encounter with Weatherheads iconoclasm. However, I would encourage such people to read this book through before formulating their final opinions about it.
I would strongly recommend that any reader stay in prayer intermittently while reading this book, constantly beseeching God for the clarity and peace. Prayer will help one maintain the perspective that God is God and that all the minute ramblings and postulations that men may perform, no matter how much they may appeal to our reason, merely scratch the surface of fully knowing God. Read this book with humility and take from it that which enhances your ability to understand and leave anything that frustrates you alone.
This book goes a long way in explaining how Christianity is a way of life and not a mere theological system. Many should read this book to understand how nothing more is really necessary beyond the simple openness of the Christian love that Jesus demonstrated so dramatically for us. We need not insist that anyone follow elaborate rules, rites, theologies, doctrines, or creeds, unless it feels right to them. The only real prerequisite is to open oneself to love others unconditionally and to let God into these relationships. The most effective way to a greater knowledge of God is through the experience of unconditional love.
Revelation is progressive. Once we embrace love, the rest will come on its own. Christ admitted those into discipleship who merely agreed to be with him and allowed his disciples to develop their own personal creed from their own experiences. That’s what the Christian Church should do. But for the Christian Church to invite others into experience means that the Christian Church must be “having” such experiences. I’m not talking about the experience of Sunday School or chapel; I’m talking about experiences of Christian action in the world, so that Christ can be really felt. It would be much more effective to invite your unbelieving neighbor to minister to the poor, help a sick neighbor, visit prisoners, read to illiterate children, or other actions of love than it ever would be to simply invite them to church. Let them find the physical church after they first experience the love. Revelation is progressive.
In this book, Dr. Weatherhead suggests that many Christian doctrines and rituals have nothing to do with expressing Christian love. Weatherhead asserts that it is time for the world to dismiss the lies, superstitions, distortions, and mythology with which the joyously simple message of Christ has been overlaid. Weatherhead contends that unless we can break out of the prison of literal Bible readings, false expressions, ancient creeds, antiquated hymns, and ridiculous expectations of one another, we will continue to repel many from the far more glorious truths inherent in simple expressions of Christian love.
Our five senses give us only a minute amount of knowledge in comparison to all that God knows. Algebra, which appears orderly to me, might well seem disorderly nonsense to an uneducated person. Cutting an unconscious mans body might seem purposeful cruelty to an uneducated savage, but a surgeon views it differently. To bridge this sort of enormous communication gap, Jesus drew word-pictures called parables. Parables help men see the truth in their own hearts. Today we have to recognize that similar communication gaps exist in our society and that bridging these gaps is how we bring new people to Christ.
In the paragraphs below I visit some of the major concepts that Weatherhead espouses:
The Virgin Birth
Jesus never mentioned the Virgin Birth, neither was it for centuries any part of the missionary message of the church. Mark never mentioned it, nor Peter, Paul, or John. Matthew goes to great lengths to show that Jesus was descended through Joseph from David, which seems meaningless if Joseph was not his father. Otherwise, wouldn’t it make more sense to trace the lineage of Jesus through Mary? Mary was descended from Aaron, not David.
Does one really have to believe in the Virgin Birth to believe in Jesus and to experience the love of Jesus? Does Jesus’ accomplishments have more to do with how he entered the world or what he was and did and said while he was in the world?
If Jesus draws me near to God, why do contentious particulars about whether or not Jesus had an earthly human father matter? Could the account of the Virgin Birth be a parable to help us all understand that we all have a heavenly father and that every man, to the extent to which he is good, is a revelation of that heavenly father? Jesus taught men to call God “father”. Jesus refers to his brothers, sisters, and mother as those who do Gods will, in contrast to his hereditary lineage.
If we take the Virgin Birth literally to mean birth without sexual intercourse, than we have to ask ourselves if Jesus was wholly human or not. If Jesus was not fully man, the whole religious significance of God becoming man is brought into question. Perhaps the appropriate symbolism is that of being “born again”, as in being spiritually re-born of God, with the implication that God is father to those who follow his will. From this perspective, God is father of not only Jesus, but also of all of us that follow him. Being re-born spiritually is to be released from the hereditary nature and purified into the spiritual nature. It is the manner by which we transcend from physical to spiritual beings. Because spiritual re-birth occurs without intercourse it is, so to speak, a “virgin” birth of the spirit.
Who was Jesus?
We assume that Jesus was sinless, but we have no way of proving that Jesus was sinless. In Luke 18:19 and Mark 10:18 Jesus asks: “Why ye call me good? Only God is good.”
