Unbelievable: Why Neither Ancient Creeds Nor the Reformation Can Produce a Living Faith Today

by John Shelby Spong

Five hundred years after Martin Luther and his Ninety-Five Theses ushered in the Reformation, bestselling author and controversial bishop and teacher John Shelby Spong delivers twelve forward-thinking theses to spark a new reformation to reinvigorate Christianity and ensure its future. At the beginning of the sixteenth century, Christianity was in crisis—a state of conflict that gave birth to the Reformation in 1517. Enduring for more than 200 years, Luther’s movement was then followed by a "revolutionary time of human knowledge." Yet these advances in our thinking had little impact on Christians’ adherence to doctrine—which has led the faith to a critical point once again. Bible scholar and Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong contends that there is mounting pressure among Christians for a radically new kind of Christianity—a faith deeply connected to the human experience instead of outdated dogma. To keep Christianity vital, he urges modern Christians to update their faith in light of these advances in our knowledge, and to challenge the rigid and problematic Church teachings that emerged with the Reformation. There is a disconnect, he argues, between the language of traditional worship and the language of the twenty-first century. Bridging this divide requires us to rethink and reformulate our basic understanding of God. With its revolutionary resistance to the authority of the Church in the sixteenth century, Spong sees in Luther’s movement a model for today’s discontented Christians. In fact, the questions they raise resonate with those contemplated by our ancestors. Does the idea of God still have meaning? Can we still follow historic creeds with integrity? Are not such claims as an infallible Pope or an inerrant Bible ridiculous in today’s world? In Unbelievable , Spong outlines twelve "theses" to help today’s believers more deeply contemplate and reshape their faith. As an educator, clergyman, and writer who has devoted his life to his faith, Spong has enlightened Christians and challenged them to explore their beliefs in new and meaningful ways. In this, his final book, he continues that rigorous tradition, once again offering a revisionist approach that strengthens Christianity and secures its relevance for generations to come.

Genres: Religion, Nonfiction, Christianity, Theology, Spirituality, Philosophy, Christian

336 pages, Hardcover

Published February 13, 2018

About the author

John Shelby Spong was the Episcopal bishop of Newark before his retirement in 2000. As a leading spokesperson for an open, scholarly, and progressive Christianity, Bishop Spong has taught at Harvard and at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California. He has also lectured at universities, conference centers, and churches in North America, Europe, Asia, and the South Pacific. His books include: A New Christianity for a New World, Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, Resurrection: Myth or Reality? Why Christianity Must Change or Die, and his autobiography, Here I Stand.

Reviews

[Carolyn Kost · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a Religious Studies major at a Catholic university in the 1980s, I came to realize that theologians' understanding of religion diverges enormously from the popular understanding, which the powers that be don't think the congregants can handle. That is the primary reason this is sure to be a controversial book. Bishop Spong has not shirked from making waves since the 1970s when he defended homosexuality to the Church; this is a tsunami in comparison, yet it is fully in keeping with what I was taught.

Spong is an excellent apologist (explainer) of the way that the medieval church constructed a complicated scaffolding around the core message of Christianity, investing it with layers that reflected its own limited understanding of the world and that became fixed. This was a horrendous error, since it gave rise to a vocabulary that literalized what was intended to be symbolic. We were never meant to abandon reason and science at the parish door. Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, and Darwin expanded our understanding, but the Church did not keep apace by altering its language or doctrines accordingly and that has caused our present crisis of anomie, meaninglessness.

Using solid biblical scholarship as well as science, Spong presents 12 theses examining outmoded constructs that have become idols, when they should have served as fingers pointing to a deeper reality. There is a domino effect as each tenet falls. First, he takes on the concept God as Being, rather than *a* Being dwelling in the sky, which was based on a geocentric cosmological structure of heaven above, earth below, hell beneath. A heliocentric model surrounds the earth, so Jesus did not bodily ascend into heaven and hell is not below us. Evolution handily eliminates Adam and Eve and "original sin," so Jesus did not save us from it and we aren't to supplicate a bloodthirsty barbaric god to be saved from hell.

Because the medievals believed the woman to be mere incubator for seed, they could present a notion of virgin birth (Spong doesn't mention it, but tradition holds that Jesus, as The Word, was conceived through Mary's ear), but now we know that birth happens from sperm and egg. Miracles were a literary device, not magical suspension of natural laws; the resurrection was not intended to be understood as a physical resuscitation. What implications does this proper understanding have on prayer? Spong clearly does not believe that a Being intervenes in human events. Rather, prayer is contemplation, consideration.

Our new understanding of interconnectedness and all sharing in Being informs ethics. Spong asserts that the mission we are called to is "building or transforming the world so that every person living will have a better opportunity to live fully, love wastefully, and be all that each of them was created to be in the infinite variety of our humanity." Amen.

I would like to put Spong in conversation with Joseph Campbell, whose interpretation of mythology (properly understood as the dramatization of a cosmically significant act in history--NOT a fable) were, ironically, more helpful to me spiritually than Spong's. By understanding the collective unconscious and archetypes, we are better able to appreciate the universal aspects of our humanity and use myths as maps for living a meaningful life.

[Clif Hostetler · Rating 5 out of 5]

The premise of this book is that traditional language used to describe Christian beliefs no longer makes sense to people living in the twenty-first century. Early in the book the author posits twelve "theses" which will be addressed, and after making the case for their deconstruction he will provide alternative understandings compatible with current knowledge of the universe, our world, and life in it. In Chapter 4 of the book the twelve theses are clearly stated, and I have decided to copy them below verbatim.

