A common thread that I see on Reddit are exchristians asking what they can do to pursuade their families that being an unbeliever isn't bad. Or combatting some of the crazy shit their families say on a regular basis. One of the interesting things about being an in-the-closet-atheist is that I can still say things to my family about religion and they think I am coming from a place of belief. It allows me to get in there and really confront their beliefs. However, I have been challenging some of the things my parents/family believe for well over two decades now. Some of it was innocent questioning as a teenager, but some was a clear deviation from my parents own belief system. I was reading my Bible and I simply didn't agree with some of the things I was being taught. I am going to go over a few of these things and how I combated them, using their own Bible as my source of enlightenment. Christians find it very difficult to argue with the Bible.
Demonic Possession What I was taught: Anyone can be possessed at any time. Sinning can leave you open to the devil and his minions (demons) to come inside you. Doing things that are considered demonic like Ouija boards, watching horror films, celebrating Halloween, sharing ghost stories, or worshipping idols would leave you particularly vulnerable to their attacks. We must anoint the house with oil in order to protect ourselves and be careful not to make friends with people who don't "speak to our spirits" because that is the Holy Ghost warning you that there is a demon nearby. How I combated it: When a person becomes a Christian, they are "bought by the blood of the lamb". Like the Israelites in Egypt, this serves as a protection from eternal death and damnation as well as from Satan and his temptations. Jesus paid that price and now you, the believer are protected. There is not a single place in a the Bible where a true-believer (more on that in a minute) was ever possessed by a demon. Never in the New Testament did a single epistle warn believers about the possibility of being possessed. Converts are never instructed to cast out demons from either believers or unbelievers. Jesus and his apostles were the only ones to cast out demons and in every instance the demon-possessed people were unbelievers. 2 Corinthians 6:15-16 even says that it would be impossible for the Holy Spirit and a demon to reside inside one person. Colossians 1:13 says that conversion delivers you from darkness. Romans 8:37 states that Christ conquered all. 1 Corinthians 15:57 says God already gave believers victory over Satan. 2 Corinthians 2:14 and 1 John 2:13 says the same. With all this overwhelming "evidence", it is safe to say that true believers don't need to worry about demon possession. Of course, Christians will get around this one by saying that a person showing "signs" of demon possession just aren't true believers. The No True Scotsman fallacy at its finest. That's not the point here though. The point is that all these Christians going around freaking out about demons have absolutely nothing to worry about based off their own holy book. Results: After directly confronting my parents about this, both agreed that scripture did not back up some of the more superstitious beliefs they were being taught in the church. My mother quit anointing the house with oil and slowly but surely the talk of demons entering the house and us went away. I haven't heard my mom talk about it in years. They still believe in temptation, but gone is the demon talk. Miracles What I was taught: If you pray hard enough and enough people get on board, God will reach down his hand and perform a miracle because he loves you. If he doesn't heal you it's because he has something special planned for your life and apparently that something special requires you to be sick, hurt, disabled or dying. If the miracle doesn't happen it's because you didn't believe hard enough. How I combated it: The point of miracles in the Bible seems to be for the sole purpose of showing that God is authority and authenticating those that God has chosen. Regular people did not perform miracles and that power appears to have only been bestowed on a handful of people and in direct obedience to command from God. In the New Testament, the apostles were bestowed with this power from Jesus. The miracles of Jesus were considered "signs" to show that Jesus was, at the very least appointed by God and/or was God himself. Eventually 70 of Jesus' disciples, post-death, were given the ability to perform miracles. These miracles were used to serve the purpose of creating more converts. John 14:12 states rather vaguely that those who believe in Christ will do greater works, but it isn't clear what that means. My challenge to the Christians in my life was, what do they equate as miraculous healing? I do not consider someone who has been under a doctor's care for cancer and receiving medical treatment as something miraculous. Anyone, Christian or not can get that treatment and possibly have the same results. I also don't believe someone who says their foot hurt and it just magically got better because they have zero evidence and expect me to take their word for it. Nevermind that for the past 2,000 years billions of people have died, some in truly horrific ways, and they often equate the fact that they managed to survive despite all odds as a sign of the miraculous. Your entire village was burned to the ground by marauders, but you survived? It's a miracle! You're house was destroyed in a fire, but your Bible managed to survive? It's a miracle. Your entire city was destroyed with flooding, but your whole family managed to survive (while others didn't)? It's a miracle. Like the 5 people who managed to survive the Trade Towers collapse because they happened to be in just the right part of a stairwell that didn't fall. In the documentary I watched, they claimed this was a miracle, ignoring the fact that close to two thousands other people literally died around them. They try to find meaning within this, some belief that God spared them for a reason. It would actually make God kinder if you believed that he wasn't over there picking who would live and die. Because that means he didn't pick the 2,753 other people were slated with death for whatever reason. It seems to me that by the Biblical standards, miracles are not everyday occurrences and used specifically for the purposes of conversion. Results: It has been years since anyone has offered to pray for me or over me. I see their shit on social media, but people know where I stand and no longer talk about it around me. Talking Animals What I was taught: Because the snake talked in the garden, animals used to be able to talk. It is clear that animals could talk because Eve wasn't scared when the snake started talking to her. It was Adam and Eve's "sin" in the garden that stopped animals talking. And when necessary, God could give animals that ability back to the animals. How I combated it: None of this is Biblical. Revelations 12:7-9 specifically states that the original serpent from the Adam and Eve story was in fact Satan. Satan spoke to Eve and was crafty in the way it was done, speaking through a snake. This does not mean that all the animals were able to talk, just because Eve wasn't freaked