Man, to the extent to which he is good, reveals the nature of God. Jesus was a vessel full of God. Jesus contained as much of God as has been poured into any man and likely lived on a moral level so high that his temptations were more subtle than we have the spiritual sensitivity to even discern as temptation at all.
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus was God. The Bible says that Jesus was the “Word” of God, it says that God was in Christ, and it says that Jesus was the Son of God; but it does not say that Jesus was God. Jesus prayed to God. Jesus did not encourage people to worship him, he encouraged people to worship God. Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man.
About Miracles
In Matthew 21:21, Jesus said that if one has sufficient faith and does not doubt they can tell a mountain to throw itself into the sea and it will be done. Jesus clearly worked many miracles but implied that others could learn to do miracles. We should ourselves be seeking how to cure people and other amazing things. But clearly, Jesus was more interested in demonstrating servitude than his miraculous abilities. The most dramatic miracle is that wherever Jesus is sincerely followed, men’s lives are changed, period.
What does it mean to believe?
Religious truth has no authority until it authenticates itself in the mind of the believer. Believing is accepting something as true because you see it to be true, not because it is imposed upon you. To be told “I am forgiven by God” does not do anything for one unless they accept readily the truth that God forgives.
If one has only reached religious convictions on the word of another then they, in reality, may have no true convictions. If ones religion has been incessantly pounded into them as a child, perhaps exploring their doubts will bring them to a more authentic faith. It is one thing to be told the Bible has authority because it is divinely inspired and quite another to feel one’s heart leap out and grasp Biblical truths. Revelation is progressive and each step along the way entails a personal acceptance of truth. As the author says, “‘seeing’ is the work of each soul for itself”.
The reason religion seems bland to many is because they have accepted the authority of the church but never really accepted what Christ stands for. Christianity is much more than theological doctrines that must be “believed”. Christianity is a way of seeing the world and living in the world. Christ never said you must believe this and that! Instead Christ said, in Luke 12:57, “why do you not of yourselves judge what is right?” The author remarks on what this means:
“A statement is not true because it is in the Bible, let alone in the Prayer Book. It is not true because Paul says so, or the Pope says so, or because John Wesley says so. It has the authority of the truth only when our own individual insight can leap up and recognize it and possess it as our own.”-Leslie Weatherhead
Having faith does not mean accepting intellectual propositions that seem preposterous. When Jesus spoke of Faith, he meant trust. One man Jesus healed by faith did not even know who had healed him and certainly had absolutely no concept of any theology about Jesus! When Jesus told people their faith had healed them he meant their “trustful expectancy” in something that breaks with convention, prejudice, biased upbringing, and peer pressure.
Taking the Bible literally
Did God converse with a snake in Hebrew? In Psalm 137:8-9, does it really say: “Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the rocks”? Does the Bible say that the flesh of swine is not to be eaten, that usury is wrong, and that wages earned one day are not to be kept back till the next morning? Do we today want to follow the rules for a Levitical priest in 700 B.C.? Did God really turn a terrified woman into a pillar of salt, order massacres, and allow his devoted servant Job to be visited with diseases and pain? Did a donkey really speak as related in 2 Peter 2:16? Were the parables that Jesus told actually factual events or simply related as examples? Does it matter whether the parables actually occurred or whether Jesus was simply drawing an analogy? Does a story have to be factually true in order to convey an important moral truth? Just asking.
Why did Jesus die the way he did?
Is there any legitimacy in the ancient Jewish custom of murdering animals for remission of sins? Would the God you know in your heart really condone such a slaughter? The Psalmists cries in 51:16 and 40:6: “Thou hast no pleasure in burnt offerings.”
Can justice really come from undeserved suffering? Is sin a debt that Jesus paid for with his death? Did Jesus experience some measure of suffering that in some fantastic ledger-account balanced the degree of sin in the world? The prodigal son, the woman taken in adultery, and the boy let down through the roof were all forgiven immediately; they did not have to await any sacrifice and neither do you when you are forgiven in the here and now. It is not that Christ had to die to pay someone or some price or to level some scale – Christ had to die because that’s what it took to get through to us! To get us to see! That’s what it took to make a big enough splash to get our attention, even today. That’s what it took to introduce a catalyst into the world that would begin progressive change.
