|
*If this is the wrong place, my sincere apologies to the mods. Please move to the appropriate location*
First off let me clarify that I do not want this to turn into a religious debate thread. I only wish to outline the struggle that lead me to first question, and then to renounce, my Christian beliefs. If any of this offends you it is not intentional, although I am not sorry about it.
I was born and raised in a Christian household. My mother was, and still is to this very day, a committed Christian woman. I spent my Sundays at church in various Sunday school programs. I was taught the basic Christian doctrines at this time and prided myself in excelling in them as well. Any question which may compromise such beliefs was met with utter hostility, and I was told it was better not to ask them at all. How dare reason stand in the way of faith. I was told these two were diametrically opposed, unless it validated religious principles. However, more on that later.
As I grew older I morphed, or shall I say evolved, into quite the little intellectual. I enjoyed reading and debating. Not to sound too conceited but I was keener at these things compared to other people of my age. This may be derived from the fact that most of my peers were too involved with sports, skirt chasing, and the like to worry about what is look at as trivial at that age. Nevertheless, my faith never wavered. Even when my actions overtly conflicted with the “morality” of the Bible I still held fast to them and bitterly opposed any opposition. I went to church because I was forced to by my parents. I didn’t want to praise the god I still gave my unwavering allegiance too. This is America. To be godless was anti-nationalist, and would possibly even make you a communist. Can’t have that, now can we?
I graduated high school and moved to college. After two years of classes my grades were not satisfactory to say the least. I drifted from major to major not sure of what I wanted to pursue, which made me not take my classes to seriously. This was also during my hardcore wow phase; there possibly could be a correlation there to explore in another thread. Then something remarkable happened. My head knowledge of faith which was actively ideal once again morphed into an emotional one. I rediscovered my love for god. I dropped the classes I was in, and within 5 months was enrolled in a seminary type internship at the megachurch I attended.
I spent a year of my life there (also five thousand dollars I might add). Eighty to one-hundred hours a week we spent running the church operations, conferences, services, special events, and the like. However, my favorite day and the one I excelled at the most was class day. Here we learned the ins and outs of Christian doctrine. To this day I believe I can quote the Bible and defend the Christian faith better than most believers. There was one remarkable thing missing in this whole ordeal. Everything we learned was under the presumption that the Bible was the true and inerrant word of god, Jesus of Nazareth was a real person, and the stories in the both the new and old testaments were factual, historical, and scientific. I believe I now know the reason why we never covered such topics. If you proved that any of those three things were indeed false the rest would soon follow. The foundations of Christianity are akin to the old tale of humpty-dumpty. Not just in historical validity, but spirit as well. One small gust of reason and the shattering would be monumental.
I graduated the program with more questions than I had when I started. I was told by a close friend at the time, who was a devote Christian, to stop all my questioning. “You won’t reach God through logic, “ he said. “I have had friends who did the same thing and they stopped believing”. I wanted the truth. You do not stop searching just because you might not like what you do not find. The hunt continued.
I stopped studying doctrine, and instead focused my attention on the fundamentals. What is the evidence that points to the inerrancy of Scripture? What is the historical proof to point to the divinity, if even the existence, of Christ? How did the universe originate, along with the species on the Earth? I started to listen to debates and lectures by the opposing “faction”, such as: Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, and the like. What I have learned and discovered is so vast that I do not have the time nor energy to write here. I can simply say this; there is an irreconcilable difference between reality, reason, and the Bible. Even the moral teachings of the Bible are founded in immorality. We are not here because of divine creation. Our purpose in life is not given to us, but we make it ourself. Our life is not meaningless, we create our own meaning.
As I am about to head to class I will end this with a quote by Hitchens. I will gladly answer any question I am able to. Also, excuse me if this comes out a bit choppy and rant-like. I am writing down my thoughts as I have them. In no way is this supposed to convince people to challenge their beliefs, but rather detail my own journey as of late.
