Meetings and Disagreements

J and I met the retiring leader this morning. Neither of us were sure what to expect. Basically he promoted the line that I appeared unwilling to accept that anyone could have a different view on transsexualism to mine, and it was that unwillingness that led the leadership to ask me to stop going. We responded that the other leader simply didn't make any effort over 18 months to even consider my view as a valid one. Basically their line appears to be "you agree with us or we throw you out". He admits that they may have handled me badly. I said that disagreements over the place of Israel in God's plans are fundamentally different to disagreements about who I am. I can live with people having different views on Israel to me. Heck, I can live with people having different views on God to me. But it becomes extremely difficult to live amongst people who simply judge you as "wrong" - especially when the leadership didn't want me to "evangelise" my position, nor investigate it for themselves. Basically, just soak it all up, and maybe the message that I am wrong would eventually seep through.

The responsibility for the fiasco last weekend was placed firmly on his wife's head. He didn't think that anyone would have had a problem with us attending. But J pointed out that the precedent was set by the leadership, as the reason given at the time of my expulsion was "people wouldn't cope". Basically the leadership were wanting my timescale of transition, if it happened at all, to be dependent upon the acceptance of others in the church. Yet, at the same time, he admitted that I probably did have to transition, otherwise I probably wouldn't be around today.

Ultimately, faith in Christ is dependent upon trust - it's a step of faith. When the church around you gives ample reason not to trust them, then you start evaluating whether your first step of faith was valid. After reading lots of things about the origin of the Bible, the origin of the Christ story, evolution and astronomy, I came to the conclusion that my step of faith was deeply flawed. I don't know whether there's a god or not. I strongly suspect that god was invented by early man in an attempt to explain the apparently inexplicable things around him. As our knowledge of the world around us has increased, the apparently inexplicable things have changed in their nature. We know what causes thunderstorms and earthquakes. We know what causes certain illnesses. We aren't able to conclusively answer questions about the origins of life - but the evidence around us seems to certainly deny the Genesis stories. I found no reason to trust Christians any more than any other religious group. And I felt that, basically, their message was simply "trust us" - a message that all charlatans broadcast.

Life's questions do become easier without having to make god jump through hoops or contorted logic. Simply put, nature is ferocious and, as a result, bad things happen. Humans are adapted to life in our particular environment, but that environment is fragile. Is this a miracle, depending upon a benevolent god, or just an amazing fact of existence? Adding an all-knowing or all-powerful god into the equation means that you have to start addressing the moral questions. Why is it acceptable for an all-knowing god to create beings, knowing they would "sin", then subsequently requiring them to trust without evidence. Isn't such a god then culpable for the destruction of that life? Why would a perfect, all-powerful god simply stand aside and let people suffer for no reason? Why is it morally OK to punish descendents for one ancestor's wrong-doing? Christians expend so much energy addressing such questions.

J appears to be talking and reading herself back into faith. I suspect that her moratorium on small group won't last beyond the small group's holiday break.