You know Kathy, we’ve been fairly blunt with you today. Flippant, too. And it’s tough when people talk to/about you that way. I’m sorry for that.
If we could cut through all the rhetoric for a second, I’d like to commiserate with you. A little over 4 years ago, I was a very dedicated Christian. I had some doubts, but they weren’t about the Christian faith, just my understanding of it.
I felt like there were problems in my beliefs about the gospel. I believed in a literal Hell, and I believed a lot of people would be going there. But I had a very hard time squaring that with a loving God. I had matured enough to realize that most people were pretty decent. Not perfect, certainly, but good people who cared about others and typically wanted to do the right thing. I didn’t think such people deserved Hell. In fact, like Paul, I often thought that if God would accept it, I’d gladly go to Hell myself, if it would save my friends and family. And if everyone else could be added into that deal too, even better.
So if I felt that way, could I be more compassionate than God? Of course not. But I had a very hard time finding anything in the Bible that backed up an idea that most people, regardless of creed or belief would be saved.
I didn’t give up though. I knew about Universalists, so I decided to read up on their reasons for thinking everyone went to Heaven. It sounded good, but I just wasn’t convinced by their arguments. I just didn’t see the Bible teaching such a doctrine, and I still believed the Bible was the inerrant word of God.
I was in a state of flux.
And that’s the position I was in when I first ran across articles that pointed out flaws in the Bible. I was shocked by what the articles said, but since I didn’t have any answers against them at the moment, I got busy with research. I didn’t even comment on the articles — I just went to work. It wasn’t about winning any arguments; it was simply a search for answers.
I think that frame of mind I was in made all the difference for me. Deep down, I was already struggling. The doctrines I had long believed in, and even taught to others, didn’t fit together in my mind as well as they once had.
That’s probably the difference between you and me. I get the feeling that you question nothing about your faith. Not trying to put you down about that; just making an observation.
For me, discovering that the Bible was not the perfect book I had always thought it to be, and finding out that some of these church leaders I had always admired knew of these problems but never spoke of them, helped me make sense of a lot of things. It took time, and it wasn’t easy to come to the realizations, but everything finally fell into place for me when I realized Christianity was just another religion. For the first time, I finally understood the sentiment of that line from “Amazing Grace,” I once was blind, but now I see…
I don’t know if that’s helpful to you at all. Maybe one day it will be. Maybe one day, something will make you ask a few questions, and you’ll think back to those non- believers who were so insistent that Christianity was certainly not the only way. If that day comes, I hope you’ll find this exchange helpful and realize you’re not alone.
Finding Truth 
“if she writes something that I find insightful, and I happen to catch it, I’m not going to discount it just because she was the one who wrote it…” – I don’t disagree with that at all. This began in June, and I’m still waiting for that to happen.
LikeLike
Ryan,
First I’d like to thank you for taking the time to read my two blog posts which you mentioned here. Also, I can’t help but think that you really don’t have a good picture of Christianity in other parts of the world. I’ve yet to meet an Aussie who didn’t rock, and I have several Christian friends from Australia. They don’t seem to be as indoctrinated with discrimination like they are here in the States. I will have to disagree with you on this comment:
“But I don’t believe Christianity causes people to harm or abuse.”
I’m not sure you can understand what it’s like to be a Christian woman or non-Christian, and especially one raised in a country where the two largest denominations, the Roman Catholic Church and the Southern Baptist Convention have caused much harm to women on several levels. Adam Lee, who is a contributing writer to Big Think wrote:
“It is tragic, but understandable, why so many men throughout history have supported these sexist and patriarchal belief systems. More incredible is how many women have willingly taken part in their own subjugation by joining and participating in religions that have done their utmost to deny them the full equality and equal rights which they deserve.”
The reality is that sincere religious beliefs and legitimate interpretations of scripture can, and very often do, cause immense evil and harm. And when a more enlightened future age arrives to tote up the harms done by religion, I am certain that the systematic oppression and denial of basic rights to one-half of the human race will rank near the top.”
Also, children have been psychologically abused by being taught the doctrine of hell and homosexuals have experienced hate crimes and major discrimination primarily due to Christianity’s teaching about homosexuality.
LikeLike
For what it’s worth, I actually agree with you here. As you know, I have a number of Christian friends (I count you among them), whom I find to be caring, kind, rational people, and I see no need for them to change their spiritual outlook. If they ever do on their own, that’s fine. But some of them get real value from their faith, and I can’t throw any stones at that.
Personally, I think (like the Aerosmith song says) that it’s more about the journey than the destination anyway. I think the process of working toward a position and thinking the through the issues is far more important than where any particular person ends up. At least, in most cases. There are certainly some beliefs that are pretty dangerous, so I would throw out a caveat in those instances.