So is there reality to the contention that Jesus’ suffering on the cross removed all of the sin? The trouble is that sins are not taken away! My sin and every man’s sin remains in the world, working still their evil in us and in the lives of others whom we have hurt. Such sin is diminished only when we forgive those who have hurt us (bear the transgression) and accept forgiveness from those we have hurt and from God. And even if our sin doesn’t appear to hurt another, but is simply a sin against what God stands for, then God bears the transgression! God bears the transgression for all our sins. This is what Christ demonstrated to us, how to bear transgressions and therefore how to also accept forgiveness! It is through forgiveness that sin is eliminated from the world. The Kingdom is of God is predicated upon men forgiving one another, God forgiving men, and the beautiful utopia resulting therefrom.
Christ forgave those who wronged him even as they were wronging him. The suffering Christ bore is the most radical example of non-violent forgiveness of assailants ever witnessed. This business of “turning the other cheek” was (and still is) a truly radical concept. It is the concept that permeates and sustains Jesus’ teaching. The purposeful restraint of backlash and retribution allows the assailant (or sinner) to understand immediately that they are forgiven. Just as the Prodigal son, we may return repentant into joyous fellowship. It is a concept so profound that it convicts the spiritual disciple to similarly hold steadfast to the truth, even in the face of his own death.
Jesus’ death is permanently etched into the consciousness of humanity. Jesus was willing to die for what he stood for, to refuse to lie, to refuse to conceal that he was a Son of God, to refuse to participate in the violence of self-defense. Jesus said: “No man taketh my life from me, I lay it down of myself.” It was not something that overcame him, it was something he purposefully did in order to carry God’s message into time, as an acted parable. The message is to go on loving and refusing evil and violence even in the face of it, without reprisal or answering violence, until men see what sin is and turn from it with loathing.
Through his death, Jesus also illustrated for us the spiritual re-birth that we now know that we can achieve. Like Jesus, we must grow our spiritual self to the point that when we sacrifice our physical body we may live on in the spirit. The only exit from the physical world is death, but unquestionably Jesus survived death and proved his survival to his followers many times. In first Corinthians 15:6 it says that on one occasion he appeared to 500 people at once. How else can we account for eleven men in hiding, terribly disappointed and disillusioned, suddenly becoming missionaries within six or seven weeks of his death and preaching his resurrection and eventually suffering themselves as martyrs’, laying down their lives for the truth? His disciples had a spiritual experience of him after his death and we have a spiritual experience of him today. He is unmistakably alive in spirit. Speaking of the disciples’ continuation of his spirit, Weatherhead writes:
“They went out through the known world, preaching, teaching, healing, inspiring, and, in spite of opposition, hostility and persecution, they won men and women everywhere to the new way. Nothing could stop them, not even the might of Imperial Rome, and is there in literature a more thrilling story than the story of that radiant Christian witness, of that infectious Christian living, of that unquenchable enthusiasm? It is depressing to find so rarely that exuberant living in the modern church.” –Leslie Weatherhead
So what it is that squelches exuberance in the church today? Perhaps it is not so squelched as some may first deduce. Weatherhead cites an eloquent Monia Furlong about this as follows:
“Within the strange, sprawling, quarreling mass of the churches, within their stifling narrowness, their ignorance, their insensitivity, their stupidity, their fear of the senses and of truth, I perceive another Church, one which really is Christ at work in the world. To this Church men seem to be admitted as much by a baptism of the heart as of the body, and they know more of intellectual charity, of vulnerability, of love, of joy, of peace, than most of the rest of us. They have learned to live with few defenses and so conquered the isolation that torments many. They do not judge, especially morally; their own relationships make it possible for others to grow. It does not matter what their circumstances are, what their physical and mental limitations are. They really are free men, the prisoners who have been released and who in turn can release others.” –Monia Furlong
The ability to alter the body with the mind
It is widely accepted that the ability to heal is very much a mental process. This has been demonstrated through the use of placebos, faith healings, and other means. Dr. Weatherhead cites the example that it has been factually proven that one can burn the flesh of a hypnotized person and raise a blister by simply telling the patient that one’s finger or fountain pen is a red-hot iron. Weatherhead suggests that such mental powers may have been the way in which Christ disposed of his physical body, accomplished miracles, and materialized at will after his death. This is exemplary of the subordination of the physical body to the mental spirit, such that the physical body is nothing less than a mere tool manifested by the spirit for its use when it needs it.
What matters most is that Jesus’ personality has clearly survived physical death and is still recognizably active in the world. After appearing physically to the senses of his followers, Jesus was eager to make them experience him independent of their senses, in the spirit. Jesus wanted his followers to know him as always present, even when they could not see, hear or touch him. Jesus is actually nearer to mankind by being spirit-to-spirit with us. Jesus said: “Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed.” Jesus said in John 15:4: “Abide in Me and I in you”. The power of the spirit is not a mere enhancement of man’s own facilities; it is a supernatural endowment. The secret of the power is to be possessed by the spirit of God. It is a power that was demonstrated by Christ.