Let's say that the consensus is that our species, being the higher primates, Homo Sapiens, has been on the planet for at least 100,000 years, maybe more. Francis Collins says maybe 100,000. Richard Dawkins thinks maybe a quarter-of-a-million. I'll take 100,000. In order to be a Christian, you have to believe that for 98,000 years, our species suffered and died, most of its children dying in childbirth, most other people having a life expectancy of about 25 years, dying of their teeth. Famine, struggle, bitterness, war, suffering, misery, all of that for 98,000 years. Heaven watches this with complete indifference. And then 2000 years ago, thinks "That's enough of that. It's time to intervene," and the best way to do this would be by condemning someone to a human sacrifice somewhere in the less literate parts of the Middle East. Don't lets appeal to the Chinese, for example, where people can read and study evidence and have a civilization. Let's go to the desert and have another revelation there. This is nonsense. It can't be believed by a thinking person. Why am I glad this is the case? To get to the point of the wrongness of Christianity, because I think the teachings of Christianity are immoral. The central one is the most immoral of all, and that is the one of vicarious redemption. You can throw your sins onto somebody else, vulgarly known as scapegoating. In fact, originating as scapegoating in the same area, the same desert. I can pay your debt if I love you. I can serve your term in prison if I love you very much. I can volunteer to do that. I can't take your sins away, because I can't abolish your responsibility, and I shouldn't offer to do so. Your responsibility has to stay with you. There's no vicarious redemption. There very probably, in fact, is no redemption at all. It's just a part of wish-thinking, and I don't think wish-thinking is good for people either. It even manages to pollute the central question, the word I just employed, the most important word of all: the word love, by making love compulsory, by saying you MUST love. You must love your neighbour as yourself, something you can't actually do. You'll always fall short, so you can always be found guilty. By saying you must love someone who you also must fear. That's to say a supreme being, an eternal father, someone of whom you must be afraid, but you must love him, too. If you fail in this duty, you're again a wretched sinner. This is not mentally or morally or intellectually healthy. And that brings me to the final objection - I'll condense it, Dr. Orlafsky - which is, this is a totalitarian system. If there was a God who could do these things and demand these things of us, and he was eternal and unchanging, we'd be living under a dictatorship from which there is no appeal, and one that can never change and one that knows our thoughts and can convict us of thought crime, and condemn us to eternal punishment for actions that we are condemned in advance to be taking. All this in the round, and I could say more, it's an excellent thing that we have absolutely no reason to believe any of it to be true
PS: To those who will say,” You were never a true Christian to begin with.” I sincerely disagree, and you have no authority by which to make that accusation. I felt the “holy spirit”. I had experiences just like every other person who believes. I knew the doctrines both in my head and heart.
 
|
I never quite understood the desire to prove beyond doubt that Christianity is true. In fact, knowledge of the truth of the Christian religion itself is something I never quite understood how anyone could ever possibly claim to have. There is a reason why Christianity is a religion and not math or... science or something. The sole fact that this thing here is religion that we're talking about means that at the very core of it all lies faith. Faith has nothing to do with certainty, knowledge or proofs.
In fact, so many classical theologians (think Aquinas) argued that although reason can strengthen faith, it can never provide complete certainty, because with certainty you lose what makes faith so characteristically faith. Nobody needs to have faith in the fact that the thing infront of you is a monitor; you either take the plain obvious for granted or you're a bored philosopher. But it takes faith to commit to a religion - in fact, that's what makes it a religion to begin with.
Coming back to Aquinas, he argued (being the Aristotlean that he was) that we are all naturally drawn to goodness, and because God is the ultimate goodness, we would never be able to resist being drawn to him if we had certain knowledge of his existence (or if we were to ever perceive him). And that would wreck our free will, which would be a bad thing, right? With other words, if we'd throw away faith, nobody with a sane mind would ever be able to deny the truth of Christianity and thus we'd be unable to -choose- God, to choose to do the good thing, to accept salvation and so on. But there's no choice in accepting the fact that the thing infront of you is a monitor. It's just plain fact.
EDIT: Oh yeah I should probably recommend you Kierkegaard's 'Practice in Christianity'.
|
Thanks for sharing. Always interesting to hear how people grow and change.
I have a similar story but not at all as extreme as yours but I know how hard it is to start questioning the faith you were borned into. That is one thing that is so scary with christianity (and most religions); it is by fear they hold you to their faith. It took many years until I dared to say out loud that I did not believe in that kind of a God.
|
I disagree with you on most points about Christianity, but I completely respect your decision. I even find some things that I relate with you, like our naturally inquisitive and rational minds. If your worldview works for you, and you are happy with your decision, I'm happy for you and hope the best in the future.