Even with Kathy, I’m not really out to “deconvert” her, despite what some may think. I only hope she learns more about the issues, since she feels so strongly about them. It’s really learning to see one another as fellow human beings — learning to empathize, in other words — that is so important, and it’s the main thing I hope Kathy can gain from these conversations.
LikeLike
Arch,
I’m glad to read your open to that 🙂
Nate,
I have a question
If through your blog you could achieve just one thing. What would you want it to be?
LikeLike
Ryan, I don’t have a problem with believers who are ‘caring and compassionate participants in society’. Indeed, there are many – the ones I call ‘quiet Christians’ who strive to do their best, are accepting of others’ differences, and actively seek out peace. I have no problem with these people, either. In fact, it could be said that they have much in common with non-believers in that regard. It’s the ones who reveal their intolerance – for LGBQ people, for other races/faiths – and actively seek to promote their own narrow agendas in society, in schools, and in others’ lives, that I have a problem with. Quite frankly, it’s that aspect of Kathy’s outlook that I detect and react to.
LikeLike
Probably what I closed my last comment with: helping people achieve empathy through better education on the religious issues they feel so strongly about.
And that goes both ways, btw. Sometimes non-believers don’t approach religious people with enough understanding, either.
LikeLike
Portal, I have no desire to deconvert anyone. On my own website, “in His own image,” which regrettably will be down for another week or two yet, I critique the Bible, presenting information that the average Bible reader may not know, about the book itself, those who wrote it, the possible motives regarding why various parts were written, the cultural and political background under which it was written, and many other areas too lengthy to go into, and if that results in a deconversion, or not, I really don’t care, as long as the reader examines as much information as possible before arriving at a conclusion. It’s when the Mikes and the Kathys come on a board, ANY board, and say, “I’m right and you’re wrong, because I’m good and you’re bad,” that I have a problem.
LikeLike
I think some flavors of Christianity hinder empathy, because they teach that non-believers choose to go against God. Therefore, we deserve whatever judgment awaits us, even something as horrifying as never-ending torture.
They have a difficult time realizing that those of us who don’t believe sincerely don’t believe. It’s not that we’re “rebelling” against anything — we just aren’t convinced by religion’s arguments. It’s hard to accept that, because it means God will punish people who sincerely don’t realize they should be following him. In other words, the non-religious get an A for effort, but fail when it comes to having the answer. And punishing people for that doesn’t match our ideals of justice, so they’re forced to think that we secretly do believe, but for some reason would prefer Hell over believing in God.
LikeLike
Yes, Nate, I do recall that as a biologist, Dawkins thoroughly explained the evolution of the eye, but I wasn’t aware that he had made the comparison, good to know.
LikeLike
I don’t think he made it in reference to the eye, but just the general statement that if the complexity of our existence (and the universe) requires a god, then how much more complex must he / she / it be to have created all this?
LikeLike
Hey N℮üґ☼N☮☂℮ṧ 🙂
I have a confession to make, I haven’t read all of your post regarding the Neuroscience Explanations I have so far just watched the videos. But I do plan to read more from your blog 🙂
Yeah Australia is quite a secular country. For which I am grateful. People more or less can practice their faith, and even preach openly, but there is not so much paranoia over the government, in contrast to other countries (at least that’s the impression that I get 🙂
“I will have to disagree with you on this comment:”
I thought I would get some disagreement from this 😛
I have a few friends who have come out as gay to me, and I think church can be particularity hard for them…especially if they are experiencing anxiety alone. but these things seem to me to be more about how people have responded to what they don’t understand or have had experienced themselves.
In regards to women’s well-being, rights and fair treatment, I believe this is not something that is looked down upon in Christianity. At least it isn’t in the church I go to. I’m sheltered to some degree though, and my experience of Christianity outside my city is limited.
and I know that the OT has some pretty confronting things to say about certain things. and in regards to those things.
LikeLike
“But I don’t believe Christianity causes people to harm or abuse.” – yes, I do have a thought, Portal – any religion that teaches beautiful little children that they are evil from birth, and who, if they don’t color inside the lines, will burn forever in a lake of fire, I have a problem with. You’re demonstrably a nice guy, and I have no problem with you, but I do with the Judeo/Christian religion.
LikeLike
“any religion that teaches beautiful little children that they are evil from birth, and who, if they don’t color inside the lines, will burn forever in a lake of fire, I have a problem with.”
yeah ok, I see what your saying
but if God created all these children in His image, and He sacrificed Himself for them, and He loves them, then that is a different God to the one you have an aversion to.