DUE TO THE LENGTH OF THIS REVIEW IT IS CONTINUED IN THE COMMENT SECTION BELOW
August 26, 2021
Clinging to my faith has been a difficult task for me. Books like this make it easier. A majority of what is written here resonates so deeply with me—believing in God but coming to terms with the fact that I can't know everything because His ways are higher than mine. Anyone who has ever wanted to leave "church the building" but has wanted to love God in the midst of that confusion should read this book.
May 21, 2007
It's better just to be honest about what you don't know.
May 28, 2024
AN ENGLISH MINISTER PROPOSES A NON-DOGMATIC, “QUESTIONING” CHRISTIANITY
Leslie Dixon Weatherhead (1893-1976) was an English Methodist/Congregational minister and theologian who pastored a Methodist church starting in 1915, then a Congregational Church in London, serving there from 1936 until his retirement in 1960. He wrote many popular books, such as 'Is There More?' Heaven, Hell, and the Eternal Life that Begins Now,' 'The Will Of God,' etc. [NOTE: page numbers below refer to a 368-page paperback edition.]
He wrote in the Preface of this 1965 book, “In 1951 … I spent three months in [physics professor Raynor Johnson’s] home and... we discussed the possibility of writing a book together which sought to commend Christianity to the modern, thoughtful layman who is so acutely dissatisfied by the conventional presentation of the Christian religion… However, while I was still the Minister of the City Temple, in London, this was impossible… As a certain amount of leisure became mine in retirement, I started to write this book… Just before his death, I had a long conversation with Lord Birkett… and then he… said, ‘I think now I should describe myself as a “Christian agnostic.”’ The phrase stuck in my mind, and I determined to make it my title… I feel that it is no sin to be an agnostic. By ‘agnostic’ I do not of course mean the atheist, who declares that there is no God… I am writing for the ‘Christian agnostic,’ by which I mean a person who is immensely attracted by Christ and who seeks to show his spirit… but who, though he is sure of many Christian truths, feels that he cannot honestly and conscientiously ‘sign on the dotted line’ that he believes certain theological ideas about which some branches of the church dogmatize; churches from which he feels excluded because he cannot ‘believe.’ His intellectual integrity makes him say about many things, ‘It may be so. I do not know.’” (Pg. 13-15)
He continues, “This book would say to the modern layman, ‘Don’t exclude yourself from the fellowship of Christ’s followers because of mental difficulties. If you love Christ and are seeking to follow him, take an attitude of Christian agnosticism to intellectual problems at least for the present. Read this book to see if the essentials of the Christian religion are clarified for you and only accept those things which gradually seem to you to be true. Leave the rest in a mental box labeled, ‘awaiting further light.’ In the meantime, join with us in trying to show and to spread Christ’s spirit, for this, we feel, is the most important thing in the world.’” (Pg. 21)
He acknowledges, “In this book I have used, where relevant, my studies in psychical research… Few writers on Christianity have taken psychic factors into account, presumably because formerly the whole subject was bedeviled by cranks, cheats, fanatics and the self-deluded, and even now the standards by which evidence is assessed are far too low. But I prophecy that when this field is explore more fully… who bring to its investigation the disciplines and methods of the real scientist, the reward for religion will be far greater than our present flirtation with physics.” (Pg. 22) He is also sympathetic toward reincarnation (Pg. 296-297).
