This was tremendous. Dawkins and Hitchens both helped bring me out of Christianity when I was young. It was necessary (level 4/5?) for me to keep ascending. I deeply appreciate the beauty of Vishnu and Shiva that I saw in my family, and still feel drawn to self-creation narratives of non-theistic spirituality like Buddhism. But there is that sense, as you put it, that these immense gods pale in comparison to Christ the carpenter who died on the cross. It’s so odd, so particular, yet I do have this unshakable belief that through Christ all things are possible because that’s what has been said! Even if I wasn’t a believer, and sometimes I don’t feel like one (what’s so special about Jesus really?) the narrative and historical power alone says everything.
Can't say enough about how insightful, inspiring and instructive this was for me. You're going to help so many people as you work all this out with fear and trembling. Thanks, Taylor.
A great Easter essay—or better, proclamation—it’s uniquely personal and therefore truly universal.
It’s interesting you’re using your given name “James” today—in First Corinthians Chapter 15, Paul mentions James as the only other person, along with Peter, whom he specifically names as being one of the many people to whom the resurrected Jesus Christ appeared.
Thank you. I am at a cross roads, have been for years. I know now having read your journey to take the lowly road and listen and trust in the still small voice and not the noise of the world. Thank you.
Your record of your journey to the faith is inspiring. I have been wanting to write about my own journey from atheism to Hinduism for a while now. There are some similar patterns here, including a “want to believe”. When I read Christian articulation of their religion, it inspires and deepens my commitment to my faith. Hopefully one of these days I will finally write about it.
1) Many of the arguments and quotes reflect Jordan Peterson's line of thinking. I wonder where you might situate him on your hierarchy of consciousness?
2) What duty to you feel (if any) to "evangelize" or in some way help others along to level seven? Presumably you feel some desire to help others along given this essay, but does that duty to evangelize manifest differently for a level 6 vs. a level 5 vs. a level 4? How do you approach a level 4 who is firmly God-fearing, but is also dogmatic and unlikely to change? Are they "close enough" to level 7 to let them be, or would you lean in and encourage a deeper, more Jungian, but also potentially more uncomfortable understanding of their faith?
Great writing, but I found your conclusion unsettling, so I ran it through Chat GPT. Here's the conversation:
The article "Why I am Christian again" by James Taylor Foreman explores the author's journey from embracing scientific rationalism to rediscovering the value of Christian faith. Foreman details his initial rejection of Christianity in favor of a worldview shaped by science and reason, symbolized by his admiration for Richard Dawkins and the concept of the "selfish gene." However, after experiencing life's complexities and the limitations of a purely rationalist perspective, including challenges with relationships, existential crises, and the search for meaning, he reevaluates his stance. Foreman's return to Christianity is not a rejection of science but an acknowledgment of the limits of human understanding and the need for a narrative framework that provides meaning and guidance beyond empirical evidence. This personal narrative underscores the intertwining of faith, science, and the human quest for purpose.
For a full read, you can visit the article here.
User
Why did he return to Christianity
ChatGPT
James Taylor Foreman returned to Christianity as a way to navigate the complexities of life and the limits of a purely rationalist worldview. He sought a narrative framework that could provide meaning, purpose, and guidance beyond what empirical evidence and scientific rationalism could offer. This shift reflects his acknowledgment of the intricacies of human existence and the need for a belief system that addresses the existential questions and moral foundations of life.
For more detailed insights, you can read the full article here.
2 / 2
User
What are the flaws in his conclusion
ChatGPT
Critiquing James Taylor Foreman's conclusion about returning to Christianity requires an understanding of the potential philosophical and logical considerations he navigates. While the article itself must be the primary source for understanding his personal journey and conclusions, common critiques in such discussions might include questioning the necessity of a religious framework for finding meaning and purpose, the potential for confirmation bias in returning to familiar beliefs, and the challenge of reconciling scientific understanding with religious faith. These critiques don't invalidate his experience but represent broader debates on faith, reason, and the search for meaning.
User
Why Christianity?
ChatGPT
James Taylor Foreman's return to Christianity, among various options for spiritual or philosophical guidance, seems rooted in a search for a deeper meaning and a framework that offers both a narrative for understanding the world and a moral compass for navigating life. While the article doesn't detail a comparative analysis of Christianity against other faiths or philosophies, it's implied that his choice is influenced by personal history, existential search, and perhaps the cultural and societal context that framed his understanding of meaning, purpose, and morality. For a comprehensive view, consider reading the full article here.
Beautiful, the point about “if we’re just chemicals then music is just vibrating air” is one of the most convicting renouncements of level five thinking I’ve ever heard and I will be using it from here on out, outstanding work.
This is a landmark essay and I'm really glad you finished it and impressed with the final product. As always, there's something novel here, something uniquely Taylor, and also there's a lot going on, too much to comment on, a lot to digest, but that's ok too. I think what you did best was highlighting the first several levels, and telling your own story through those levels.