LikeLike
“I think some flavors of Christianity hinder empathy, because they teach that non-believers choose to go against God. Therefore, we deserve whatever judgment awaits us, even something as horrifying as never-ending torture.”
Nate, I agree that some flavors of Christianity hinder empathy. We both live in the South, so I think we experience this with more intensity. Since I deconverted, I’ve lost 3 jobs when my conservative Christian employers found out I was a nonbeliever. I didn’t volunteer the information. Studies show that atheist are consider untrustworthy. I never talk about my non-belief offline unless I’m backed in a corner, and for good reason. I thought you might find this study interesting.
Abstract:
“Despite the declining salience of divisions among religious groups, the boundary between believers and nonbelievers in America remains strong. This article examines the limits of Americans’ acceptance of atheists. Using new national survey data, it shows atheists are less likely to be accepted, publicly and privately, than any others from a long list of ethnic, religious, and other minority groups.
This distrust of atheists is driven by religious predictors, social location, and broader value orientations. It is rooted in moral and symbolic, rather than ethnic or material, grounds. We demonstrate that increasing acceptance of religious diversity does not extend to the nonreligious, and present a theoretical framework for understanding the role of religious belief in providing a moral basis for cultural membership and solidarity in an otherwise highly diverse society.”
Click to access atheistAsOther.pdf
LikeLike
Thank you, arch, for saying that. I also agree that denominations who teach that doctrine – that children are born evil – are VILE. Thankfully, the church we’ve attended does not agree with this and Hell is not mentioned as a place people might end up. I’ve never had to explain that sort of nonsense. As I’ve mentioned before, as my kids got older, they recognized that it was ALL nonsense.
LikeLike
“helping people achieve empathy through better education on the religious issues they feel so strongly about.
And that goes both ways, btw. Sometimes non-believers don’t approach religious people with enough understanding, either.”
I know we see things differently Nate, but I think achieving empathy and understanding is brilliant 🙂
LikeLike
Carmen,
if you mind me asking, were you brought up in a church when you were young?
LikeLike
RE: “UNFORTUNATELY you have to be dead to receive it.” – Here, Carmen, something you might appreciate – I got a million dollars for you!
LikeLike
“I never talk about my non-belief offline unless I’m backed in a corner, and for good reason”
Christians are a minority here in Australia in some areas. And people are def very open about their non belief. There is no backlash really when people do, except maybe a verbal argument. That’s about it.
LikeLike
“Christians are a minority here in Australia in some areas. And people are def very open about their non belief. ”
Ryan — lucky you. You just might reconsider your belief system should they become the majority. 😈
LikeLike
Substance, Kathy? You ask for substance?
Here … from various online dictionaries:
LIBERAL
Progressive, giving, generous, enlightened, flexible, tolerant, understanding, broad-minded, humanitarian, reasonable, unbiased, receptive, benevolent, charitable, etc.
Also — favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs; giving and generous in temperament or behavior
CONSERVATIVE
Cautious, moderate, tending to preserve the status quo, reactionary, controlled, fearful, obstinate, hidebound, inflexible, die-hard, unchangeable, old-line, narrow-minded, red-neck(!), etc.
Also — holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion; a person reluctant to change or new ideas.
_____________________________
You asked for examples of your “twisted thinking.” Here is substance from psychcentral.com (“10 Forms of Twisted Thinking”).
— All-or-nothing thinking: You look at things in absolute, black-and-white categories.
— Overgeneralization: You view a negative event as a never-ending pattern of defeat.
— Mental filter: You dwell on the negatives and ignore the positives.
— Jumping to conclusions: You conclude things are bad without any definite evidence.
— Magnification or minimization: You blow things way out of proportion or you shrink their importance.
— Emotional reasoning: You reason from how you feel,
P.S. There are more; these are just examples that have been illustrated on this blog.
_______________________________
I apologize if you feel I’m attacking you, but some of your comments related to “liberals” is also seen as an attack to many of the posters on this blog. That’s why I suggested the appropriate terminology would be “infidel.” When you use the word “liberal” to categorize individuals, you are delving into personalities, beliefs, and philosophies for which you have no intimate knowledge.
LikeLike
I doubt it, I don’t think a majority or minority should have little to do with it 🙂
LikeLike
arch – that was a KICK-ASS spiel!! (full-throated guffaw)
LikeLike
In one of his books, Dawkins discussed the evolution of the complexities of the Human eye – now it may have been The Ancestor’s Tale, and not The God Delusion, but it was one of the two.
LikeLike
“And people are def very open about their non belief.”
Actually, come to think of it, people are more often reserved. Unless they are asked,
LikeLike