Thursday, December 27, 2007

Guest Post By BrianC

The following is a guest post by BrianC, who has been posting comments on a previous post from an atheist perspective. I have invited him to tell us about his personal voyage of self-discovery:

Mark has very graciously suggested that a number of posts explaining how I got from bible believing Christian to my current state of apostasy, might by instructive, or at the very least serve as a terrible warning of what to avoid, for the true believer. It’s a longish story, but I hope sufficiently novel to keep most readers engaged. I grew up in the republic of Ireland in the 1960’s and 70’s, running the entire obligatory catholic obstacle course, of communion, confirmation and lectures on the specific and exquisite methods of torture, God had in mind for the non, or wayward roman catholic. This left me with a fairly clear idea of where I stood in relation to God. He was THE BOSS and I was in his absolute and total power. Disobedience was not merely a dangerous idea, but the very definition of insanity, given the potential downside. Even as a callow youth, I could see the logic of Pascal’s Wager:-), and I remain sympathetic to the compelling logic of the worldview, which embraces the idea of eternal rewards and punishments.As a twelve year old, I moved to South Africa. Quite a shocking change of climate, culture and religious milieu for a young Irish lad, and it gave me an opportunity afforded very few. I was suddenly forced to switch perspectives, from being the citizen of a small country suffering some low key oppression at the hands of an overbearing neighbour (the UK), to becoming part of a ruling minority (the whites) participating in the markedly more robust oppression of a powerless majority. I was also exposed to my first real brush with protestant Christian sects, and frankly, I rather liked it.The emphasis on salvation through the acceptance of Jesus, as opposed to the catholic obsession with penance, categories of sin and more than a hint of real world mortification of the flesh, struck me as a far more palatable and internally consistent message. Yes we were all sinners, but Jesus had taken that sin on our behalf. Plus, there were no priests, and I had always considered these grotesque elderly virgins rather creepy. Some kind of sixth sense I suppose.During the next 5 years or so, I went through, what for this audience is I expect, a fairly familiar evangelical cycle of salvation and backsliding. Often my returns to the fold were followed by speaking in tongues, periods of intensely emotional joy, laughing in the spirit and the like. Sometimes there was nothing, my re-dedications were followed by little more than an intellectual sense of having put things back in order, and that on totting up the balance sheet, I was once again, out of the red. Those catholic habits die hard:-) Other than an aggressive attempt by a Mormon friend to recruit me (I simply found the book of Mormon too silly, even then), and a bit of a close call with 7th day Adventists (I found their intense attention to detail rather compelling), things rolled along fairly smoothly. I was largely at peace with my faith, and seriously considering the ministry. At the age of 18 I finished school, worked for about a year as computer operator in Johannesburg, and then began my two year stint of national service in the South African Defence Force, sometime in 1984. After a fairly grueling 3 months of basic training, I was stationed in a grim, dusty little support battalion, 7th South African Infantry, in Palaborwa. Palaborwa was reputed to have two seasons, summer and hell. It was too close to the equator, much too close to Mozambique and in practical terms, as far from the real world (air conditioning, the opposite sex and beer) as the dark side of the moon. The career military in Palaborwa had little but contempt for conscripts like myself, thousands of flabby, wide eyed innocents, all harbouring in their lethal little breasts, a one in one thousand chance of loosing an eye, a hand or worse still, a whole staff sergeant to the statistical certainty of training accidents to come. To the further disgust of the professionals, almost all of whom were Afrikaners, most of us weren’t even South Africans, but force naturalized colonials. An imaginative government attempt to beef up the, even then, rapidly shrinking white demographic, had resulted in the conscription of thousands of pale English speaking foreigners. Plenty of whom could barely squeak out so much as a “Hoe gaan dit?” in Afrikaans. You get the picture;-)After school, in the run up to my 2 years in the SADF, and intermittently when I had leave from the army, I attended a mega church in Johannesburg called “Christian City”. You know the type. High energy speakers, tithes (expected but not obligatory), the prosperity gospel, lots of bible courses (for a fee), speaking in tongues, slaying in the spirit, a pretty good Christian bookshop where I recall buying and being so impressed by Josh McDowell’s “Evidence that Demands a Verdict”, that I later splashed out on the rather unimaginatively named sequel “More Evidence that Demands a Verdict”. They also had really well organized home churches and study groups. This church and my experience with the narrow slice of protestant Christendom I had been exposed to, left me with a real sense of how chosen “we” were. At this time by “we” I meant people who explicitly had been born again, baptized in the Holy Spirit (with signs mind you) and who harboured a sympathetic contempt for anyone that hadn’t. Happily, my time in the SADF changed that rather bigoted view.I had the incredible good luck (I considered it divine intervention at the time) to be assigned as a chaplains clerk. This was a very cushy number which required no dangerous shooting, throwing of grenades or any of that very unpleasant, “running while being shot at”. Basically, my duties were to keep the office tidy, carry hymn books, furniture and religious accoutrement back and forth to services, in short to be the chaplains general dogs body in all things. The chaplain was a Dominee (the Afrikaans term for pastor) of the Dutch Reformed Church. A rather austere denomination, very heavy on the Calvin, light on the "Jesus Loves you" and lumbered with the weird, disquieting and quite logical doctrine of predestination. However the Dominee himself was a wonderful man, a great Christian and it showed. He may not have had the fireworks of the spirit that I had come to expect from all true believers, but he certainly had the fruits in abundance. This, I suspect, is where it all began to go off the rails. Ironic really, that the witness of such a humble Christian gentleman would sow the seeds of “destruction”. The thing was that I could see the fruits of the spirit, love, patience etc. the really good stuff, in all sorts of Christians. Even Christians that my pastor back in Christian City suggested were lost. I had been fed a fairly exclusive message for years, told that the embrace of that message should show in some tangible way, but reality was not stacking up like that. In fact, I began to see the simplistic “believe and receive” Christians of my old church as superficial and shallow, downright materialistic, when contrasted with the Lutherans, Anglicans and Catholics I had spent the last rather grueling two years with.My stint in the SADF had also left me searching for a lot of philosophical answers on the subject of justice. Apartheid was alive and well in the SA of 1984, and the ideological incompatibility with the words of Jesus simply became more starkly obvious during my military service. My religious convictions although still strong and integral to my person at the time, were struggling to understand how an overwhelmingly Christian nation could endorse, justify and actively champion the cruelties being visited upon the majority black population, who were also Christians.While chewing on these inconsistencies, I was drawn to the idea that true Christians appeared in all denominations, and that the specific dogma was secondary. Simply “accepting Jesus as your saviour” wasn’t producing noticeably better Christians, and I was bumping into a steady stream of people who had never “been born again” in any kind of ostentatious way, yet even with long term and intimate exposure to them (the army will do that!) they still seemed objectively “better” people. There had to be something else, something indefinable in the mix, not