He recounts, “in a television interview, a distinguished and thoughtful layman… was brushed off by an eminent dignitary of a certain denomination, because the layman said he could not accept the Virgin Birth. Jesus would not thus have turned him away. Jesus never mentioned the Virgin Birth, neither was it for centuries any part of the missionary message of the church. We still make of prime importance matters about which Jesus said nothing. How can a matter be fundamental in a religion where the founder of the religion never mentioned it? And all this goes, not for the Virgin Birth only, but for a dozen improbabilities about which not even a reverent agnosticism is allowed by the die-hard Scribes and Pharisees of today, and the sad result is that we lose from Christian discipleship some of the ablest minds of our time.” (Pg. 31)
He suggests, “Christianity is a way of life, not a system of theological doctrines which must be ‘believed.’ But though, by using the authority of the church, we must not thrust beliefs on people… to try to make them accept orthodoxy, we may set these same beliefs before people, showing them the rich truth which we have found and which they may come to receive as their questing mind develops and grows… We want them to SEE and then they will believe.” (Pg. 61)
He states, “The question which I feel it is so relevant to ask is not, ‘What deeds lay within Christ’s power?’ … The relevant questions to my mind are, ‘Is this alleged happening like him? Is it the kind of thing he would be likely to do?...’ Healing a leper seems to me a perfect example of a miracle, desire to make a sick man well being the motive… but whether turning water into 120 gallons of wine … which could keep a small village in wine for some time, a story only recorded in one Gospel, written half a century after the event described, is to be regarded as factual, I feel we may be allowed to doubt, since nothing important hands on it. Some other stories I think are in the category of narratives which have been ‘written up,’ and it is legitimate for modern man to seek natural explanations. Indeed, intellectual honesty demands this… One wonders whether Christ really cursed a fig-tree when it was not even the time of figs… One wonders whether the story of the daughter of Jairus, always quoted as a raising from the dead on the part of Jesus, was not a case of healing a girl who was in a coma… None of this is written to belittle Christ but to understand him… possible accretions which men love to add to a venerated figure… do nothing to make the modern man love him. They obscure the real Jesus from us and … make claims for him which … he would never have made for himself.” (Pg. 111)
He explains, “I take the view that Christ was a Divine Being, an avatar or incarnation of God, Man to the nth degree, who, perhaps through many previous incarnations had reached in the unseen an august place in Divine Society and who, for man’s sake, had volunteered to take on our flesh and our circumstances and had committed himself, as God’s utterly devoted servant and intermediary, to our redemption.” (Pg. 139-140) He adds, “If, then, Christ is not to be equated with God… it seems reasonable to place Christ in a unique category of avatar, truly man but more God-like than man has ever attained on earth…. None of these speculations takes Jesus from us. For this world he is the Word of God in whom we see God’s nature and purpose… He is the Savior of our world and man can follow ho higher way than to commit himself in return, to obey and to follow.” (Pg. 140-141)
He admits, “I know that many are so disappointed in the churches as at present organized that they rarely, if ever, attend services… And one sometimes wonders whether a useless thing should be supported, even for worthy motives, or whether its abandonment might not awaken its promoters to the fact of its uselessness. Many wonder how the elaborate ritual and ceremony of some services can possibly have developed from the teaching of a young man… who talked so simply … to very simple people. Others find so much meaningless drivel preached in sermons that they feel it is a waste of time to listen to them… We sometimes tell people they should go to church to worship God, but some services make that impossible… We KNOW we could worship better along among the hills or by a lonely shore, and get just as good fellowship on the golf course.” (Pg. 171-172)
He argues, “As for the matter of the equal inspiration of all parts of the Bible, I defy any honest reader to allege that he has gained spiritual help from the verses in [Revelation] which describe ‘the judgment of the great harlot…’ … Do let us be honest about the Bible!... We should one day take a blue pencil and cross out whole chunks of it like the violent imprecatory Psalms… the long genealogies… the worries of Paul about circumcision, his obsession with sin and guilt, and his Jewish emphasis on animal sacrifice… and the parts of Revelation written in code… to which we have largely lost the key.” (Pg. 192-192)
He asserts, “Hell may last as long as sinful humanity lasts, but that does not mean that any individual will remain in it all that time. The time of purging can only continue until purification is reached. And a God driven to employ an endless hell would be a God turned fiend himself, defeated in his original purpose.” (Pg. 282)
Though more than fifty years old, this book still says many things which may resonate with modern ears and hearts.
Leslie Dixon Weatherhead (1893-1976) was an English Methodist/Congregational minister and theologian who pastored a Methodist church starting in 1915, then a Congregational Church in London, serving there from 1936 until his retirement in 1960. He wrote many popular books, such as 'Is There More?' Heaven, Hell, and the Eternal Life that Begins Now,' 'The Will Of God,' etc. [NOTE: page numbers below refer to a 368-page paperback edition.]