1. God.
Understanding God in theistic terms as a being supernatural in power, dwelling somewhere external to the world, and capable of intervening in the world with miraculous power is no longer believable. Most God talk in liturgy and conversation has thus become meaningless. What we must do is find the meaning to which the word God points.
2. Jesus the Christ.
If God can no longer be thought of in theistic terms, then conceiving of Jesus as the incarnation of the theistic deity has also become a bankrupt concept. Can we place the experience of the Christ into words that have meaning?
3. Original Sin.
The biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which we human beings have fallen into original sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense. We have to find a new way to tell the old story.
4. The Virgin Birth.
The virgin birth understood as literal biology is totally unbelievable. Far from being a bulwark in defense of the divinity of Christ, the virgin birth actually destroys that divinity.
5. Miracles.
In a post-Newtonian world, supernatural invasions of the natural order performed by God or an incarnate Jesus are simply not viable explanations of what actually happened. Miracles do not ever imply magic.
6. Atonement Theology.
Atonement theology, especially in its most bizarre substitutionary form, presents us with a God who is barbaric, a Jesus who is a victim, and it turns human beings into little more than guilt-filled creatures. The phrase "Jesus died for my sins" is not just dangerous, it is absurd. Atonement theology is a concept that we must escape.
7. Easter.
The Easter event gave birth to the Christian movement and continues to transform it, but that does not mean that Easter was the physical resuscitation of Jesus' deceased body back into human history. The earliest biblical records state that God raised him, into what we need to ask. The reality of the experience of resurrection must be separated from its later mythological explanations.
8. The Ascension.
The biblical story of Jesus' ascension assumes a three-tiered universe, a concept that was dismissed some 500 years ago. If Jesus' ascension was a literal event of history, it is beyond the capacity of our 21st century minds to accept it or believe it. Does the Ascension have any other meaning, or must we defend 1st century astrophysics?
9. Ethics.
The ability to define and to separate good from evil can no longer be achieved with appeals to ancient codes such as the Ten Commandments, or even the Sermon on the Mount. Contemporary moral standards must be hammered out in the juxtaposition between life-affirming moral principles and external situations. No modern person has any choice but to be a situationist.
10. Prayer.
Prayer understood as a request made to an external theistic deity to act in human history is little more than an hysterical attempt to turn the holy into the service of the human. Most of our prayer definitions arise out of the past and are thus dependent on an understanding of God that no longer exists. Let us instead think of prayer as the practice of the presence of God, the act of embracing transcendence and the discipline of sharing with another the gifts of living, loving, and being.
11. Life After Death.
If we are to talk about eternal life with any degree of intellectual integrity we must explore it as a dimension of transcendent reality and infinite love. A reality in love that, when experienced, let us share in the eternal.
12. Universalism.
We are called by this new faith into radical connectedness. Judgment is not a human responsibility. Discrimination against any human being on the basis of that which is a given is always evil, and does not serve the Christian goal of offering abundant life to all. Any structure in either the secular world or the institutional church that diminishes the humanity of any child of God on an external basis of race, gender, or sexual orientation must be opposed publicly and vigorously. There can be no reason in the Church of tomorrow for excusing or even forgiving discriminatory practices. Sacred tradition must never again provide a cover to justify discriminatory evil. The call to universalism must be the message of Christianity.

Can a new Christianity be forged on the basis of these twelve theses? Can a living, vital, and real faith that is true to the experience of the past while dismissing the explanations of the past be born anew in this generation? I believe it can. And so to engage in this task I issue this call to the Christian world to transform its holy words of yesterday into believable words of today. If we fail in this task there is little reason to think that Christianity as presently understood and constituted will survive this century. It is my conviction that we must move beyond theology, beyond creeds, beyond human perceptions, to catch a new vision of the Christ. This book will be my attempt to do just that.

I think the author delivered on this stated goal and has provided interpretations of those religious words worthy of consideration by anyone who has difficulty accepting traditional Christian theological language but wishes to continue being a part of a church community.

[Josh Issa · Rating 3 out of 5]

Spong is….. interesting. In some ways I love his willingness to cut through bs and just say what people mean. But on the other hand, I think he’s a bit much and a bit too American.

His new vision for what Christianity must adapt to or die is a bit overstated, but he is right a lot of the time. He is right to say that an overly literal emphasis kills Christianity out the gate. He is right that much of our theological language is rife with mythology and paints a small picture of an evil God. He really cuts through a lot of that really well. He also pulls out some really fascinating arguments about the Jewishness of the Gospels and how to read them properly.

However, I don’t see why we need to drop the Incarnation or a resurrection that involves an empty tomb, nor do I see the problematic elements to the Trinity (which is not talked about except when it’s tacked on at the end). I think that his Tillich-ness betrays him too much here. Although he can exegete well, he also can get too loose and not provide enough reasoning beyond quick appeals that it couldn’t be anything else. Also, the way he uses life-affirming principles in the ethics chapter is…… questionable at best. I agree with the fundamental premise, but his application of it really sucks and his examples are not good.

Anyways, RIP to the homie. Sometimes having an old white man tell you that it’s okay to move past evangelical theology is what you need. Shoutout NT Wright who is basically what you get if Spong affirmed the creeds.

I believe I have experience God as the Source of Love. Love is the power that enhances life… If God is the Source of Love, then the only way I can worship God is by loving “wastefully”… It is love that never stops to calculate deserving. It is love that loves not because love has been earned. It is in the act of loving “wastefully” that I believe I make God visible.

[Jon Stout · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ever since my mother warned me of the “radical” bishop in New Jersey in 1980, I have admired Bishop Spong as an interpreter of Christian thought and as a champion of women and LGBT participation in the Episcopal Church. I have worked with him through my association with three different churches, as well as an Episcopal social work agency, but his greatest influence on me has been through his books. Starting with how Christian liturgy can be understood as structured by its Jewish origin, Bishop Spong went on to write books which sought to demythologize (in the style of theologian Rudolf Bultmann) Christian dogma in order to make it intelligible and meaningful to a scientifically oriented age.

Unbelievable may be his last book, according to Bishop Spong, as he has had recent medical problems. It seeks to understand and reinterpret (or reject) what is “unbelievable” in the Gospels and in the prevailing understanding of Christianity. He tackles such topics as Original Sin and the Virgin Birth, which are perhaps easy targets, but which can be understood historically even though literally non-factual. He goes on to address the deepest Christian myths, such as sacrificial redemption, that Jesus died to save us from our sins, by exploring both the scriptural origins of the idea, as well as the theological consequences. Generally he tries to make Christianity intelligible to the secular, modern skeptic.

His book has two possible audiences: those who are part of church communities, and those who are evolutionarily oriented naturalists or atheists and thus are skeptical of religion.