reducible to some cold scriptural formula. In the late 80’s I left South Africa and returned to Europe, specifically the UK. I still had in the back of my mind that ministry was what I wanted to do, and after about a year I made contact with a Christian group I had first seen in school in SA in the early 80’s. The group was Covenant Players (http://www.covenantplayers.org/), their explicitly stated mission was to communicate the Lord Jesus Christ through the medium of drama. This may well have been the best 4 years of my life. I was assigned to Germany where I quickly picked up the language, and within 2 years was running my own unit. People loved us, our message and the medium. I was good at the drama, as well as the business side of things and my unit became one of the first to use a computer. A ludicrous IBM 286 with an absurdly small amount of RAM, and a 10 MB hard “card”. I used to lug this beast around with me in a suitcase, but all of our correspondence was done on time, and we kept in such regular contact with our “customers”, that we had a steady stream of bookings generated by these mass mailing contacts alone. I met my wife in Covenant Players, and when my daughter was born, the unit in Ireland drove us home from the hospital in their van. Although both of us have now rejected theism generally, and Christianity in specific, we both look back very fondly on our time in ministry, and the many wonderful Christians we met.All through this period, my continued disappointment with simplistic evangelical Christianity, interaction with every Christian denomination under the sun, as well as positive interactions with Mormons, JW and even the occasional Muslim, deepened my conviction that God must accept all monotheists on whatever cultural terms the context of their upbringing provides. If “accepting Jesus” was the critical formula, did it really stand to reason, that someone born in Utah or Teheran had exactly the same chance at salvation as someone born into the family of a Baptist minister? This seemed absurd, the more so given the terrible penalty of making the wrong choice.It gradually seeped into my consciousness, that Pascal’s Wager was not a binary proposition at all, that given the thousands of confident religions, sects and cults worldwide, the choices were in fact functionally infinite. I wrestled with the idea that there had to be some way of giving everyone an equal shot at salvation, so to speak. Either that or the penalty couldn’t possibly be as severe as alleged. The concept, “accept Jesus as your saviour” had been (re-?) formulated during the reformation, with the very narrow horizon of European civilization in mind, and as a counterpoint to the Catholic Churches focus on sin. When I examined this dogma against the broader sweep of history and geography, it simply seemed vacuous, even cruel, and the attempts to explain this clear injustice were uniformly inadequate. I considered the thousands of years of Chinese history for example, utterly untouched by Christianity until perhaps two hundred years ago, or the South and North American civilizations that have risen and fallen in the last 2000 years, collectively, billions of people that lived and died without ever hearing a single solitary syllable about Jesus. That is assuming you don’t accept the book of Mormon.A particularly important fork in the road, was the thought that every theist on the planet makes very similar claims, appeals and arguments, just for a different set of speculations. They are frequently certain they have evidence, reason and of course God on their side. To me, they all began to look very, very similar, including my own Christian convictions. How could the different perspectives, dogmas and claims be objectively evaluated? Not by reason, all the faiths and sects have what they consider excellent reasons for what they believe, and consider everyone else’s reasons insufficient. If you think I’m exaggerating, try arguing with a Muslim (they are all over the internet) about the inerrancy of the Quran or with a 7th Day Adventist, Mormon of Jehovah’s Witness regarding some of their more curious doctrinal claims.Not by personal experience, people from all faiths and sects tell a steady stream of anecdotes about their interaction with the transcendent, miraculous and indefinable. I have a few such stories myself! To this day, the adherents of Hindu gurus will tell breathlessly of healings, resurrections and the occasional virgin birth. If I dismiss these claims without a thought today, what am I to make of similar claims of a far more illiterate, credulous and above all, distant age?Not by example, all faiths have a history of angels and demons in their ranks. How then? How could one be certain that a particular set of religious Dogma was the correct one? My changing world view, the recognition that people were people everywhere eventually overwhelmed the capacity of my religious convictions to adapt. No matter how you examined it, either religious dogma was overtly unjust, and frequently absurd, or so denuded as to be worthless. This thought process percolated in the background for a few years, and then along came the Iraq war. My sense of injustice was ignited by the in your face lies and the outrage that this war embodies, and that George Bush personifies. His cynical duping of the religious right in the US, made me think anew about the state of my own religious life. I began to aggressively investigate the details of my faith; I read books on comparative religion, church history, cosmology and evolution. I read Dawkins, Harris and Dennett, the unholy trinity of Atheism. I basically took a wrecking ball to the superstructure of ignorance that my faith depended on, and the whole thing came crashing down. Worse still, I realized I’d been duped as well, betrayed by people I expected to be honest with me. Especially that idiot Josh McDowell (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/newetdav.html) , I had genuinely thought that his books had informed me; when all they had done was to crudely inoculate me against actual knowledge.The deep dishonesty of some Christian apologists, for example the cynical, relentless, and decades long conflation of the scientific definition of “theory” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory), with that of it’s everyday common usage, simply reinforced my sense that religions were run and directed, for the most part, by charlatans and confidence tricksters. In defense, I developed a method for assessing the truth (with a lower case t) probability of any given assertion. In it’s simplest form, what proportion of relevant experts endorse assertion X? For example, scientific disciplines accept particular facts as given, only when a broad majority in the relevant discipline accepts them as such. Thus I weigh the position of astronomers vis a vis the ability of stars to predict future events, as of vastly greater value than the literally billions of people around the world that continue to give astrology credence. Ministers may be the relevant experts on theology or church history, but they are absolutely the wrong people to listen to on biology, cosmology and the like.I embraced the reality, that I can’t know everything, about everything, but I can, and have a responsibility to, inform myself about the consensus amongst the experts. In a world awash in information, opinion and bald faced lies, it is vital to have a methodology to make sense of it all. This works for me, but it has side effects that have proven lethal for my religious faith. In brief, the experts in all the scientific disciplines that have any bearing on the question “Where did we come from?”, uniformly dismiss the literalist interpretations of all the major religions as nonsense, grouping them under the dismissive heading of “not even wrong”. A small minority (some 10%) of the world’s most prestigious scientists (http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html ) do have a recognizable religious faith, but it’s generally a pretty ephemeral thing. For balance, http://www.findingdarwinsgod.com/excerpt/index.html, I include someone who seems to manage this feat, but they do appear to be a minority. That’s how I got here, through decades long contact with lots of good Christians, followed by a 5 year force feeding of GWB’s criminal policies. GWB is possibly to the Christian faith what cholesterol is to the heart, it won’t kill you overnight, but it’ll get you in the end:-)