He wrote in the Preface of this 1965 book, “In 1951 … I spent three months in [physics professor Raynor Johnson’s] home and... we discussed the possibility of writing a book together which sought to commend Christianity to the modern, thoughtful layman who is so acutely dissatisfied by the conventional presentation of the Christian religion… However, while I was still the Minister of the City Temple, in London, this was impossible… As a certain amount of leisure became mine in retirement, I started to write this book… Just before his death, I had a long conversation with Lord Birkett… and then he… said, ‘I think now I should describe myself as a “Christian agnostic.”’ The phrase stuck in my mind, and I determined to make it my title… I feel that it is no sin to be an agnostic. By ‘agnostic’ I do not of course mean the atheist, who declares that there is no God… I am writing for the ‘Christian agnostic,’ by which I mean a person who is immensely attracted by Christ and who seeks to show his spirit… but who, though he is sure of many Christian truths, feels that he cannot honestly and conscientiously ‘sign on the dotted line’ that he believes certain theological ideas about which some branches of the church dogmatize; churches from which he feels excluded because he cannot ‘believe.’ His intellectual integrity makes him say about many things, ‘It may be so. I do not know.’” (Pg. 13-15)
He continues, “This book would say to the modern layman, ‘Don’t exclude yourself from the fellowship of Christ’s followers because of mental difficulties. If you love Christ and are seeking to follow him, take an attitude of Christian agnosticism to intellectual problems at least for the present. Read this book to see if the essentials of the Christian religion are clarified for you and only accept those things which gradually seem to you to be true. Leave the rest in a mental box labeled, ‘awaiting further light.’ In the meantime, join with us in trying to show and to spread Christ’s spirit, for this, we feel, is the most important thing in the world.’” (Pg. 21)
He acknowledges, “In this book I have used, where relevant, my studies in psychical research… Few writers on Christianity have taken psychic factors into account, presumably because formerly the whole subject was bedeviled by cranks, cheats, fanatics and the self-deluded, and even now the standards by which evidence is assessed are far too low. But I prophecy that when this field is explore more fully… who bring to its investigation the disciplines and methods of the real scientist, the reward for religion will be far greater than our present flirtation with physics.” (Pg. 22) He is also sympathetic toward reincarnation (Pg. 296-297).
He recounts, “in a television interview, a distinguished and thoughtful layman… was brushed off by an eminent dignitary of a certain denomination, because the layman said he could not accept the Virgin Birth. Jesus would not thus have turned him away. Jesus never mentioned the Virgin Birth, neither was it for centuries any part of the missionary message of the church. We still make of prime importance matters about which Jesus said nothing. How can a matter be fundamental in a religion where the founder of the religion never mentioned it? And all this goes, not for the Virgin Birth only, but for a dozen improbabilities about which not even a reverent agnosticism is allowed by the die-hard Scribes and Pharisees of today, and the sad result is that we lose from Christian discipleship some of the ablest minds of our time.” (Pg. 31)
He suggests, “Christianity is a way of life, not a system of theological doctrines which must be ‘believed.’ But though, by using the authority of the church, we must not thrust beliefs on people… to try to make them accept orthodoxy, we may set these same beliefs before people, showing them the rich truth which we have found and which they may come to receive as their questing mind develops and grows… We want them to SEE and then they will believe.” (Pg. 61)
He states, “The question which I feel it is so relevant to ask is not, ‘What deeds lay within Christ’s power?’ … The relevant questions to my mind are, ‘Is this alleged happening like him? Is it the kind of thing he would be likely to do?...’ Healing a leper seems to me a perfect example of a miracle, desire to make a sick man well being the motive… but whether turning water into 120 gallons of wine … which could keep a small village in wine for some time, a story only recorded in one Gospel, written half a century after the event described, is to be regarded as factual, I feel we may be allowed to doubt, since nothing important hands on it. Some other stories I think are in the category of narratives which have been ‘written up,’ and it is legitimate for modern man to seek natural explanations. Indeed, intellectual honesty demands this… One wonders whether Christ really cursed a fig-tree when it was not even the time of figs… One wonders whether the story of the daughter of Jairus, always quoted as a raising from the dead on the part of Jesus, was not a case of healing a girl who was in a coma… None of this is written to belittle Christ but to understand him… possible accretions which men love to add to a venerated figure… do nothing to make the modern man love him. They obscure the real Jesus from us and … make claims for him which … he would never have made for himself.” (Pg. 111)
He explains, “I take the view that Christ was a Divine Being, an avatar or incarnation of God, Man to the nth degree, who, perhaps through many previous incarnations had reached in the unseen an august place in Divine Society and who, for man’s sake, had volunteered to take on our flesh and our circumstances and had committed himself, as God’s utterly devoted servant and intermediary, to our redemption.” (Pg. 139-140) He adds, “If, then, Christ is not to be equated with God… it seems reasonable to place Christ in a unique category of avatar, truly man but more God-like than man has ever attained on earth…. None of these speculations takes Jesus from us. For this world he is the Word of God in whom we see God’s nature and purpose… He is the Savior of our world and man can follow ho higher way than to commit himself in return, to obey and to follow.” (Pg. 140-141)
He admits, “I know that many are so disappointed in the churches as at present organized that they rarely, if ever, attend services… And one sometimes wonders whether a useless thing should be supported, even for worthy motives, or whether its abandonment might not awaken its promoters to the fact of its uselessness. Many wonder how the elaborate ritual and ceremony of some services can possibly have developed from the teaching of a young man… who talked so simply … to very simple people. Others find so much meaningless drivel preached in sermons that they feel it is a waste of time to listen to them… We sometimes tell people they should go to church to worship God, but some services make that impossible… We KNOW we could worship better along among the hills or by a lonely shore, and get just as good fellowship on the golf course.” (Pg. 171-172)
He argues, “As for the matter of the equal inspiration of all parts of the Bible, I defy any honest reader to allege that he has gained spiritual help from the verses in [Revelation] which describe ‘the judgment of the great harlot…’ … Do let us be honest about the Bible!... We should one day take a blue pencil and cross out whole chunks of it like the violent imprecatory Psalms… the long genealogies… the worries of Paul about circumcision, his obsession with sin and guilt, and his Jewish emphasis on animal sacrifice… and the parts of Revelation written in code… to which we have largely lost the key.” (Pg. 192-192)
He asserts, “Hell may last as long as sinful humanity lasts, but that does not mean that any individual will remain in it all that time. The time of purging can only continue until purification is reached. And a God driven to employ an endless hell would be a God turned fiend himself, defeated in his original purpose.” (Pg. 282)
Though more than fifty years old, this book still says many things which may resonate with modern ears and hearts.