It seems that level 5s really frustrate you, and it feels often in this essay like you are personally attacking Dawkins and others like him. I think, based on your story, and on some of your responses to comments, that it's because primarily you view level 5 as a place where lots of your contemporaries get stuck and end up causing a lot of damage in their hubris. And also because you got stuck there. And also that the way forward is to move beyond that.
It does seem like an unspoken assumption that there is something beautiful and good about each level. Intimacy in one-on-one relationships is powerful. So is the family, or the team, as well as the tribe. And it seems that even level 7 is only accessible on rare occasions. So perhaps the best solution is to be able to access all of the levels, at different times, depending on the situation.
And then the other question on my mind, which others have raised as well-- how do you prevent people from doing harm at a specific level and/or how do you help them? Drunks and addicts hurt themselves and their families by being stuck at level 1. Codependents or people locked in conflict hurt each other in level 2. Families that isolate themselves are stuck in 3, dogmatists in 4, hyper-rationatlists in 5, pomoers in 6. Can someone even do harm in level 7? Maybe people addicted to psychedelics and "meaningful experiences", who don't actually help anyone or provide any value in the world. I know some people like that.
Read it twice and still cannot comprehend how a thinking person rationalizes belief in a myth, how to be comforted by something that defies logic.. Sad that you're sad..
I just loved this! Thank you! I, too, have come home to Christ in a real way after many incarnations at various levels. I almost died literally and then died spiritually via the Benzos they kept prescribing me--truly a dark (4-year) night of the soul--throughout it all, like some Hallmark card, the knowledge that only God was carrying me. Have you read Rene Girard about scapegoating and why Christ's self-sacrifice changed that pagan behavior forever? It seems very close to what you are getting at...
On a lighter note, I was watching The Chosen with my 82 yo mother last winter and after the Christ character gave the Sermon on the Mount she said, "I don't care if it's not true. It's still the best philosophy for living there is..." Framing, indeed!
If we need anything around here lately (to steal coordinates from a Jackdaw friend) we need to meet the ending of many things with a return to tree that speaks Messiah and serpent aloud again. Thanks for this. Where is that final image of such a tree from?
This was tremendous. Dawkins and Hitchens both helped bring me out of Christianity when I was young. It was necessary (level 4/5?) for me to keep ascending. I deeply appreciate the beauty of Vishnu and Shiva that I saw in my family, and still feel drawn to self-creation narratives of non-theistic spirituality like Buddhism. But there is that sense, as you put it, that these immense gods pale in comparison to Christ the carpenter who died on the cross. It’s so odd, so particular, yet I do have this unshakable belief that through Christ all things are possible because that’s what has been said! Even if I wasn’t a believer, and sometimes I don’t feel like one (what’s so special about Jesus really?) the narrative and historical power alone says everything.
Can't say enough about how insightful, inspiring and instructive this was for me. You're going to help so many people as you work all this out with fear and trembling. Thanks, Taylor.
Brilliant writing and explanation of Wilber's levels. More people will settle around seven over time, as they tire of the dead ends at five and six.
A great Easter essay—or better, proclamation—it’s uniquely personal and therefore truly universal.
It’s interesting you’re using your given name “James” today—in First Corinthians Chapter 15, Paul mentions James as the only other person, along with Peter, whom he specifically names as being one of the many people to whom the resurrected Jesus Christ appeared.
Happy Easter Brother—Christ is risen!
Thank you. I am at a cross roads, have been for years. I know now having read your journey to take the lowly road and listen and trust in the still small voice and not the noise of the world. Thank you.
Your record of your journey to the faith is inspiring. I have been wanting to write about my own journey from atheism to Hinduism for a while now. There are some similar patterns here, including a “want to believe”. When I read Christian articulation of their religion, it inspires and deepens my commitment to my faith. Hopefully one of these days I will finally write about it.
Incredible piece. Two questions:
1) Many of the arguments and quotes reflect Jordan Peterson's line of thinking. I wonder where you might situate him on your hierarchy of consciousness?
2) What duty to you feel (if any) to "evangelize" or in some way help others along to level seven? Presumably you feel some desire to help others along given this essay, but does that duty to evangelize manifest differently for a level 6 vs. a level 5 vs. a level 4? How do you approach a level 4 who is firmly God-fearing, but is also dogmatic and unlikely to change? Are they "close enough" to level 7 to let them be, or would you lean in and encourage a deeper, more Jungian, but also potentially more uncomfortable understanding of their faith?