Comments are most certainly welcome here.

33 comments:

Mark said...

Just an observation here, Brian. After reading the entire essay, I have to say I didn't see any mention of any actual conversion experience. All Christians can recall their own conversion vividly, and most can remember the exact day.

With that in mind, and assuming you didn't just accidentally leave that particular experience out, It would appear that you are not an ex-Christian as you describe yourself, but indeed, never were a Christian at all.

It is impossible to explain to a non-believer, but there is knowledge about the nature of God that non-believers simply aren't able to ascertain.

In spite of all the scholary works that have been generated over the centuries explaining why a belief in God is nonsense, True Christians know (without studying) things that non-believers will never comprehend unless they have a true conversion experience of their own.

Timothy said...

Hi Brian,
Thanks for sharing all of that. I have to admit, it is a long and winding road.

The one observation I would like to make is that of God's word. You keep referring to those who told you this and that, but we are all to be Bereans at such point and compare it to God's word. That is the standard for what is right and wrong, what is True and not true. Not the denominations themselves, etc. but the word of God.

I know you probably wouldn't agree, but that is just my observation. Again, thanks for taking the time to write it all out and share it with us.
blessings

Neil said...

Thanks for sharing that, Brian. You've come across a lot of the things that challenge and/or disgust Christians.

I am one of those who did not have a dramatic / singular conversion experience but am pretty sure I'm a Christian ;-).

I don't know any Christians that don't wrestle with the "but what about the Chinese / Indians / guy on the Island" question. But to use that as a proof point against God ignores two important things: A just judge does not have to pardon guilty people. In Christian theology, no one will ever be punished more than their sins deserve. Also, God can and does reach people in all sorts of ways. Creating God in our own image (or ignoring him because we don't like the image) is a major wrong turn.

I'll have to look into your Josh McDowell stuff. I haven't read his books but have heard him a few times. Christians need to be very careful about not giving any bad answers, because one bad answer can undo 10 good ones.

Peace,
Neil

Anonymous said...

Mark : It is impossible to explain to a non-believer, but there is knowledge about the nature of God that non-believers simply aren't able to ascertain.

I would consider my acceptance of Jesus at the Assemblies of God Church at the age of about 14 as the experience you mention, although I freely admit it's all a bit vague now.

There have also been a number of subsequent (occasionally tearful) dedications in the intervening years, most notably when I joined "Christian City" at a Rheinhard Bonke crusade in the early '80's.

Some were intense some were not. It seems pretty clear that these experiences occur uniformly across religions, and can even be "faked".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ryYYCe8qg4

Most Rev. Gregori said...

Brian;
From what I gathered from your writing is that you were seeking religion rather than spirituality, and believe me there is a difference. I am sorry to say, that tends to be the problem of far too many Christians, no matter what their denomination or sect, they are too hung up on the religion aspect and not enough on spirituality.

The Roman Catholics, especially back when you were a boy, were far too hung up on guilt and fear and not enough about God's forgiveness and love through Jesus.

Many of the Protestants were heavy on "Jesus loves you" but somehow they drifted away from repentance and turned more toward a "you name it and claim it" message and many sound more like self-help gurus with feel good messages.

I myself am an Orthodox Catholic priest, but the Divine Liturgy, the incense, the chants,etc., is not the end all, be all of Orthodoxy. We try very hard to make Jesus Christ a part of our daily lives, and we tend to spend a lot of time in contemplation of spiritual matters.

It is rather easy to tell the person who is really spiritual and those who are just merely religious.

I couldn't help but notice your dig a GWB, and in some ways I have to agree with you, as he has turned out to be a disappointment to a lot of people who voted for him, but a lot of people who like to dis GWB seem to have high praise for Bill Clinton who did more to destroy the morals of this country in eight short years then most people could do in a lifetime. He claimed to be a Christian and he and Hillary loved to have themselves photographed every Sunday coming out of church carrying a huge Bible. Not only were neither of them religious nor spiritual, they were and are hypocrites of the highest order. But that is neither here nor there at this moment. The real concern is you.

Perhaps if you could spend more time seeking to make Jesus a part of your personal life, get to know Him on a personal level one-on-one, you would feel much different. Once you have accomplished this, then you can seek out a particular church denomination that fits the form of worship that makes you feel comfortable. Religion is just the physical form one chooses to use to outwardly worship God. Religion without true spirituality is just dead wasted action.

As a car bumper sticker said:

"Know Jesus, know peace - No Jesus, no peace".

Anonymous said...

Timothy : That is the standard for what is right and wrong, what is True and not true. Not the denominations themselves, etc. but the word of God.

The problem is Timothy, that practically every group claims that this is exactly what they are doing.

It's what Mark thinks he is doing, what you and Neil think you are doing, and what a typical Mormon, Jehovahs Witness or Christ Recumbent Zionist (Reformed) thinks they are doing.

The head wrecking reality is that people in good faith (for the most part) interpret the Bible very differently. That Christianity can't settle on a basic doctrinal superstructure (the Nicene Creed was the closest shot at this, but merely because of Constantines insistence) is surely a smoking gun that we have a problem here?

Anonymous said...

Abouna : We try very hard to make Jesus Christ a part of our daily lives, and we tend to spend a lot of time in contemplation of spiritual matters.

As do, in my experience, most people who have what we can loosely call "spiritual" experiences. The dogma, as I came to realise, is irrelevant. However, you are failing to ditch your dogma completely by referencing Jesus at all.

All religions have practioners, who like you, experience the indefinable and the transcendental. The conclusion is inescapable. It has nothing to do with Jesus, Allah or Krishna, but something to do with us.

Humanity is the common denominator, from Anami Purush to Zoraster, the diety is quite incidental.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps if you could spend more time seeking to make Jesus a part of your personal life, get to know Him on a personal level one-on-one, you would feel much different.

As regards your advice I'm afraid I've "been there and done that", and I've reached my conclusions.

I'm conscious that this makes me seem like an arrogant asshole, but I think this rather unfair, and part of the free ride that religion gets in society.

Let me explain. Dismissing Christianity (which I've actually spent come considerable time practicing), plus religions I've only given the most cursory inspection, comes across as arrogant because it implies that I have an alternate answer to the one religions purport to provide.

Nothing could be further from the truth, I've no idea where the universe came from or why it, or we are here, or even if this formulation means anything. I do have some confidence about the details of the universe we mysteriously find ourselves in, and life on Earth for the reasons stated in the original post.

Religious adherents on the other hand explicitly claim to know the very things I have just shrugged my online shoulders about, and will frequently threaten to kill those that disagree. Something that Christianity has happily grown out of, but only after several hundred years of house training. As we all know, Islam continues to have a very weak bladder indeed.

So, which position is the more arrogant? The upfront, "I don't what is going on, but I'm fairly certain it ain't THAT".

Or the inherently dishonest, "I have discovered ultimate truth and it is THIS. Join me or terrible things will happen to you".

Bob V said...

Brian, I was transfixed by your post, reading it in its entirety. We grew up basically at the same time, although continents apart. I too went into the military - the U.S. Air Force Chaplain Service and served for nearly 21 years. My experience in those years mirrors what you described as your own - a variegated melting pot of assorted religions, as well as people with no religion. And of everyone I met and knew in those years, the best and most kind hearted seemed to be the way they were despite any religious conviction. A few that stand out most in my mind, and who actually helped me and my young family at the times we needed help the most, were, in fact, proclaimed atheist. The metamorphosis in your thinking you describe is just amazing in its similarity to my own. Yes, indeed, I can place the time and date of my Christian conversion in the mid-70s. But the slowly evolving realization of the reality of this narrow world view simply came to overwhelm me for reasons you so eloquently described. Especially as of late, the travesty of Bush and the Christian Right. The last 8 years have been the wakeup call to me and forced me to really examine what I "believed." My conclusions were, looking back, inevitable - how can what is obviously Middle Eastern mythology trump actual knowledge and understanding born out by evidence? It can't. The weight of it all in my own life was due to indoctrination. The whole thing came crashing down for me about a year ago. It took a great deal of guts resisting my childhood fears and indoctrination, but I have at last realized with stunning clarity that we indeed can lead good, fulfilled lives without a shred of belief in ancient nonsense. Without fear of some bizarre punishment if we simply don't accept what is obviously manmade dogma. I have shed this ball and chain and life is so much brighter for it now. I take responsibility for my life, rather than looking to the ultimate scapegoat to do this for me. Thanks for sharing your most elegantly articulated post. I know there are many, many more out there like us.

sidfaiwu said...