But what exactly turned you away from God? Was it a specific argument, or just a realization that none of it made sense?
|
Ok I'll bite. You take a collection of readings that were written almost thousands of years ago at the earliest, that have no original to reference, that were translated from language to language with no real collective authority on how this process should happen, and at the very earliest wasn't mass produced until 500 or so years ago, and you think that if one thing was off everything must be wrong and should be ignored? I don't know anything who says that the bible is a definitive academic reading that should be referenced as a solid source for things. The roman records approve of what at least the modern bible has said and they've been mostly replicated by the Quran.
So I admittedly don't get a lot of what you say and I don't know what denomination you belonged to so there isn't a real point of reference for me to go off of for your "doctrines" but I'm gona guess if your using those words its catholic.
But at the foundation of your blog the very idea of trying to find evidence that proves or in opposition disproves god you aren't going to find anything. There isn't anything that proves god or disproves it simply and if thats what you used to lose your faith then I'm sorry for you and I guess I should let you go on your way. I feel confident and happy in my faith and questioning it and reasoning with it doesn't threaten me. Just because you know the rules and practices doesn't really say anything about your faith, I've known plenty of shitty Christians and plenty of good non religious people.
|
For someone who thinks of themselves so highly, it sure took you long enough to figure out that it was bullshit.
|
Religion was infantile mans attempt to understand the world around them. Why does rain happen, why does this gigantic mountain occasionally blow up in fire, and the like. With little to no scientific knowledge of the world around them it was perfectly acceptable at that time to believe that there was a higher power, maybe the sun, trees, animals, or other humans which were the ultimate cause for these phenomenon. Religion was the lens by which we tried to answer the question why and how. Thanks to meteorology and hydrology we understand precipitation. We now know why volcanos erupt and tsunamis happen. It is time that we give religion a short, but not too sweet, dismissal to the Smithsonian museum where it belongs.
|
On February 19 2013 04:26 PhoenixVoid wrote:
I disagree with you on most points about Christianity, but I completely respect your decision. I even find some things that I relate with you, like our naturally inquisitive and rational minds. If your worldview works for you, and you are happy with your decision, I'm happy for you and hope the best in the future.
But what exactly turned you away from God? Was it a specific argument, or just a realization that none of it made sense?
The latter. It started with my battle of the inerrancy of scripture, then the the study of the origins of the universe and how it completely contradicts the biblical narrative of creation . The lack of secular evidence for most biblical events. This turned me off to Christianity then the whole notion of God in general.
About me sounding arrogant. That was not my intention at all. I do not consider myself an intellectual heavyweight. I constantly finding myself knowing less and less about more and more. I do think I know more than the average person my age, mostly because I find these types of things fascinating.
|
On February 19 2013 04:28 Sermokala wrote:
Ok I'll bite. You take a collection of readings that were written almost thousands of years ago at the earliest, that have no original to reference, that were translated from language to language with no real collective authority on how this process should happen, and at the very earliest wasn't mass produced until 500 or so years ago, and you think that if one thing was off everything must be wrong and should be ignored? I don't know anything who says that the bible is a definitive academic reading that should be referenced as a solid source for things. The roman records approve of what at least the modern bible has said and they've been mostly replicated by the Quran.
So I admittedly don't get a lot of what you say and I don't know what denomination you belonged to so there isn't a real point of reference for me to go off of for your "doctrines" but I'm gona guess if your using those words its catholic.
But at the foundation of your blog the very idea of trying to find evidence that proves or in opposition disproves god you aren't going to find anything. There isn't anything that proves god or disproves it simply and if thats what you used to lose your faith then I'm sorry for you and I guess I should let you go on your way. I feel confident and happy in my faith and questioning it and reasoning with it doesn't threaten me. Just because you know the rules and practices doesn't really say anything about your faith, I've known plenty of shitty Christians and plenty of good non religious people.
Was in a non-denominational church for awhile. Towards the end I considered myself staunchly orthodox presbyterian (Calvinist).
|
|
|
On February 19 2013 04:49 sam!zdat wrote:Nice blog  I'd just like to leave you, however, with the seed of doubt, that there are more sophisticated ways to think about religion than the way in which you were raised, and there are more sophisticated ways to think about the critique of religion than Dawkins and Hitchens. Keep asking questions I love a curious mind! If you decide that NOW you have found the Truth, then you have just made the same mistake as before  Show nested quote +
Confucius said, "When everyone dislikes something, it should be examined. When everyone likes something, it should be examined."
Thanks for the kind words, and the advice, brother =).
|
On February 19 2013 04:34 ImAbstracT wrote:
Religion was infantile mans attempt to understand the world around them. Why does rain happen, why does this gigantic mountain occasionally blow up in fire, and the like. With little to no scientific knowledge of the world around them it was perfectly acceptable at that time to believe that there was a higher power, maybe the sun, trees, animals, or other humans which were the ultimate cause for these phenomenon. Religion was the lens by which we tried to answer the question why and how. Thanks to meteorology and hydrology we understand precipitation. We now know why volcanos erupt and tsunamis happen. It is time that we give religion a short, but not too sweet, dismissal to the Smithsonian museum where it belongs.
Quoting this for 100% truth. Religion may have had a use in the past (we're talking hundreds or thousands of years ago here), but now that we have science that's able to answer most of the "tough" questions that couldn't be answered in the past, religious beliefs are a relic and it's time to let them go. They have virtually no place in a modern-day, thinking person's society.
Also, ImAbstracT, welcome to the dark side.
If I'm actually being serious, though, congratulations on breaking through the indoctrination that you grew up with from a very young age. I have a firm belief that people, overall, would be far less religious if it was forbidden to expose children below the age of 13 to religious styles of thought. So many devoutly religious adults are only devoutly religious because those beliefs were forced on them from a young age, before they were able to cognitively say "you know, I don't think this is true because there's no evidence." Children (especially very young ones) are incredibly gullible, especially when it comes to things their caretakers say. I'm happy that you were able to break through all of that and see things from an objective point of view.
|
5/5 for the guy who made up a religion so he didn't have to work on a farm everyday!
|
On February 19 2013 04:56 iamahydralisk wrote:
now that we have science that's able to answer most of the "tough" questions that couldn't be answered in the past
Careful, buddy, or I'm gonna ask you some "tough" questions...
edit: be careful that, having cast off your priesthood, that you do not replace it with another, this time wearing labcoats.
and @op, even though I like to needle atheists, as you know, lemme tell you that I'll take Dawkins over the megachurch any day of the week
|
As I grew older I morphed, or shall I say evolved, into quite the little intellectual. I enjoyed reading and debating. Not to sound too conceded
i died at this typo xD
interesting blog, very well written, 5 stars
|
My statement:
As a guy who got isolated from his religion because of a choice to go to a different highschool, I'm just going to say that I'm very cynical of what you just wrote. I'm going to be abrasive here, not because I hate you or think that you are some kind of moron, but because you missed the point despite all your learning. When I got isolated, I was attached, slandered, but nothing physically harming ever happened. While I was gone, I was bitter, angry, and most of all disappointed in my faith. I lost it for a while, and to be honest I will never allow myself to go back to the community without a bit of cynicality there. However, that is not the point of religion. That was what happens when people mix power and religion, that never goes well. The point of religion is to teach people to be moral. Whether or not I agree with Christian doctrine, in a Jewish view, does not matter. Being a good person means following the laws and codes that god has set forth. Some of them are antiquated (until the end of the second temple and more recently with the creation of head rabbis for states) and they get tossed out, while others are kept for tradition. That said, the point is to be a moral person. Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim and even Scientologists all believe that. You did not lose your religion, you lost the faith you had because you went too far into an area that you can't do anything with. You can't prove god, you can only have faith that what he said is how you should live your life. The Old Testament has some history to it, but first and foremost it is a codex.
My final thoughts:
I'm younger than you, but I spent all of my life growing up in a significantly more orthodox environment. I am personally not orthodox, and neither is my family, but I spent my formative years in school there, living a double life. What I questioned is what you questioned and the answer I was given by my Rabbis varied, with one exception. They all said that god is a matter of faith. To some its just a natural idea that, "of course he is real, l0l," while to others it was a more sympathetic, "I believe he is real because I have faith in him," or something to that effect. When you try to rationalize and prove his existence you fail; like all the mathematicians of the past who tried to prove that 1=3, no one will ever prove god's existence. You can believe what he said was right, but you can't ever say to anyone else that beyond a shadow of a doubt you can prove he is real.
My background:
I spent about 9 learning religious doctrine. From the time I was in school until I left for highschool, and even in highschool (though significantly less so) I learned religious Jewish doctrine (I'm talking about Yeshiva level stuff here, not your generic conservative or reform stuff). I can defend my faith to the end of the earth, but that doesn't matter. What matters is that you ask questions, you need to find what fits you.
EDIT: I'm just editing bits in and out because I think the original was WAYYY to rude.
|
On February 19 2013 04:59 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2013 04:56 iamahydralisk wrote:
now that we have science that's able to answer most of the "tough" questions that couldn't be answered in the past Careful, buddy, or I'm gonna ask you some "tough" questions... edit: be careful that, having cast off your priesthood, that you do not replace it with another, this time wearing labcoats. and @op, even though I like to needle atheists, as you know, lemme tell you that I'll take Dawkins over the megachurch any day of the week
Notice that I said "most" lol. I know that science can't answer everything, but at least it can answer a lot of things empirically, whereas religious beliefs would answer those same questions with "the creator did it" and rely entirely on faith. Basically what I'm saying is, I choose reason over faith.
|
On February 19 2013 05:00 docvoc wrote:
My statement:
As a guy who got isolated from his religion because of a choice to go to a different highschool, I'm just going to say that I'm very cynical of what you just wrote. I'm going to be abrasive here, not because I hate you or think that you are some kind of moron, but because you missed the point despite all your learning. When I got isolated, I was attached, slandered, but nothing physically harming ever happened. While I was gone, I was bitter, angry, and most of all disappointed in my faith. I lost it for a while, and to be honest I will never allow myself to go back to the community without a bit of cynicality there. However, that is not the point of religion. That was what happens when people mix power and religion, that never goes well. The point of religion is to teach people to be moral. Whether or not I agree with Christian doctrine, in a Jewish view, does not matter. Being a good person means following the laws and codes that god has set forth. Some of them are antiquated (until the end of the second temple and more recently with the creation of head rabbis for states) and they get tossed out, while others are kept for tradition. That said, the point is to be a moral person. Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim and even Scientologists all believe that. You did not lose your religion, you lost the faith you had because you went too far into an area that you can't do anything with. You can't prove god, you can only have faith that what he said is how you should live your life. The Old Testament has some history to it, but first and foremost it is a codex.
My final thoughts:
I'm younger than you, but I spent all of my life growing up in a significantly more orthodox environment. I am personally not orthodox, and neither is my family, but I spent my formative years in school there, living a double life. What I questioned is what you questioned and the answer I was given by my Rabbis varied, with one exception. They all said that god is a matter of faith. To some its just a natural idea that, "of course he is real, l0l," while to others it was a more sympathetic, "I believe he is real because I have faith in him," or something to that effect. When you try to rationalize and prove his existence you fail; like all the mathematicians of the past who tried to prove that 1=3, no one will ever prove god's existence. You can believe what he said was right, but you can't ever say to anyone else that beyond a shadow of a doubt you can prove he is real.
My background:
I spent about 9 learning religious doctrine. From the time I was in school until I left for highschool, and even in highschool (though significantly less so) I learned religious Jewish doctrine (I'm talking about Yeshiva level stuff here, not your generic conservative or reform stuff). I can defend my faith to the end of the earth, but that doesn't matter. What matters is that you ask questions, you need to find what fits you.
EDIT: I'm just editing bits in and out because I think the original was WAYYY to rude.
He did lose his religion, but he didn't lose his morals. There's a very clear-cut difference there. You don't have to have religion to be a moral person, and on the converse of that, having religion doesn't automatically make you a moral person either. Just saying there are good and bad people on both sides.
|
I'm very much in the same place you were in the past. Except 100% Irish Heritage and Catholic.
I don't really practice much anymore but while I was in the military I have to tell you I found myself in the church every week.. odd how that works. Anyway I tend to just accept Pascals Wager now and it works for me on why I choose to believe. I think my issue is that I've lost faith in the church rather than faith in God. Everything that has happened recently reinforces my beliefs that the church just like many other organizations is extremely corrupt.
Fun Fact, Pope Benedict the 16th's clothes were an estimated $80,000 for everything and his shoes always looked brand new (also cost around $1,500 a pair). Not exactly the most modest person.
Edit: I should mention that I'm not against the church at all. I'm just disappointed. I hear a lot because my uncle has been a priest for almost 60 years, my mother was a religion teacher, and my cousins sell all the priests / bishops and in some cases cardinals their garments and tassels and all that other stuff they wear.
Edit 2: Also the blog title made me think of R.E.M.
|
On February 19 2013 05:13 OmniEulogy wrote:
Fun Fact, Pope Benedict the 16th's clothes were an estimated $80,000 for everything and his shoes always looked brand new (also cost around $1,500 a pair). Not exactly the most modest person.
Don't you hate it when subversive-progressive ideologies are coopted by hegemony? bummer, man
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