For those who are already part of Christian communities, Bishop Spong’s ideas are familiar to many in progressive churches, perhaps not to others. In either case I wonder if a sermon which sought to deconstruct the idea of the Virgin Birth would be considered very gratifying to a congregation during Advent. Bishop Spong addresses the conundrum when he says that, as a newly installed bishop, he “learned that most clergy are either unable or unwilling to engage the great theological issues of the day because of their perception that to do so will ‘disturb the faith and beliefs’ of their people.”

For those outside of church communities, who are skeptical because the world seems scientifically coherent without religious premises, the response to Bishop Spong’s ideas might be: “Yes, so what is left that is worthy of interest.” This reaction to the demythologizing approach resembles that of some churchgoers. Skepticism about phrases such as “son of God” or “Christ died to save us” are commonplace among church teenagers, college students and inquiring minds generally. Discussion is badly needed.

There are constructive steps, in spite of the deconstruction, which I would find inspiring in a sermon. For example, when Bishop Spong takes apart the theistic conception of God, the idea that God is a being in the universe, he offers Paul Tillich’s idea of God as the Ground of Being, an Existential conception which speaks to our effort to be in this world from day to day. I wish he had spoken more on this.

Another example occurs when he uses evolutionary science to deconstruct the idea of Original Sin, saying that we see ourselves as developing, not fallen. His positive step is to replace redemption (from sin) by atonement, at-one-ness, addressing the need we have to achieve wholeness, and to be at one with the universe.

Despite the struggle to make a deconstructive exercise into an inspirational message, Bishop Spong is a thoughtful spokesman for where many of us are in our faith. I would love to see his chapter on the Resurrection given as an Easter sermon. He discusses the rising from the dead and the ascending into heaven in terms of how the disciples experienced the impact of Jesus’s death, and how their use of transformational language was taken literally and frozen into dogma by the Gospel writers. By understanding the experience in plausible human terms, he overcomes an obstacle to faith.

[Robert D. Cornwall · Rating 2 out of 5]

What kind of Christianity is left when much that has been traditionally affirmed is deemed "unbelievable"? John Shelby Spong, who has long been recognized as one of the most liberal Christian leaders offers his take on that question. On the cover of the book one will find a declaration attributed to "Booklist" that declares "Luther launched a reformation with 95 Theses. Song would launch another with 12." As with earlier books, Spong offers his take on a form of Christianity that will meet with rational explanations. While it is suggested that he would offer us the foundation of a new reformation, it seems awfully old hat. In fact, it would seem to resonate with John Toland and Matthew Tindal, though these figures are largely long forgotten except to historians like me.

His premise, as laid out in Part I is that modern men and women can no longer be believers. Traditional theism doesn't fit with current understandings of reality. What was once believed has died and must be buried. When I read Spong, what I discover is that the concerns he has have largely been rethought and restated decades ago. He seems stuck in the 1960s, with a theology that is largely reflective of Paul Tillich.

He offers us twelve theses, beginning with God. He declares that God is not a being, but is perhaps Tillich's "ground of being." He seems to embrace a form of panentheism, but he doesn't use the term, nor does he mention Process Theology or a person like Moltman. He does, have a chapter on Darwin and Newton and another on Freud. Whatever God is, Spong is a bit ambiguous.

His second thesis focuses on Jesus Christ. Here he wants to rid the church of the idea of incarnation, suggesting that it is a 4th century invention. For someone who wrote a book on the Gospel of John, I'm surprised he forgot about John 1:1-14, which declares that the Word of God became "flesh" and dwelt among us. He also challenges the traditional salvation story. He's not too interested in salvation.

Thesis three throws out original sin, and for some reason he takes up the virgin birth as part of this pice. Thesis 5 looks at Miracles. He suggests that these are described in few places in Scripture, beginning with Moses, then Elijah and Elisha, and finally Jesus. I expect there are other places where miracles appear, but again, he might want to look at what even a John Crossan has to say about the miracle stories, for Jesus is portrayed as a healer in the Gospels.

IN Thesis 6 he overthrows "atonement theology," but then again he's not alone in finding traditional penal and satisfaction theories problematic. In a chapter titled "incomplete-- not fallen" he speaks of his vision of humanity in evolutionary terms. Again, most mainstream theologians have made peace with evolution, but see the creation story as having important symbolic value.

Theses 7 and 8 deal with Easter and the ascension. Regarding the resurrection, he sees it as more an opening of the mind to a new vision of reality. While he mentions Paul's reference to the witnesses in 1 Corinthians 15, he seems to pass over Paul's declaration that if the dead are not raised we are most to be pitied. So, it seems that Paul has more in mind here than simply a new way of thinking. Then there is the Gospel of John and Thomas putting his fingers in Jesus' wounds.

Thesis 9 focuses on Ethics. His thesis is that "the ability to define and separate good from evil can no longer be achieved with appeals to ancient codes such as the Ten Commandments or even the Sermon on the Mount." He focuses his attention on the Ten Commandments, but never really tells us why the Sermon on the Mount might be passe. Regarding the Ten Commandments, he fails to set them in their context as the covenant stipulations, which would seem to be an important point. Of course, his point is that we need to look elsewhere beyond Scripture for ethical guidance. While he is correct that we need to adapt what we hear in Scripture, that doesn't mean it is without value. Many of us, who would be much less liberal in our theology understand that love needs to be our guide and that what Scripture seems to speak to might not (such as with LGBT persons).

Thesis 10 speaks to the question of prayer, and that is a conundrum for many. God isn't simply a dispenser of goods nor does God step in and solve every problem we ask for, but there is something about prayer as the means by which we connect with God (however we envision God). Thesis 11 has to do with Life after Death. It is true, that our beliefs are not scientifically verifiable, but there seems to be something inside us that desires a continuation of existence beyond the grave. At the same time I think most mainliners like me don't see the promise of heaven (whatever heaven might be) as a means of social control.

His final Thesis has to do with Universalism. This he believes is the message of Christianity, that is, we are all one. There's nothing here really to object to. I don't know that adherence to creeds and ideas such as incarnation mitigate against such a vision. It is interesting that he can embrace and reject the Trinity at the same time. Of course, a doctrine like the Trinity cannot fully define or describe God. It is an explanatory piece that helps us understand both the Scriptural witness and our own experience of God.