What an interesting read, Brian. My own apostasy happened much more quickly and for different reasons. It's neat to read someone else's journey. But I have come to the similar belief that one's religion is mostly a function of where one was born and two whom that person was born to.

Mark said, "It would appear that you are not an ex-Christian as you describe yourself, but indeed, never were a Christian at all."

As a fellow ex-Christian, I have heard this before. Such hubris! Even taking the Christian point of view, to claim to know the spiritual status of an individual is to pass judgment explicitly reserved by God Himself (Luke 6:37, 1 Corinthians 4:5, James 4:12, just to name a few). Please, Mark, examine your faith and be sure that you are not guilty of that most dangerous of sins Pride; Pride in your own 'Christianess'.

Anonymous said...

It took a great deal of guts resisting my childhood fears and indoctrination

Thanks for your comment Bob, I commend you for your courage. For me the hardest part was the fear of hell. It had been drummed into me in my catholic childhood, and reinforced by the churches I attended afterwards.

It took me about 18 months to really get the intellectual knowledge to be assimilated at an emotional level. Not so much a fear for myself, but for my wife and daughters salvation. What if I was wrong, was it really worth the risk, not for me but for them?

The breakthrough was grasping that Pascals Wager was nonsense, and that since there was no mechanism to evaluate one system of faith against another, the choices were not God or no God, but God X -> Infinity.

Now I'm just really angry about the level of emotional manipulation I've been subjected to, the worst is it has nowhere to go!!

The Christians that raised me and fellowshipped with me, did so (for the most part) in good faith, and there is no God to blame. This posting on the internet is a kind of self imposed therapy I suspect:- )

Religious systems are ironically, quite obviously evolved, the ones with the most insidious and clever systems to short circuit rationality, and harness the labour and wealth of large numbers of humans, are the ones that have triumphed.

The monotheistic religions, are the most cunning and pernicious systems of control ever devised, and all without conscious direction. A perfect model of natural selection at work:-)

my_own_reality said...

Mark, I stumbled onto your blog earlier and i just couldn't contain myself. As as athiest myself, I see religion as a way of keeping order and sanity. I belive in evolution. If there wasn't a Bible and religion, then everyone would be running around like lunatics. Everyone has there own version of the bible, because they need a way to keep order. To me, it doesn't really matter what the bible says. The only thing I live by is
"do unto others........"
it has worked for me. There has been no divine force. Just my right and wrong choices that governed my life. As for all the other peoples choices who have effected me. You can't control them and there is certainly not some "divine force" controlling them. You really believe that there is a God and he forgives all the wrong things you've done! Sounds like the authors of the bible just needed a way to deal with thier own guilt. Thank you. I read in one of your past blogs, that in one time in your life, you were happy and thought you had you needed, good mariage, nice house, etc...Did you fall off the God wagon. If there is one and he gives you inner peace, then what happened.....It wasn't God that changed that. It was your actions and the actions of others. I'm interested in hearing your views on other subjects, as I will be checking this blog regularly. What are your views on children and marriage? It sounds like you're divorced and Christians aren't supposed to divorce.

mom2 said...

Have you been invaded by one or two posing as more than one or have you invited a convention of atheists?
If they will stick around and read comments by your friends, maybe some light will shine through. Seems strange to me that the GWB syndrome affects them (politics seems to be a great divider) and yet they want to throw out Christianity because of politics.
World peace will not come until the Prince of Peace returns and no political party is capable of establishing peace.

Mark said...

I dont know, Mom. I am starting to think Brian has alerted some friends of his to add their two cents.

I have given some thought to my response but have hesitated because of what Neil said about 1 bad answer damaging 10 good answers.

Regarding Brians reference to Pascals wager:

I was somewhat aware of Pascals wager, but hadn't actually read Pascals own version. So, I googled it and found it. Yes, the point I brought up in my original post was very close to Pascals wager.

I find one huge flaw in Pascals wager. His wager is founded on whether one believes God exists, not on whether one believes in God. There is a huge difference. Even Satan believes God exists. Does that save Satan's eternal soul?

From what I've read here, I have come to the conclusion that all these atheists commenting here are basing their atheism on what others beieve.

As it has been stated by Timothy and Abouna, and sumamrily dismissed, The God of the Bible is the only True God. All dogma and theologies are flawed in their own way, but truth is never flawed.

I would suggest that the athiests here read the Bible, the whole Bible, and not just snippets of it. Don't read it looking for flaws or enlightenment. Read it as you would a book. Then simply let God do what God does. I think you will find your life changing.

If your life does indeed change, then seek out a Bible believing church that most closely resembles your own personal understanding of the nature of God.

There are many many issues over which the different denominations and sects disagree, but as long as the Diety of Christ is agreed on, there is no reason those different denominations should be irreversibly divided.

Anonymous said...

Hey Mark!

Several posters from the Dawkins (http://richarddawkins.net/) site where I hang out have posted here. I have mentioned your gracious offer and asked people to be respectful and courteous if they post. Several having been following the exchange with interest.

Given our radically opposed views on reality however, I'm not sure how long that can last:-)

I'm not sure if there is anything else I can add, or scope for additional explanation that won't ultimately bump to earth in exchanges indistinguishable from trolling, it is tricky when views and opinions are so diverse.

I am happy to continue the exchange in the same spirit of courtesy we have managed to establish, but I'm conscious that I may already be outstaying my welcome:-) Let me know if you want to continue the discussion, I have some responses percolating to yours and moms last post.

At the very least I hope it has humanised some atheists for you, and provided my fellow atheists some examples of thoughtful and intelligent fundamentalists. As a one time fundamentalist myself, I am frustrated at how easily atheists assume these beliefs are simply the result of stupidity, they emphatically are not. Which of course from our perspective, makes them that much more disturbing.

Again, let me thank you for your quite unusual and open minded offer.

All the best, for the new year and the future, Brian.

Truth said...

Jesus said, "Beware the leaven of the Pharisees". The Pharisee's leaven trips up a man's soul by teaching man's doctrine for God's Truth. When man's doctrine is revealed to be flawed, the man's soul is damaged and will not easily understand God's Truth, even though the elect may strive to teach him.

This has been so sad to read. But I have hope in the One who can change hearts. Thank you, Mark, for your blog. It has renewed a thankfulness in me towards God for his grace and salvation. I wish I could help BrianC, but know for sure I will pray for him.

Anonymous said...

As an atheist as well, this was an interesting read. I simply was not ever exposed to serious religious indoctrination though my parents were still religious, to an extent when, I was young. My mother, in particular, has described how she felt a similar fear of punishment and took a very long time to overcome her, then deep, belief though it seems in retrospect to have been inevitable since she is a molecular biologist.

Anyway, I am commenting because I read mom2's post and feel I have to reject this generalization. I live in the UK but I was born in the US and am a US citizen. My political leanings are entirely separate to my lack of religious belief. Unlike many atheists (and, indeed, religious people as well), I was not opposed to the Iraq war and my reasons for disliking GWB are mainly to do with his attitudes vis-a-vis domestic issues. I will almost certainly be voting for a Republican in the upcoming elections because I tend to agree with their economic policies.

My point is - atheists are not required to be Democrats or liberals of some sort (and perhaps this is partly the reason atheists, as a group united ONLY by their lack of belief in a god, hold no recogniseable political power - we do not agree on most other things). I feel this is an important point to make as many people (including atheists) forget that the only thing atheists share is a lack of belief in a god. Our worldviews, beyond this, can and do differ.

Should add that this is not actually necessarily the case with religions. With Christianity, for example, due to the existence of central authorities which dictate what parts of the Bible, for example, you should take into acount and how to interpret them and because there are teachings conmtained here that intefere with most aspects of daily life, religious people do, in fact, tend to adhere to a specific subset of principles which leads them to adopt certain political ideologies as their own that is chatacteristic of that religion or particular sect.

Marshal Art said...

I have to agree with the suggestion that the atheist attitudes or points-of-view presented here seem to stem from a focus on man and his abuses, more so than on actual living according to Scripture. The idea that many are of a belief system due to upbringing only goes so far. Whereas the visitors here have tried to square Scripture with the behaviors of fallen people shows the focus is askew.

A true search for evidence, if that is what is required, could not so easily allow such certainty that the atheists here seem to want to convey. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with wanting proof, as long as one understands that ultimate, no-doubt-about-it proof is unlikely, just as it is for every other theory of origins, or whatever.

But nothing in Brian C's offering, nor in the comments of his friends, indicates that any such search ever took place. One doesn't necessarily find in moving from one denomination to another. To any who haven't already, I recommend Lee Strobel's books, mostly "The Case For Christ". I've been rebuffed for suggesting him in the past, but what I like about the book is two main things: for those needing something akin to proof, it properly points one toward the most researched figure in human history, Jesus Christ. It's easier to support His life as related in Scripture, than to find "proof of God". Secondly, the book supplies info on the experts interviewed for the book with a good bibliographie for further, more intensive, research into the subject of Christ as Lord and Savior.

But that's simply one source. The point here is that walking away from the faith due to issues presented here seems the result of faulty focus and reasoning. Researching sources that cover the topic of Christ as deity may still leave one unconvinced, but at least you'll have actually reviewed something substantive regarding the issue. Religions and denominations are not important at this point. The abuses of human beings are meaningless in the decisions of whether to "buy into" the notion of a Biblical God. I don't know about Pascal, but you don't lose much by such a pursuit.

Anonymous said...

Marshall:But that's simply one source. The point here is that walking away from the faith due to issues presented here seems the result of faulty focus and reasoning.

Obviously I disagree:-)

I've spent quite a bit of my life living as a christian. In relationship to Jesus, praying, laying hands on the sick, speaking in tounges, receiving what I considered direction from God and being witness to occurrences I considered miracles etc.

I have nonetheless come through this experience, and drawn the conclusion that it can all be explained without the intervention of an actual deity.

Now assuming I am in fact fatally wrong, whos fault is this? Mine or Gods? You of course think it's mine, and you consider that anyone, no matter how convincing their Christian life prior to their "deconversion", is also at fault. In fact no matter what the outcome, or set of circumstances God is never at fault. It is always us.

This strikes me as loading the dice, or stacking the deck. All the hits are being recorded, but none of the misses. If we take this principle to its extreme, every single human on the face of the earth could be tortured to death, die screaming, be plunged into hell for eternity and it would still not be Gods fault as far as you are concerned. I think this is a dangerous mindset, after all have only "Gods word", and personal "feelings" that he is who he says he is. Maybe he's not, we can't possibly know.

You and I both know, that a fair number of people become disillusioned with the church, their faith or other christians, and fall away. You want to exclude this data as irrelevant. I say "not irrelevant!!". On the contrary highly relevant.

The question "why does this happen?", requires an answer more illuminating than :

a) It's their fault.
b) It's our fault, but they are still going to hell.
c) God moves in mysterious ways.

The only way to get around the problem of evil is to to ignore it, to not think about it or simply to "have faith". Which of course is exactly what theists are encouraged to do.

Finally, You should check out Pascals Wager, it inadvertently throws the problem into sharp relief. I have spent decades "researching" christianity, my life is unlikely to be long enough to do similar justice to all the other religions out there.

I'm guessing you have spent almost no time on Islam, Hinduism or Jainism, or any of another dozen religions or significant subsets of Christianity. You've just settled on whatever you have and your mind is made up, you have to "feel" it's right, because you can't possibly know, not having investigated the myriad of alternate options.

There are uncomfortable thoughts, that all rational people should think and face down. Religion has of course evolved powerful mechanisms to resist this kind of introspection. Faith and the threat of Hell being the two most pervasive concepts with the primary function of short circuiting attempts to examine the core of a given religious faith. Try and fight it:-)

a) Why Christianity and not X?
b) What if I had been born in Kabul?
c) Why do fallible human police officers intervene in terrible evils, giving their lives to save a child, but the creator of the universe can't?
d) Since the redemptive sacrifice has been made, why cannot God at least prevent the outcome of an evil, while allowing the attempt to stand? This would allow for free will but prevent the evil of those choices destroying the innocent.
e) Why do natural disasters kill so many?
f) If God knows everything, including the future, am I not doomed (if he knows my fate) from the moment of conception? Why then allow me to be conceived only to be tormented forever?

Timothy said...

I've been thinking about BrianC off and on since he first posted and I have to admit that his post was a tough read and he does have a lot of good questions.

My original response was to say that he had to come back to the word of God, to which he explained (Brian, just writing, not meaning to exclude you from the conversation) that all the groups claim that. I would agree with that. There may be 30,000 sects of Christianity, but I would disagree with the premise that they are all mutually exclusive. They may vary on certain aspects of Christianity, but if they are truly Christian, then they are in agreement on one thing: Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Him.

And that also lead me to the point of my despair in my Christian walk. It was after my first pastorate when a good deal of my allusions fell by the way side. In my experience, my theology broke down and I began to question everything. At one point, I began toying with the idea of leaving seminary all together. But there was one thing, and only One thing, that kept me from doing so. That was the person of Jesus Christ. I knew that He had called me to ministry, called me to follow Him, called me to be one of His children, and because of that, I could not walk away.

If our faith is not centered upon Jesus and Jesus alone, it will fall away, and we will be left with more questions than answers. I know that this is purely subjective because it is my experience, but I believe that is the centrality of the Christian faith, i.e., that our faith must be centered on Him, our eyes must be on Him, and we live and move the way we do because of Him. Yes, theology plays a role in all of that, and it helps us discern truth from error, but at the end of the day, we still must admit that what we do is because of Christ and the fact that He has saved us and bought us with a price.

To reject that, is to fall into apostasy, as some of the writers have admitted. All the questions and doubts seem to be nothing more than a smoke screen to that reality. Those who have grown up in the faith, and then later on rejected that faith and the person of Christ, do fall into apostasy, according to scripture. That is fine if that is where you want to be. My hope is that you will reconsider, based on the person of Christ, not the 30,000 sects of religion.

Marshal Art said...

Brian,

You seem to have missed my point. Or perhaps I left out a salient piece, that being, that for those who need evidence before giving themselves over to God/Christ, one can never be totally satisfied. But one can get closer by looking at it from a more clinical, step-by-step, methodical review of what IS known without a doubt. Disciplines such as archeology have shed immense light upon what parts of the Bible might be true or show how likely they are to be true, to a point that many who didn't believe, now do because of it. This is something the distinguishes the Christian faith from all others: there IS tangible evidence that supports the veracity and credibility of NT Scripture that Islam, Hinduism, etc., do not have. Or even come close to having. So to answer your question of why Christianity and not some other faith, for a person never exposed to any religion whatsoever, that would be my reason. There IS something you can look at that is profound and compelling without ever looking at the holy books themselves. For this, I don't believe anything near a lifetime is required for study. Simply seeking out ANY such evidence should be enough. I believe then, again it might not convince you of God's existence, you would at least know why any religion BUT Christianity would be a waste of time.

You see, I too wanted proofs or just something more than just "have faith". While I couldn't shake the feeling that God exists, I didn't want to be taken for a sucker. There's just too much that supported the feeling for me to consider ignoring it.

As for the "trickier" questions you've posed, most can be answered in this way: because God gave us free will. More importantly, the idea is that coming to God after death, no matter how that death occurred, is the desired destination. So much so that the manner or timing of death isn't as important as the destination afterwards. But all such questions, to which an apologist such as Peter Kreeft can better respond, are distinct from the question of whether or not He exists. Kreeft responds to that as well, but not in the same evidenciary manner as does the people of Stroebel's book. Kreeft co-authored "A Handbook of Christian Apologetics". An overview of the types of questions you've asked in your last comment.

Anonymous said...

Guys I appreciate opportunity to air my views and the time you've taken to respond. Nonetheless I remain completely unconvinced.

Is this my fault, your fault or (for the moment assuming he does exist) Gods? Has He hardened my heart? If He has directed my life, and my decisions flow logically from my life experiences (as opposed to being random) was I not doomed from the outset?

I think, not unreasonably, that my creator is responsible for not providing sufficient evidence, ensuring my mental hardware was able to assess the information correctly or popping me into just the right culture. The whole "being saved" thing, when considered in the bigger picture context, seems little more than pure lottery.

Now though, I see I'm just being annoyingly repetitive.

Final thought. Even Thomas despite several years of living cheek by jowel with Jesus had doubts. Yet the second he flakes, he gets a personal audience with Jesus, and to touch his wounds!!

Why not me?

All the best:-)

Marshal Art said...

"Why not me?"

He's made His appearance after the ressurrection. Those to whom He appeared have related their experiences and those tales have been passed down through the ages.

As to the rest of your last, I must now repeat MYself: answers are available if you look in the right places, but none that will be on par with a visitation from God Himself. You simply have to truly seek them and truly be open to them. It almost seems as if you'd rather be resistant, purposely calling off the search now before you're persuaded. It's certainly not likely that you'll be so convinced at a blog, but there are plenty of blogs and websites that can help you if you still care at all, which seems to be the problem at this point.

Anonymous said...

Mom2,
Why is Jesus called the prince of peace when he is quoted in the bible saying "i have not come to bring peace but a sword?"

Marshal Art said...

anon said,

"Mom2,
Why is Jesus called the prince of peace when he is quoted in the bible saying "i have not come to bring peace but a sword?""

I don't know. Why did they call the Colt .45 "the Peacemaker"?

Wyatt Roberts said...

I could not disagree more with the first post here by Mark. He states with great authority that "All Christians can recall their own conversion vividly, and most can remember the exact day."

You have absolutely no basis whatsoever to make a claim like that, other than, perhaps, your own experience, which would count for exactly what? C.S. Lewis describes his own conversion is very ambiguous terms -- not in the sense that he's not sure it happened, but that he's not exactly sure *when* it happened.

For what it's worth, my "experience" has quite often been the opposite. I dedicated my life to Christ when I was only three years old, but have no recollection of doing so. Likewise my son accepted Christ when he was two. I dare say he may not remember it many years hence.

What bearing does that have on our salvation? None!

My apologies to you, Brian.

Anonymous said...

порно фото студентки частное http://free-3x.com/ онлайн студентки free-3x.com/ фото молодых телок [url=http://free-3x.com/]free-3x.com[/url]

Anonymous said...

Bonjour, godswaymyway.blogspot.com!
[url=http://meds.fora.pl/ ] viagra en ligne[/url] [url=http://medsonline.fora.pl/ ] viagra en ligne[/url] [url=http://onlinefarmacia.fora.pl/ ]Acheter du viagra online[/url] [url=http://masar.fora.pl/ ]Acheter du viagra en ligne[/url] [url=http://med.fora.pl/ ]Achat viagra [/url]

Anonymous said...

Both BA and Iberia take been losing bread during the downturn as businesses

Anonymous said...

toilet training 4 year old dog how to train dog to tell you when he has to go outside for potty best ways to house train a dog sex slave training electric dog collar lowcountry dog agility training south carolina [url=http://community.naturalnews.com/members/dogs/default.aspx ]minnesota dog training [/url] martingale dog collars leads training training dog tracking dog training off leash drug dog training schools minnesota big basin dogs dog training [url=http://community.naturalnews.com/members/dogs/default.aspx ]whos walking who dog training nyc [/url] dog attack training in london dogs trained for hunting how to kennel train dog service dog training program in oklahoma why people should train their dogs [url=http://community.naturalnews.com/members/dogs/default.aspx ]dog training debate [/url] train cattle dog behavior dog training service dog training in minnesota dog personal protection trained trained started dogs for sale [url=http://community.naturalnews.com/members/dogs/default.aspx ]how to train a guide dog [/url] trained guard dogs colorado big dog training and facilitation site dog training classes deland fl dancin woofs dog training oregon dog training crate [url=http://community.naturalnews.com/members/dogs/default.aspx ]dog training and communication and michelle and victoria bc [/url] free dog training courses dog training dave walters dog pet training train dogs to stay away from rattle snakes house training shitz dogs [url=http://community.naturalnews.com/members/dogs/default.aspx ]how to train a dog to go bathroom outside [/url] dog training class santa barbara french ring dog training wags dog training dog training collers guard dog training kennels in ny [url=http://community.naturalnews.com/members/dogs/default.aspx ]leash training young dogs [/url]

Anonymous said...

[url=http://firgonbares.net/][img]http://firgonbares.net/img-add/euro2.jpg[/img][/url]
[b]adobe creative suite 4 design premium for mac, [url=http://firgonbares.net/]Software original[/url]
[url=http://firgonbares.net/][/url] software for selling discount software canada
can i buy used software [url=http://firgonbares.net/]macromedia fireworks software[/url] want to buy photoshop
[url=http://firgonbares.net/]windows vista theme[/url] microsoft office onenote 2003 serial
[url=http://firgonbares.net/]discount software review[/url] outside sales software
buy downloadable software [url=http://firgonbares.net/]acdsee download free cracked[/b]

Anonymous said...

эротика молоденькие фото http://free-3x.com/ порно училки онлайн free-3x.com/ порнуха училки [url=http://free-3x.com/]free-3x.com[/url]

Anonymous said...

Hello
http://www.moroccanwholesale.com/ - cheap meridia
You should never take the over dose of this drug meridia.
[url=http://www.moroccanwholesale.com/]reductil weight loss[/url]
Food and drug administrative is the bosy who has certified meridia for the use of the people.
meridia no prescription
If you are a patient of obesity, then consider the drug Meridia as your first choice.