June 1, 2022
This is an especially difficult book for me to review. I first read “The Christian Agnostic” as a college student, and at the time it was completely seminal and revolutionary for me. During my formative years when my religious skepticism was at its peak, Weatherhead’s writing gave me permission to own my doubts without giving up on faith altogether. In many ways, it’s likely because of my exposure to Weatherhead’s writing that I made the decision to remain a person of faith rather than walk away from organized religion. For that, “The Christian Agnostic” will always retain an important place in my heart and on my bookshelf.
That being said, I'm reviewing “The Christian Agnostic” with nearly 20 years’ worth of hindsight, ministry experience, and formal theological training. In spite of my sentimentality towards that period of my life, I have to be candid that Weatherhead’s writing is well-intentioned but also woefully problematic (particularly in the second half).
Christian apologetics is not really a meaningful spiritual exercise for me anymore, but even I can admit that some of Weatherhead’s attempts (particularly in the first half) are beautifully written. However, by the second half it goes completely off the rails with pseudo-science, spiritualism (not to be confused with spirituality), and careless lapses in its own logic that it spends the opening chapters laying down with care.
I am grateful for the help that it offered me during one point in time in my life, but I really can't recommend the book as a solid resource in good faith (if you’ll pardon the expression). I can look back on it with some fondness and nostalgia for what it was for me during college, but in the end it simply has too many problems to ignore as an adult.
Perhaps it is best left on my bookshelf as a reminder of the time in my life in which it served its purpose…and as a benchmark for how far I’ve come since growing beyond it.
That being said, I'm reviewing “The Christian Agnostic” with nearly 20 years’ worth of hindsight, ministry experience, and formal theological training. In spite of my sentimentality towards that period of my life, I have to be candid that Weatherhead’s writing is well-intentioned but also woefully problematic (particularly in the second half).
Christian apologetics is not really a meaningful spiritual exercise for me anymore, but even I can admit that some of Weatherhead’s attempts (particularly in the first half) are beautifully written. However, by the second half it goes completely off the rails with pseudo-science, spiritualism (not to be confused with spirituality), and careless lapses in its own logic that it spends the opening chapters laying down with care.
I am grateful for the help that it offered me during one point in time in my life, but I really can't recommend the book as a solid resource in good faith (if you’ll pardon the expression). I can look back on it with some fondness and nostalgia for what it was for me during college, but in the end it simply has too many problems to ignore as an adult.
Perhaps it is best left on my bookshelf as a reminder of the time in my life in which it served its purpose…and as a benchmark for how far I’ve come since growing beyond it.
January 13, 2017
A GREAT BOOK BY A GREAT CHRISTIAN MINISTER. HUMANE BEUTIFULLY WRITTEN . A WAY AHEAD OF HIS TIME IN SO MANY WAYS WHEN HE WAS A OLD MAN I HEARD HIM PREACH . HE WAS MAGNETIC CHRISMATIC. A MAN OF HIGH INTELLENENCE AND GREAT CHARM TODAY THEY NO LONGER EXIST IN OUR MATERIALISTIC WORLD AND REAL INTELLEGENT PREACHING NO LONGER REALLY EXISTS. READ THE CHRISTIAN AGNOSTIC IT IS CAPTIVATING AND CHALLENGING. NOT FOR THE FUNDAMENTALIST I FEAR AND THAT IS VERY SAD I THINK.