As for me, I have no need or desire to push Spong out of the faith. I find it ironic that he used his position as a bishop to deconstruct the Christian faith, but he was elected a bishop and served for quite some time. As a theologian and biblical scholar he is somewhat sloppy, so be careful as you read through the text. He makes plenty of statements that require discernment.

At the end of the day, while Spong thinks traditional Christianity is dying, it seems rather vibrant in much of the world outside Europe and North America. The form of Christianity that continues to win the day isn't Spong's reasonable Christianity but Pentecostalism. In fact, I would venture to say that most persons who might embrace his vision of Christianity probably wouldn't find much reason to stay with it. That it works for Spong is fine, but it does seem rather dated.

[Ray · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a reader of John Shelby Spong's other books, I thought this was a fitting culmination of his thoughts on the nature and future of the Christian religion. A caution to readers who fear radical theological thoughts: this book will only make you angry, so best to move on to something else. Our Sunday School class has been studying the Reformation, and the major players were all considered heretics in their time. I suspect Spong would self-identify. But something like truth resonates through his thoughts and ideas--and I plan to read again to absorb more! Reformation continues, whether or not we are willing participants.

[Andy Alexis · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is the capstone of John Shelby Spong's career and summarizes his radical departure from traditional Christianity. This would be a tough read for many Christians. He actively destroys many tenets of Christianity, including the virgin birth, heaven and hell, atonement, miracles, and prayer. His thesis is that most of these constructs are not and have never been universal, unchanging bulwarks of faith, and were developed by the early church and actively adapted to changing circumstances over the centuries. Most of these tenets reflect 1st and 4th century understanding of the universe; modern science has reduced the tenets to quaint relics.

One positive aspect of this theological massacre is that he goes to great lengths to describe how he envisions a 21st century reformation of Christianity. His vision is probably closer to Universalism, but he does use the Trinity as his model for how he views God. He emphasizes the power of experience over that of explanation. For example, everyone can experience a sunrise; but the explanation for that sunrise has changed over the millennia from being a chariot driven across the sky by Gods, to that of the sun orbiting the earth, to the modern understanding of the earth orbiting the sun. He is suggesting that Christianity should be based on our experience of the divine and not explanations that have lost their meaning.

Two quotes illustrate this: "God is not God's name. God is our name for that which is greater than all and yet present in each"(taken from Forrest Church); "If God is the Source of Life, then the only way I can appropriately worship God is by living fully. In the process of embracing the fullness of life, I bear witness to the reality of the God who is the Source of Life".

[Zachary Houle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Once in awhile, a book comes along that completely shatters your Christian world view. John Shelby Spong’s Unbelievable is one of those books. It may be hard to imagine that if you know me, as I consider myself somewhat liberal in my faith — liberal enough that members of the evangelical community feel the need to either comment directly on these reviews or reach out to me on Twitter to inform me that I’m looking at Hell in the afterlife for my “transgressions of faith.” (Note to evangelicals: Hell is just a construct, and I really don’t believe such a place exists. Along with Heaven, perhaps.)

Anyhow, Unbelievable basically takes all you think you knew about the church and the Bible, and aims to turn everything on its head. It’s a radical read, and there’s a reason for it. Spong is, at current time, 86 years old. He suffered a stroke last year not long after completing a draft of this book. So he has announced in the introduction to Unbelievable that this is most likely his very last book, his very last word on the subject of religion. So, like Galileo waiting until his latter years to announce that the sun was at the center of the known universe so that he would be spared judgment from the Church, Spong basically unloads with this book, offering 12 theses on how to move Christianity forward.

Read the rest here: https://medium.com/@zachary_houle/a-r...

[Ashraf Bashir · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book is built on an accumulative series of assumptions. I don't like the methodology which Spong is using to jump to conclusions, he starts with an assumption, asserting that it is a non-validated one, then he concatenates a second assumption which plays well with the first, then a third, etc. Till the moment when he reaches an assumption node which he announces as a conclusion!

The very irrational part that he considers the chain of assumptions as some kind of proof for the final node, which itself is no more than an extra node in the chain of assumptions, he used this in heaven/hell, virginity of St. Mary, prayer redefinition, etc. This is a wrong methodology and it is a non-academic presentation of ideas.

In the other hand, I like some of his presented points, for instance his view on God as "ground of being", and his view of God's relationship with Christians as being one in Him, because it clicks perfectly with the eastern orthodox theology especially that of St. Maximus the confessor, regarding cosmological salvation in Christ and Theosis in general.

Overall, it's worth reading; because it is an entertaining book, written with a very amazing style, with an easy flow of ideas to grasp, and full of real life examples, but take care you will easily catch many logical fallacies here and there.

[Muhamed · Rating 5 out of 5]

What an honest and sincere scholar.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoroughly amazing and insightful capstone to a fabulous career of theological discovery

This climactic volume to Bishop Spong's prodigious and challenging career as writer and exemplar of Christian faith calls on all of us to see the religion very differently. He advances twelve theses to invite us to a new reformation which he sees as critical to the continued existence of Christianity.

[Eric · Rating 5 out of 5]

Much to my surprise I absolutely loved this book. But you need to know a bit of my background.

I grew up as a devout Mormon. It was something I believed with my whole heart and soul. But I also had a love of science and reason. For the longest time I saw no conflict. Either through compartmentalization or rationalization (and a whole lot of confirmation bias) I thought it was all perfectly compatible. Until, gradually, cracks started to form. Eventually I went through a full blown faith crisis and just didn't see a way for reason and faith to co-exist, at least in that form. I became a complete non-believer, and was rather triggered by religion, to be honest. I struggle with the labels, because they have so much baggage, but let's just say I'm a complete materialist, or at least don't believe in the super-natural.

I thought this book would be refreshing, as opposed to a fundamentalist and literalist faith that I knew, but ultimately fall well short of what I agree with. I was pretty wrong. If I had my choice I may not choose to still be in Christianity, but the version that Spong describes is so reasonable and palatable that I could see myself participating in such a religion (if it existed). He seems like a rationalist, who happens to want to keep his religious tradition alive, in a very reformed state. I respect the reforms he suggests. He hit the big topics that I thought, for sure, would be verbotten areas to someone who wants to keep their religion but liberalize. I was shocked that he preferred the rational and logical explanations of resurrection, atonement, heaven and hell, universalism, virgin birth, scripture, etc.

And yet he also showed how and why he wants to keep Christian tradition. He showed how it can be transformative and lead to a life well lived. He showed the supremacy of love, and how the form of worship impacts that. He exemplified the need for peace and beauty that doesn't conflict with what's believable and what's not.

I just wish there were congregations as thoroughly dedicated to his vision. It seems they are either non-existent or extraordinarily rare.

[Mikki · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent book! I obtained a proof copy prior to publication, so there might be a few modifications in the published version. However, it was exciting to read somebody who has gone down the same road before me in his spiritual journey, and has similar views vis-à-vis the future of Christianity, which can't stay as it is! The religion which has been built by (mostly) men - principally for control of human thinking and behavior - MUST die! And be rebuilt from within, as every human organization must be. Change cannot happen from without. John Shelby Spong's theses for reformation make total sense to me (I won't go into my background - not relevant here) - and, while I may disagree with a couple of arguments, it's mostly semantics based on my own personal experiences of the Divine and my understanding of what the New Testament of the Bible contains, especially about who Jesus was (and I know in my heart he was a real person), his life and his teachings. I won't outline the content of the book here. I'll recommend that people read it for themselves, especially anybody who has abandoned the Christian Church (and its idolatrous 'Churchianity' - my personal description of how things stand), or who is vacillating within its (fake) walls, and feels the need to dismantle the comfort zone the Edifice has become, or challenge the man-built rules and dogma which keep the status quo within 'Orthodox' or 'Conservative' or current 'Evangelical' thinking and practice.

[Pat Newcomb · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Pinnacle of a Life’s Work

Genuine, thoughtful, accessible, life affirming. A synthesis of almost 50 years of careful thought, clear writing, and careful arguments for thoughtful people who find themselves struggling with the legacy of the belief system otherwise known as Christianity. Truly prophetic. Highly recommended.

[Micke Goteman · Rating 5 out of 5]

John Shelby Spong writes to people for whom a common modern conservative view of the Bible, simply doesn't work (or perhaps no longer works). We live in a time where new facts about the world and an increasingly global perspective on Humanity is naturally shaking the foundation for how many people have grown up thinking about their religious world view. In my opinion, Spong brings a valuable perspective to this table and 1) asks the relevant questions that are naturally bound to come up, and 2) does so with significant knowledge and insight of biblical scholarship. He clearly doesn't feel the need to pull punches, which I'm sure further irritates many, but at the same time it is his bold and straightforward manner that also provides such a challenge to our often too relaxed way of thinking (or frankly lack of thinking and exploration altogether).

If you're not ready for this book, you'll notice. But if this kind of thinking challenges you and helps you grow, then I strongly recommend this book.

[Jennifer Jones · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was the perfect one to read after the book I just finished (How Jesus Became God by Bart Ehrman). I appreciated both for the academic approach they take to the history of Christianity. It feels honest, researched and unbiased… refreshingly different from what’s being taught by churches I’ve attended. The thing I really like about Spong that Ehrman can’t offer as an agnostic, is that he gives me hope that it is possible to admit and hold in tension all the inconsistencies and still remain a Christian. I wholeheartedly agree with his main thesis of the book—Christianity must change in order to remain relevant for modern day humans whose consciousness has evolved past first century explanations of God. We can hold those perspectives with great honor while transcending the ideas in light of our advancing knowledge of science, psychology and universalism. Christianity is not meant to be a static preservation of some presumed golden age of the past—its dynamic and ever-evolving (just as we are as humans), and that is really exciting to me!

[Merritt Watson · Rating 5 out of 5]

The honest confessions of a tried and true follower of Jesus

This is a book that makes you think about things you have assumed were literal truth and opens the way to revision it all so that it can become truth at a deeper level in the 21st century.

[Sally · Rating 4 out of 5]

A strong book by Spong, not covering much new ground for those familiar with his other writings but well stated and energetic. I enjoyed reading it. I’m not optimistic that the majority of Christianity will change in the ways he hopes, however desirable that might be.

[Sara R Embleton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant. Liberating. Challenging but also comforting.

[Benjamin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Finally someone with insight making suggestions for possible ways to deal with problems that the institutional church ignores. Bishop Spong has restored my faith and given much food for thought.

[Chad Hogan · Rating 1 out of 5]

Picked up from library and it piqued my interest as I am very interested in various approaches to justifying a semblance of faith in a modern world where science increasingly explains away superstitions and mysteries that were previously understood through a supernatural lens.
Increasingly the secular world is throwing the baby out with the bathwater leaving a residual god-sized hole.

The book offered no hope and what was truly unbelievable is that a prominent Christian Episcopal bishop’s overall thesis is that Christianity itself is unbelievable in our modern day unless you completely dismantle and denature the entire essence and interpretation of Christianity soup to nuts. I know it’s my fault - it’s right in the title of the book but didn’t think a bishop could ever attempt to reconcile his “belief” in this way. It’s like a boy claiming he still believes in Santa Claus except his Santa’s “sleigh” is a USPS truck and instead of delivering gifts once a year he delivers them each day in the form of letters and bills. However, he still considers himself a Santa believer and it’s important others see this new definition as well to keep the belief alive. Please excuse the comparison between Christ and Santa Claus.

The book explains that the bible has been subjected to several blows over the centuries since it’s inception arising from Galileo (earth is not center of universe), Newton (supernatural intervention explained by natural laws), Darwin (we’re just an extremely evolved animals closer to the ape than to angels) and Freud (Man created God, God didn’t create man because of our need for meaning in an otherwise purposeless existence). Obviously these discoveries were majorly devastating for believers even though that was not the primary intention of the instigators (all but Freud struggled with the impact on their or their family’s faith).

The author’s re-interpretations seem like quite a stretch in some areas and seemed to cherry pick bible passages. I was aware of many contradictions within the bible and the major impact of the Nicene Creed but did learned of several contradictions for the first time. His ultimate understanding is that God is not a being but just the act of being alive (oh, and Love), Jesus was not God Incarnate and there was no atonement partly because Man never fell (if anything he continues to improve through evolution). You should still pray but don’t think the prayer is actually communicating with any divine being.

I would not recommend this book.

[Tammy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This guy totally dismantles all literal readings of the Bible and creeds of Christianity, and still retains the label Christian himself. He makes good points. It’s easier for me to simply accept that I’m agnostic. But he places a high value on the church as a possible post second-reformation entity in society. If the church can survive this yet to be realized reformation. Never say never I guess. Was worth the read. Good historical info to think clearly about wrong assumptions related to what we learned in Sunday school.

[David Mills · Rating 2 out of 5]

Favorite Quote = “Let the reformation begin.”

[Douglass Morrison · Rating 4 out of 5]

John Shelby Spong, an Episcopal clergyman, spent his career trying to reconcile his Christian faith with scholarly study of Biblical texts, in the context of advances in scientific knowledge since those texts were written. Over his theology career, Spong critically examined aspects of Christian liturgy, such as the existence of God, the concepts of Incarnation, Resurrection, and Atonement, and the function of prayer. In Unbelievable Why Neither Creeds nor the Reformation Can Produce a Living Faith Today, Spong puts his ideas together and proposes Twelve Theses for a new Christianity - a modern Reformation.
Spong’s Twelve Theses, and the questions they pose for a living religion:
1. God – Can we find the meaning toward which the word God points?
Spong writes, “… God as a being that dwelled outside the boundaries of this world, endowed with supernatural power and periodically intervening in history to answer prayer or to impose the divine will on this world.” no longer makes sense. In Jewish tradition, God cannot be named. God is beyond words, ineffable: ‘I am who I am’ and ‘I am that which causes all things to be…’
• “Doctrines are a description of our God experience, they are never a definition of God.”
• “God is not beyond my ability to experience, but the nature of god is beyond my ability to describe.”
Spong suggests thinking of God as the Ground of being as had been proposed by theologian Paul Tillich in The Courage to Be: being itself rather than ‘a being’.
2. Christ – Can we place the experience of Christ into words that have meaning?
“I say that I am a Trinitarian because that term describes my experience of God. The father… means the experience of God as an external other, that is beyond anything I can imagine. The spirit means the experience of god as an internal reality, that is within me and inseparable from my humanity. The Son means the experience of God manifest in a particular life.”
3. Original Sin – Should we look at the creation story differently?
New stars and new life forms are being created, while others are being destroyed. Creation was neither perfect nor complete. Life is impermanent. Spong tells his readers that an evolving Universe and evolving Life forms are not consistent with a Perfect Creation followed by the Fall of Humanity from which some form of salvation was required.
4. Virgin Birth – Is there something to be gained from a figurative story, that is not inconsistent with biology?
Spong tells us that the first two authors of New Testament texts were Paul in 52-64 AD (or Common Era CE) and Mark in the 70s CE; neither referred to a virgin birth for Jesus. In the John Gospel, Jesus is referred to as ‘the son of Joseph’… There are inconsistencies in the four Gospels, and Spong dates the ‘virgin birth’ concept to the era of the Nicene creed in 325 CE. Spong tells us that four mothers are listed in the genealogy section of the Bible, meant to document a direct line from King David to Jesus. He tells readers it would have been unusual in patriarchal Jewish society to list mothers in a genealogy list.
The author examines other inconsistencies within the genealogies and texts of the Old and New Testaments. He points out, as have scholars like Joseph Campbell and psychiatrist Carl Jung that virgin birth creation myths were present in many ancient cultures.
5. Miracles – Must we create miraculous explanations for things we do not understand?
The author goes into the various categories of miracles and the Hebrew translation of signs rather than miracles. “…both Matthew (11:2-6) and Luke (7:18-35) tell the story of John from prison sending messengers to Jesus asking, ‘Are you the messiah?’ Jesus never answers the question. Rather, he tells the messengers to listen and to look. His exact words are, ‘Go and tell John what you hear and see… Jesus quotes from Isaiah 35, a passage regularly associated with Rosh Hashana. In that chapter, Isaiah painted a picture of the signs that would mark the arrival of the kingdom of God… human wholeness would replace human brokenness.”
Spong concludes, “These miracle stories were interpretive symbols not biblical happenings.”
6. Atonement Theology – How does the death of Jesus atone for the millions who lived before his birth? Or the millions who have never known of him?
In the author’s words, “It presents a barbaric God, a victim Jesus, and humans who are guilt-filled – ‘Jesus died for my sins’ does not make sense.” Spong suggests considering a transformative experience from brokenness to wholeness.
7. Easter – What is to be gained from the resurrection experience rather than the literal resuscitation of Jesus’s physical body back into human form?
“the scholarly and critical explorations of the biblical narratives… reveal that… none of the Bible’s sources represent eyewitness, first-generation reporting… there is hardly an Easter detail proclaimed in one part of the New Testament that is not contradicted in another.” Spong concludes that the founding moment of the Christian story is not about an empty tomb or the resuscitation of a dead body… he surmises that perhaps words cannot adequately describe the experience.
8. Ascension – Space exploration has cast doubt on a three-tiered Universe (Heaven above; Earth in the middle; Hell below); where is heaven?
Jesus’s literal ascension into heaven defies contemporary astrophysics –Spong suggests a figurative reinterpretation. What does ‘God raised Jesus to the right hand of God’ mean? The author suggests a transforming experience: “Was the resurrection the ability to see that Jesus had taken his humanity to a new dimension and had stepped into the being of that which we call divine? Was it a step from self-consciousness to universal consciousness, into the awareness of the oneness of all things?” Spong thinks resurrection was not a physical act… It was a persuading appearance.
“The Easter experience in the New Testament, contrary to what we have been traditionally taught… is not about bodies walking out of graves. It is far more profound than that. It is about God being seen in human life. By God I do not mean a supernatural, invasive God who violates the laws of nature to enter time and space. I mean a transcendent dimension of life into which all can enter, an experience in which life is expanded, love is unlimited and being is enhanced. I mean the God who calls us into our essential oneness, our universal consciousness, our interconnectedness. We are part of who and what God is… That is what resurrection is about.”
9. Ethics – Can we be good without God (or with god)?
Neither The Ten Commandments nor the Sermon on the Mount provides contemporary answers to many practical questions of Good and Evil in a changing and complex world. Religions wish to establish ethics that are objective and unchanging. Life is not static.
Spong points out that most people (including devout parishioners) cannot recite the 10 Commandments, despite saying that ‘they are very important’. He documents changes over time and across Biblical texts in the Ten Commandments. Hebrew scriptures have at least three versions in Exodus 20; Deuteronomy 5; and Exodus 34.
Among the creedal imperatives that are ‘missing’ from the 10 Commandments: “Love the Lord God with all your heart, mind and strength.” and “Love your neighbor, as yourself.” Conversely, a former 10th commandment: “You shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk.” And “You shall not covet your neighbor’s slaves.” are inconsistent with most contemporary morality.
10. Prayer - If God is not an anthropomorphic Santa Claus or Vengeful Punisher, what is the point of prayer?
Spong asks, Can God intervene and change the world? If God can intervene, why did he permit the Holocaust and other genocides? If God is omnipotent, why did he flood the earth at the time of Noah and kill all of His sacred human creations? Didn’t Robert E. Lee and Ulysses Grant pray to the same God? Human wars and genocides provide evidence against the efficacy of an individual’s (or a group’s) prayer to change history.
Spong’s take on prayer seems closer to mindfulness and meditation on compassion, as described by Buddhist monk Matthieu Ricard in Altruism The Science and Psychology of Kindness. Spong writes, “I pray daily. My way of doing this is to bring into my mind those I love, to cradle them in my awareness… Do I expect miracles to come? No, but I expect to be made more whole, to be set free to share my life more deeply with others, to be able to love beyond my boundaries and to watch the barriers that divide me from those I once avoided lowered.” And “Prayer to me is the practice of the presence of God, the act of embracing transcendence and the discipline of sharing with another the gifts of living, loving, and being.”
11. Life After Death – In the absence of evidence for immortality, can we face uncertainty, and the threat of meaninglessness?
Spong writes, “I have no use for life after death as a tool or method of behavior control… Heaven and Hell are badly dated, unbelievable concepts, which need to be dismissed from our minds and from the liturgical life of the church.” He tells us that the Church developed a system of reward and punishment: Heaven for the saved; Hell for the unsaved, misbehaving, unbaptized, pagans, nonbelievers, etc. The objective was behavior control – the adherence of the masses to the rules of the Church.
This leads to many questions: What about all the good and bad people before Jesus and before his church? What about degrees of Good and Evil? The church had to create limbo in which to put non-Christians like Gandhi and Aristotle. What about unbaptized babies? What about degrees of evil? The church developed Purgatory for time-related sentences. Spong references the Christian literature around heaven and hell as agents of behavior control including: Dante’s Divine Comedy; Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales; John Milton’s Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained; and John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress. He proposes an alternative perspective on Eternity: looking beyond self-consciousness toward universal consciousness.
12. Universalism – The same rules for everyone or ‘chosen people’ and escape clauses for a select few?
True and useful religion must apply to everyone; 'all of God’s children' means the entire Human race. This reads like the Gospel message that ‘God makes the sun shine on the righteous and the sinners’. The Gospels also tell us that we are not called to judge others… ‘attend to the beam in your own eye before worrying about the speck in your brother’s eye’.
Spong summarizes: Christianity is not about religion, it is about life.” And “… God was experienced as the source of Life in the life of Jesus, as the source of Love in the love of Jesus, and as the Ground of Being in the being of Jesus.”
I take away from Spong’s book, Unbelievable Why Neither Ancient Creeds Nor the Reformation Can Produce a Living Faith Today:
• A figurative interpretation of scripture, as contrasted with the many inconsistencies of literal interpretations;
• The specific rejection of dogmatic and judgmental creeds; and
• An emphasis on religious experience rather than spiritual explanation.
While studying Spong’s opus, I experienced resonance with ideas I had previously confronted in: William James’ The Varieties of Religious Experience A Study in Human Nature; Paul Tillich’s The Courage To Be; Thich Nhat Hanh’s Living Buddha, Living Christ; and the Dalai Lama’s The Good Heart A Buddhist Perspective on the Teachings of Jesus.
I found Unbelievable Why Neither Ancient Creeds Nor the Reformation Can Produce a Living Faith Today a useful read for an open-minded seeker. It will not likely satisfy fundamentalists or anti-religion zealots. Spong proposes figurative interpretations of complex texts, experiential practice which emphasizes compassion and decency, and whenever possible, avoiding judgment of other people. I believe his book has much to offer.

[Steven Cunningham · Rating 5 out of 5]

Faced with the unbelievable creeds and doctrines of (not to mention the ills wrought in the name of) Christianity (and other religions), some people today become aggressive, high-profile atheists (here one thinks of Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins), some become passive, quiet or private atheists (the increasing majority of young people, especially in Europe), some become agnostic (Lesley Hazelton's "Agnostic: A Spirited Manifesto" is well worth the time to read), and some atheists imagine the future of religion in "five wildly different hypotheses" (see Daniel Dennett's book "Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon" [p. 35]).

When Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong is thus faced, he proposes another Christian Reformation, but this time with 12, not 95, theses. It's interesting to hear him make the same claims of Christianity being unbelievable that are made by the so-called New Atheists and others, but to manage to rearrange things in attempt to reinvent - indeed to reform - Christianity to fit today's world, lest, he warns, it die altogether.

Is he spot on or just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic?

Either way, it's hard to argue with the value in his personal mantra in the Epilogue: "to live fully, love wastefully and be all that we can be." (By "wasteful" love he means not just abundant love, but "the kind of love that never stops to calculate whether the object of its love is worthy to be its recipient").

A refreshingly heretical look at Christianity. Bravo, Bishop Spong.

Sometimes, however, his attempts to redefine things produces definitions that are stretched beyond recognition, the most absurd being that "love is photosynthesis" but also there is a case to be made for applying this thinking to his defining God by saying “God as love" (as 1 John 4:8 also does), or defining God by saying “God is being” (as Tillich, Heidegger, and Bultmann also do).

But I think that you can stretch definitions, including definitions of God, so far like this that they become unrecognizable, so far that you are not really talking about “God” any more but about something else altogether. I can see why people do this, because things like God are so big and complex and multifaceted and protean that they seem to beg definition by referral to other things like “love” and “being” but there are other words for those things, like for example “love” and “being” which work just fine.

In the end, for Spong, God is not definable, or is definable only in pointing-to sort of way, an ineffable, apophatic way. Karen Armstrong nicely reviews such ineffable, apophatic conceptions of God in “The Case for God.”

Similarly, apropos of definitions and language, he keeps saying that language is inadequate to discuss what he is discussing quite well. Claiming, for example, that God is indescribable grates a little for me, since it’s like saying that the experience occurs only inside of the experiencer, or that there is such a thing as a “private language,” but such notions of the inner are largely considered to be the result of confusion regarding psychological concepts, as discussed in Paul Johnston’s “Wittgenstein: Rethinking the Inner.”

If an experience is “indescribable,” then that utterance is indeed a description that others can understand. Spong has a nice analogy for this: just like a horse can experience the presence of a human life but no horse has the frame of reference to enable it to describe to another horse what it means to be human, similarly, humans *experience* God even if they can’t describe to another human what it is like to be God, who/what God is, etc.

Still though, he keeps repeating how “woefully inadequate” language is for the task at hand, but yet one wonders not only how it is that he is successfully using language, but also, if he trying to round the square, like when he suggest that “God is real even if not part of the reality we can process.” One wonders which other realities are there.

[Judy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thought provoking book on Christianity from its roots to its effectiveness today. From miracles to death to Easter. What we were taught & what we may experience in our journey. Truth or Folklore. Mythological to magical. Experiencing God & trusting that experience. Source of life & Source of love.

[Mark Mazelli · Rating 4 out of 5]

Spong has some radical ideas but I found the book to be thought provoking. It turns Christianity on its head and frankly, that’s the point of the book.

One of his weaker ideas was that God could no longer be understood as residing in the heavens because of the discoveries of Copernicus and Galileo. The Bible is rich in meaning and for my taste, best understood symbolically. Throughout the book, he cautions against literalism but that’s precisely what he’s doing here.

My favorite quote from the book: “If you do not and cannot see the face of God in the hungry, the thirsty, the homeless, the sick and the imprisoned, then you cannot see God at all. God is not an external being; God is present in the faces of the least of these - our brothers and sisters.” - John Shelby Spong ✌🏻

[Duncan Swann · Rating 1 out of 5]

If there was ever an argument that the Reformation was the greatest travesty of all time (besides perhaps the French Revolution) then this is it.

Spong is a very elderly man at the end of his tether. This is an unhealthy diatribe against Christianity that reads like the ravings of a mad man. Where Jordan Peterson comes across as a non-Christian wanting to raise up the values of the Church, Spong is supposedly a Christian but whose message is to undermine the Church.

This is literally an argument built from stringing together a series of strawmen. To understand where this muddling comes from, you have to see that Spong came from one of those fundamentalist churches that believed in creationism and a literal God In Heaven. He then uses these false notions of Christianity to undermine it, and in many ways manages to come full circle by almost reinventing concepts, though of course always undermining any divinity. Some issues: taking the 10 commandments as written in stone, stating that he is correct after one paragraph making an argument, dismissing the early church fathers because they didn't write about Jesus at the time of his miracles but then insists we take his 2000-years-removed interpretations seriously (???), arguing that the conception of God held by Christianity is no different to Dawkins' Spaghetti Monster, etc. It goes on and on. He attempts to lead the reader by saying 'now that I have disproven X (which he hasn't) we can see that Y is also false!'

It is clear that he has a far too literal mind. It is disappointing that this was actually published. To be clear I also disagree with most of his progressive politics as well, but nonetheless I think they colour his opinions far too much.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

Spong's essential premise is that the traditional beliefs of Christianity as described in the biblical texts are no longer believable in the 21st century. These beliefs include God, Jesus Christ, original sin, the virgin birth, miracles, atonement theology, the resurrection, the ascension, ethics, prayer, life after death, who is saved and lost. For Spong, the Copernican Revolution, the Newtonian view of the world, the insights from Freud, and the knowledge explosion that has resulted from scientific enquiry all lead to the conclusion that these beliefs and doctrines are no longer sustainable. From Spong's perspective, all of these are unbelievable for educated people and hanging on to them is one of the reasons that the people are giving up on Christianity in droves.

I agree with Spong's analysis and his argument that most of what Christians believe is no longer unsustainable in the modern world. Spong writes in an easy and engaging style and mounts a compelling argument. Despite this, I do wonder why Spong believes that his call for a new "Reformation" is actually ever going to happen. For Spong, his experience of the divine leads him to retain his connection with Christianity and he wants to see Christianity radically change and preserve its relevance in providing people with a "living faith". But his radical reformation wouldn't leave much of "historic" Christianity left so I do wonder why he wants to hang on to it so tenaciously.

In the Epilogue of the book, Spong presents what he calls is "mantra" -- a positive statement of what he does believe. It all boils down to '"live fully, to love wastefully and to have the courage to be all that I can be."' Christian or not, this mantra will undoubtedly be something we can all subscribe to whatever we believe.

[Richmond Shreve · Rating 5 out of 5]

Spong rejects dogmatic literal reading and interpretation of Christian gospel. He argues that most of the creed that is shared among Christian denominations may have been appropriate in the context of what was knowable when it first was written but is simply unbelievable today.

He talks of a common experience of the divine and suggests that we may know God by knowing ourselves in relation to a loving community of fellow seekers.

I was raised as an Episcopalian and am now a Quaker. Spong's writing affirms my personal experience and belief. I recognize that ritual, religious practice and a creed to live by are important stepping stones for the majority of people. I am moved by the dignity and worshipful respect the old-school services evokes, and I celebrate the experience of the divine presence others achieve through the liturgy. But seeking the still quiet voice withing through silent meditation and worship is more consistent with my personal experience of faith. Spong's take resonates.