Great writing, but I found your conclusion unsettling, so I ran it through Chat GPT. Here's the conversation:
The article "Why I am Christian again" by James Taylor Foreman explores the author's journey from embracing scientific rationalism to rediscovering the value of Christian faith. Foreman details his initial rejection of Christianity in favor of a worldview shaped by science and reason, symbolized by his admiration for Richard Dawkins and the concept of the "selfish gene." However, after experiencing life's complexities and the limitations of a purely rationalist perspective, including challenges with relationships, existential crises, and the search for meaning, he reevaluates his stance. Foreman's return to Christianity is not a rejection of science but an acknowledgment of the limits of human understanding and the need for a narrative framework that provides meaning and guidance beyond empirical evidence. This personal narrative underscores the intertwining of faith, science, and the human quest for purpose.
For a full read, you can visit the article here.
User
Why did he return to Christianity
ChatGPT
James Taylor Foreman returned to Christianity as a way to navigate the complexities of life and the limits of a purely rationalist worldview. He sought a narrative framework that could provide meaning, purpose, and guidance beyond what empirical evidence and scientific rationalism could offer. This shift reflects his acknowledgment of the intricacies of human existence and the need for a belief system that addresses the existential questions and moral foundations of life.
For more detailed insights, you can read the full article here.
2 / 2
User
What are the flaws in his conclusion
ChatGPT
Critiquing James Taylor Foreman's conclusion about returning to Christianity requires an understanding of the potential philosophical and logical considerations he navigates. While the article itself must be the primary source for understanding his personal journey and conclusions, common critiques in such discussions might include questioning the necessity of a religious framework for finding meaning and purpose, the potential for confirmation bias in returning to familiar beliefs, and the challenge of reconciling scientific understanding with religious faith. These critiques don't invalidate his experience but represent broader debates on faith, reason, and the search for meaning.
User
Why Christianity?
ChatGPT
James Taylor Foreman's return to Christianity, among various options for spiritual or philosophical guidance, seems rooted in a search for a deeper meaning and a framework that offers both a narrative for understanding the world and a moral compass for navigating life. While the article doesn't detail a comparative analysis of Christianity against other faiths or philosophies, it's implied that his choice is influenced by personal history, existential search, and perhaps the cultural and societal context that framed his understanding of meaning, purpose, and morality. For a comprehensive view, consider reading the full article here.
Beautiful, the point about “if we’re just chemicals then music is just vibrating air” is one of the most convicting renouncements of level five thinking I’ve ever heard and I will be using it from here on out, outstanding work.
Beautiful!!!---amazing how things seem to pop up just when you need them by simply not looking so hard. God Bless!!!
I think this is the article I needed in this rather scary time
This is a landmark essay and I'm really glad you finished it and impressed with the final product. As always, there's something novel here, something uniquely Taylor, and also there's a lot going on, too much to comment on, a lot to digest, but that's ok too. I think what you did best was highlighting the first several levels, and telling your own story through those levels.
It seems that level 5s really frustrate you, and it feels often in this essay like you are personally attacking Dawkins and others like him. I think, based on your story, and on some of your responses to comments, that it's because primarily you view level 5 as a place where lots of your contemporaries get stuck and end up causing a lot of damage in their hubris. And also because you got stuck there. And also that the way forward is to move beyond that.
It does seem like an unspoken assumption that there is something beautiful and good about each level. Intimacy in one-on-one relationships is powerful. So is the family, or the team, as well as the tribe. And it seems that even level 7 is only accessible on rare occasions. So perhaps the best solution is to be able to access all of the levels, at different times, depending on the situation.
And then the other question on my mind, which others have raised as well-- how do you prevent people from doing harm at a specific level and/or how do you help them? Drunks and addicts hurt themselves and their families by being stuck at level 1. Codependents or people locked in conflict hurt each other in level 2. Families that isolate themselves are stuck in 3, dogmatists in 4, hyper-rationatlists in 5, pomoers in 6. Can someone even do harm in level 7? Maybe people addicted to psychedelics and "meaningful experiences", who don't actually help anyone or provide any value in the world. I know some people like that.
Anyways, good stuff
Read it twice and still cannot comprehend how a thinking person rationalizes belief in a myth, how to be comforted by something that defies logic.. Sad that you're sad..
Nice! You might like my thoughts on a similar topic below
https://ranas9.substack.com/p/the-curse-of-knowledge
I just loved this! Thank you! I, too, have come home to Christ in a real way after many incarnations at various levels. I almost died literally and then died spiritually via the Benzos they kept prescribing me--truly a dark (4-year) night of the soul--throughout it all, like some Hallmark card, the knowledge that only God was carrying me. Have you read Rene Girard about scapegoating and why Christ's self-sacrifice changed that pagan behavior forever? It seems very close to what you are getting at...
On a lighter note, I was watching The Chosen with my 82 yo mother last winter and after the Christ character gave the Sermon on the Mount she said, "I don't care if it's not true. It's still the best philosophy for living there is..." Framing, indeed!
If we need anything around here lately (to steal coordinates from a Jackdaw friend) we need to meet the ending of many things with a return to tree that speaks Messiah and serpent aloud again. Thanks for this. Where is that final image of such a tree from?