IAN KEMP
IAN KEMP
September 17, 2008
This one is fascinating. Absolutely fascinating. Where has it been all my life?
Read
March 24, 2021The Christian Agnostic by Leslie Weatherhead is a great book for anyone interested or involved in Christianity. If you hold your beliefs firmly, it will challenge many of your beliefs and help you to develop a deeper understanding of them. If you’re someone who is maybe not so sure of your beliefs, it is also great to have some of what you have been struggling with in your thoughts put into words for you by someone who has spent most of their life struggling with the same.
The overarching theme of this book is that the true message of Christianity has been weighed down by nearly two millennium’s worth of church leaders piling on doctrine as they have seen fit. In the author’s words. The author argues that Christianity is much more a lifestyle based on love and forgiveness than it is a strict set of doctrine of which one must be aligned with.
The author uses Jesus’s close associate, the apostle Peter as an example. During Peter’s time, concepts such as the virgin birth or the Trinity were not yet part of the Christian doctrine. Yet Weatherhead states that Peter was no less a Christian than a Christian of today, despite him not being aware of or believing in the virgin birth or the concept of the Trinity.
Another major takeaway from Weatherhead is that the Bible, written and compiled by men, is not infallible, and should be judged relative to Jesus’s teachings.
Overall I thought this book while a bit dry and repetitive at times, was very illuminating on a subject which I myself have struggled with often through the years. I would encourage anyone who is curious with or involved in Christianity to read this book to give them a deeper understanding of their beliefs, or non-beliefs.
The overarching theme of this book is that the true message of Christianity has been weighed down by nearly two millennium’s worth of church leaders piling on doctrine as they have seen fit. In the author’s words. The author argues that Christianity is much more a lifestyle based on love and forgiveness than it is a strict set of doctrine of which one must be aligned with.
The author uses Jesus’s close associate, the apostle Peter as an example. During Peter’s time, concepts such as the virgin birth or the Trinity were not yet part of the Christian doctrine. Yet Weatherhead states that Peter was no less a Christian than a Christian of today, despite him not being aware of or believing in the virgin birth or the concept of the Trinity.
Another major takeaway from Weatherhead is that the Bible, written and compiled by men, is not infallible, and should be judged relative to Jesus’s teachings.
Overall I thought this book while a bit dry and repetitive at times, was very illuminating on a subject which I myself have struggled with often through the years. I would encourage anyone who is curious with or involved in Christianity to read this book to give them a deeper understanding of their beliefs, or non-beliefs.
April 17, 2023
I very rarely have said this in my life - but this book has changed my thinking and probably my life. One of the best books I have ever read, especially focusing on Chapters 1-12. If you've ever had questions about God, the Christian faith or the Bible and have been met with anger or silence from the Church or from Christians, this is the book for you. For years I've struggled with the fact that my beliefs didn't line up with anyone else's and now I feel like almost a weight has been lifted from me. The clarity this book has provided will stay with me forever.
January 23, 2019
I love reading about a person’s spiritual journey. The first few chapters of this book beautifully capture the author’s bewilderment and doubt, which culminate in a renewed sense of faith. But I hate reading the contortions of religious apologists. The author is a member of the established church, and he weaves together random parables and passages to justify his arbitrary positions.
This book is notable because the seams are visible between personal faith and practicing dogma.
This book is notable because the seams are visible between personal faith and practicing dogma.
January 6, 2024
Wacky at times, and downright heretical at others...But incredibly beautiful, well-written and engaging. His arguments, even the ones I intensely disagree with, are well-made and fun to interact with.
July 19, 2024
An interesting book with some points that I did not expect being written by a man who grew up in the early 1900s. He certainly had some very interesting ideas and interpretations, and gave me several things to think about. Very encouraging.
August 29, 2011
Weatherhead has written a book for the Christian agnostic. I certainly am no agnostic and by his definitions I am not sure that I am a Christian, though I do think that I can answer to that name. It is an interesting mix of religion, psychology, mystic thought etc, and pulling in words from scientists to help with his work of regaling us with his form of Christianity which is sans virgin birth, but possibly reincarnation. Not my cup of tea, even though he is an Englishman. He does quote Wesley once or twice but in areas that are not problematic.
J. Robert Ewbank author "John Wesley, Natural Man, and the 'Isms'"
J. Robert Ewbank author "John Wesley, Natural Man, and the 'Isms'"
Read
January 3, 2010Religion
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews