A personal introspection for my Christian friends

This is the context of my state of sincerity during my struggle with faith and eventual “falling away”. Since sincerity is not a measure of truth, you might safely listen to this personal part without a defensive guard.

What went wrong with me when my mind changed? When you hear the arguments I make, some will seem ridiculous to you. At some point in your perspective, my logic breaks down. You may become frustrated and think something like “Satan lied to him” or “He chose to believe in man’s wisdom over God’s.” Statements like that are frequent and natural but serve merely as excuses not to examine my rational progression. If you actually want to understand me, look at that which seems ludicrous. Focus on why those things seem so backward to you and try to imagine what I might have honestly gone through to come to those strange conclusions. How would an otherwise intelligent person fall into these obviously incorrect assumptions?

If I take this same advice and take on a Christian perspective, I am transported back to when I was living the Christian life, thoroughly familiar with the apologetics. I had the same zealous faith that Christians have within the modern Pentecostal branch of the church tree. I was a student of the Bible. I felt the warmth sweep over me at the altar so many times. I prayed in earnest to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, and after some experimentation and a relinquishment of ego, I began to speak in tongues. Attaining glossolalia was a valued confirmation of my Christian advancement. While on the Christian path, I desperately wished to progress to a level of faith and submission to God that I imagined might look something like a robed monk, who had little attachment to this physical world and could get by without excess in food, lust or possessions. My projected future-self was very much Christ-like, with a gentle humility mixed with a deep rage for the evil of this world. In wondering how I might become this ideal, I knew I had to first earn a profound understanding of the fundamentals of my belief. The resolution of those basic questions that came to mind as a young believer were so important that I just could not put them aside with the intention to fill in the blanks later on in my journey. “How are we so sure about all this?”

“If I was born into the standard local religion of a foreign culture and immersed into a similarly relevant system of apologetics, could I really be damned due to poor placement?”

“Why would an omniscient God need to set up humanity for failure?”

“How did the people before Jesus achieve salvation?”

“How can God be jealous?”

“Does the corrupt physical mind really get to choose the eternal fate of the soul?”

“Shouldn’t the answers to these questions be simple?”

My honest doubts were not unique, I knew. Others around me in praise services appeared to me convincing in their complete rapture, but I knew they were at least part-acting. I tried some of the time to put on the character of confidence during collective worship. It felt grossly dishonest, and I was turned off by the stylistic expression of the extreme charisma I observed in the Assemblies of God and similar churches. Why was this outward expression so important when we weren’t focusing our energy on the foundation of theology? In order to concentrate on the tenets of faith apart from the distasteful, impassioned acting, I occasionally visited more somber services that exhibited respectful reflection.

Whether I was attending one of those “dead churches” or the rock and roll services of my youth, I stayed critically aware of the beliefs that pivot a soul to or from damnation. Those are the things that matter. How can one simply choose to believe in his heart that Jesus is God? How can I really decide to believe something so important without a very good reason? Belief in the promises of God would have to wait until I could first believe in the authority from which I heard them. The big promise of gaining eternal life was only a layer in the background that I could hope to uncover once I had worked out the oddly blurry puzzle in front of me. If this truth we share is so readily apparent, freely given, why can’t I make clear sense of the first step? If everyone on earth is given at least one chance to hear and accept The Good News, does my hearing it retold several times a week throughout my life make me even more damned for not really getting it? Isn’t it true that I am one of the luckiest of souls since I have been graciously dropped right into the family of a pastor who actually teaches others this truth that happens to be the one and only universal truth in a sea of lies? What are the odds? Did I dare to test God and ask him to show Himself to me to clarify my doubt? With a fervent determination, I sought that my personal relationship with the Creator would be thorough. I faced my questions bravely. There would be no accepting half-answers to this – the ultimate decision – like “It is probably right” or “Just to be safe” or “People whom I trust have accepted it”.

I really wanted Christianity to work, and I gave it my heart. How many more years would I be required to wait for decent responses to my inquiries? If my faith was not strengthened by Christian fellowship or the teachings of great preachers or reading and re-reading the Bible or late nights of earnest prayer, should I look to outside perspectives? Could something in the secular world satisfy my need for understanding? Since I already knew The Gospel, would God appear to me more clearly through His creation?

It is the observation of the natural world without the bias assumed by religion which resulted in my conscious letting go of faith. Skepticism is my new virtue. I found answers. I haven’t found all of them, but my rational method satisfies me. Now that I look back, I think I would have stayed a Christian if my circumstances had not forced me to consider the weight of the choice. If it were not stressed with such eternal importance, I might have casually considered it a nice social club.

Related:
http://notetoself.net/2010/03/04/so-what-prompted-the-change-to-atheism/
http://notetoself.net/2010/03/05/reflecting-on-my-dad-the-minister/

“So what prompted the change to atheism?”

An old friend recently asked me a question that got me started on this long-winded response. I thought I would post it here. I’ll write more about my Christian childhood later to give this some context.

“So what prompted the change to atheism?” Well, a Christian hurt me, and now I’m mad at God. ….. No, totally just kidding, but that seems to be the most often assumed “cause” that I hear from religious people who haven’t taken the time to listen to a de-conversion story. My mom used to ask who it was that hurt me and what happened to me. I really have no serious issue directly with any individual Christian that I’ve met personally. I think Christians are simply overwhelmed by systematic religious fear. “Love God or else!” It’s not really their fault. This is a tangent to answering the question directly, but I just want to be clear that my decisions on faith and the supernatural are not out of rebellion or a vendetta or as a reaction to some non-related personal offense.

Why the change? The short answer is that I see no rational reason to choose to believe in a faith-based worldview. Below is a somewhat disjointed summary of my views on both Christianity and religion in general. Consider it a draft from a non-writer. ; )

The usual reasons offered for being religious can be summarized as either the promise of eternal life / punishment or religious life is happier / more moral / good for humanity. I don’t include the statement “I just know in my heart that X is true.” as a reason, because that is only a statement about how strongly the belief is held and not actually any kind of argument.

In response to the promise of eternal life or death, historical records show that the various afterlife stories have been continually made up or modernized to fit ongoing changes in culture. They are just stories from human imagination which are used to influence people. They are pretty entertaining to listen to, especially in succession.

In response to statements that suggest that religion improves our everyday life, consider religious wars, hindrances to science, and countless inhumane actions perpetrated by religious institutions. Humanity is, overall, worse off for being religious. Of course, most any religious person would respond to that with, “Yes, all those religions other than my own cause great harm to the world.” … but you can see the inherent problem in that kind of thinking. If you’re not convinced, take a look at some religious perspectives other than the ones with which you are most familiar. It is natural to think only of the positive effects of one’s own religious affiliation and to disbelieve the negative.

The concept of morality across cultures and time has been pretty much standard. Some religions claim to be the source of morality (a moral compass), but then why do the basics of common morality, ideas like be nice, don’t murder or steal, care for children, make sense to a rational person in the absence of religion? Those ideas are common among humans simply because they make good sense for the health and continuance of humans. An individual who acts for his own benefit at the expense of others in his community (i.e. raping children) has to then deal with the consequences directly from the community. It works itself out even without divinely inspired fear or love. Good and bad have been defined over time through natural human development.

I guess there is another pro-religion reason I have heard somewhat often. “We are here in a universe, therefore something must have created it.” That doesn’t make sense to me. What we do know is that we are here and that the universe exists, but that is all we really can observe. That a “god” entity created us in order to have pets or to be loved is simply an imaginative idea to consider, not at all an observation.

I have found it important to make a distinction between truth and opinion when considering religion. There are methodical, empirical ways to test the truth of an idea, but simply saying “The belief of a certain idea makes one happier” gives no weight to the authenticity of that idea. Some people say they are happier with a relationship with Jesus than without. I am sure they feel that and honestly believe that to be true. I believed it honestly as well. Since then, my own experience has been that the occasional feelings of religious ecstasy are self-induced. I can have similar experiences from many other sources. My happiness now is more genuine than I previously knew it could be. I don’t have to put aside those annoying questions anymore. Doubt is good. Faith is merely choosing to reject reason and go along with some other person’s ideas.

What about the in-errancy of the Bible (or other religious book)? Listen to a less-biased historical perspective. Those that claim Biblical in-errancy will blindy defend it. The chaotic formation of that collection of writings is well documented from reputable and verifiable research. It is not the singular or profound “Word of God” its followers claim it to be. It was gathered with many revisions over time, mostly due to political motivations.

“Why not just be like Jesus who taught love and forgiveness?” Apart from the absence of that character in historical record, why get your morality from a social mentor who supported slavery? Why would he slaughter a bunch of pigs for no reason? Why tell his disciples to steal a donkey? If it is wrong now, it was wrong then. Defenders of the Bible, especially the Old Testament, are defending moral relativism according to cultural norms of the time. If God actually frequently commanded genocide including children and animals, as well as rape and child sacrifice, then the God of today would still be responsible for that hateful behavior. The statement “God is love” requires that “love” be severely redefined. It is comforting to me that there isn’t actually anything I have seen that indicates that such a terrible, jealous, genocidal, emotionally irrational entity exists.

One more point, due to the supposed “unchanging nature of God”, a Christian is often prevented from admitting to being wrong, even in the face of new information. Christian ideas are often in conflict with reality as clearly seen when creationists try to debate with science. Science is a method that definitively requires ongoing correction through cycles of theory and testing. It also uses the process of expert peer review to confirm or deny new research. “Creation Science” is truly an oxymoron since its defenders will not and cannot change their views when the continual flood of evidence supports an ancient universe and Darwinian evolution.

So, why am I becoming more vocal and active about religion? Brad Pitt says it succinctly here. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/15/brad-pitt-religion-doesnt_n_260398.html I don’t want to block anyone in their own search for truth, but I do speak out when a concept of faith begins to interfere with public policy or causes the mis-education of our future generations.

So… that’s enough for the summary. These are the views that I have found through a very honest, personal search. I don’t think there is much chance of there being a supernatural being like we humans have imagined in the past, but… I am quite willing to be open to rational discussion and new observations. Please let me know what you think or if you have a question.

Related:
http://notetoself.net/2010/03/08/a-personal-introspection-for-my-christian-friends/
http://notetoself.net/2010/03/05/reflecting-on-my-dad-the-minister/