out. She was kind of new around town. It's not like she knew all the rules. In Numbers 22:28 with Balaam's donkey, the donkey did not actually say words, but rather Jehovah used the donkey like a ventriloquist's dummy. Jehovah was the one speaking, not the donkey. For those who aren't Biblical literalists, this one is an easy one. The Adam & Eve story is purely mythical. There just wasn't a talking snake. The story of Balam's donkey was a miracle, not a sign that all animals have the ability of speech. Results: My parents did NOT like this one as much because my dad really likes the idea that animals could talk. But he also couldn't deny that it was all conjecture and not actually scriptural. Speaking in Tongues What I was taught: Speaking in tongues is the physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit moving within you. If you are a believer and are regularly communing with God, eventually God will send his Holy Spirit down and you will speak in this special language. This language is a real language that someone, somewhere actually spoke. For example: You may be speaking Ancient Sanscit, because God can make you speak those languages. If you speak up loudly while speaking in this language, God will provide a translation through another person in the congregation. This may take a little while though, because not everyone is open to speaking up in church. If you are not willing to speak up, you should still speak in tongues, but quietly to yourself. After all, this is your special language from God. How I combated it: Firstly, it is clear in the early uses of tongues in the Bible that tongues was people speaking human languages that were known to the people they were preaching, but they themselves had never studied. For example: A apostle speaking Greek fluently in order to preach the gospel, even though he had never studied Greek or only knew a little. This was supposed to be a miracle. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 14:27 that speaking in tongues was supposed to be done one at a time (definitely not a thing in my church where everyone shouted on top of one another) and that there were only specific people with the gift of interpretation (1 Corinthians 14:5, 13, 27). Again, they were speaking a REAL language. Tongues wasn't a private prayer language, but rather a spiritual gift meant to help preach the gospel. Paul also says in 1 Corinthians 13:8, that tongues will cease permanently. Some people like to interpret that this is referring to after the second coming, but there is little evidence of that based on the original language it was written in. Tongues were a sign to unbelievers that the Messiah had in fact come. It was a transition between New and Old Covenants. One the new church was established, tongues was no longer necessary. Important note: After 1 Corinthians, tongues is never referred to again. The early church considered it obsolete and early writings from the church made it clear that they believed it to be something that was only to help build the original church. For centuries, those who did claim to speak in tongues, still used it as a miracle explanation. They would claim to speak French for example in order to gain new converts. It wasn't until the late 19th century that some cult-like groups began using tongues in the way that modern-day churches try to use them. Results: I told my parents that I no longer speak in tongues, because I firmly believe it to be glossolalia, where I was attempting to mimic the sounds of words. I've never had an interpretation to anything I have said, mostly because I believe I was speaking gibberish. My mother downright refused to believe this, but also didn't have much of a comeback besides, "Well, I've felt the Holy Spirit move so I know it's true." I told her that wasn't good enough because all those people before said the same stuff and we know that when people get in groups that there is something akin to mass hysteria where people are convinced they are seeing and doing things that aren't really happening. My dad later admitted that he is often skeptical of interpretations because they are always vague and it's weird that they always started with, "Thus sayeth the Lord..." As if we live in 1650 and God speaks KJV. Being Chosen (aka Calvinists) What I was taught: God knows all of our choices. He knows who will and won't be Christian. And he chooses who he wants to be in heaven. If he doesn't call you, then you just aren't in the club. It's not really your fault even, because God purposefully didn't pick you. The only reason you witness to other people is so that the people God did pick can meet their destiny and become the Christian that God intended them to be. Everyone else is a lost cause. Disclaimer: I was not raised Calvinist, but rather starting attending a youth group in my late teens that was. How I combatted it: Firstly, this does not align with the teachings of Jesus who says in John 3:16, that he came to save the world and whoever believes in him will be saved. Jesus also states that no one will come to him without being drawn, but in John 12:32 it becomes clear that Jesus ascending into heaven IS the draw. By him going up into the sky, all men can have the opportunity to believe in him. 2 Peter 3:8–9 says that God doesn't want anyone to perish and Titus 2:11 states that the gospel is available for all men. The counter from Calvinists is that God’s omniscience means that he has already predestined things. Where this comes from is a misunderstanding of scripture that points to there being a plan in place for Jesus to be the sacrificed for the whole world from the beginning of time and for those who believe in Him to be saved as part of the plan. Results: My parents were actually appalled by this line of thinking and had never considered this type of theology before. After explaining Calvinism to my mom, she said that she would never serve a God who willfully chose to send people to hell, no matter the reason. For her, (even though this is still an appalling line of thought), having that choice is what makes the whole salvation story work. Non-Christians Can't Be Good or Joyful People What I was taught: Even when people do "good" things, if they aren't Christians, it is done from a broken place. Christians will always be better because our motivations are better because God told us to do them. Nevermind, that non-Christians can never be truly happy or joyful, so they will never experience the true joy that comes from God. Their brokenness as non-believers means they can never be good or happy. How I combated it: I can't believe I actually bought into this lie for as long as I did. Because the world is full of non-Christians who do good things, enjoy their lives, and are in most respects--happy. What does the Bible have to say about this? Nehemiah 8:10 says the Joy of the Lord is my strength, although this is a statement about the current situation having to do with Israel returning to Judah to rebuild the city and temple after a very hard time. An interesting statement, but not a universal one. One of the fruits of the spirit is supposed to be Joy, suggesting that if you are a good Christian, you should be joyful. An interesting sentiment, but nowhere in there does it suggest that non-believers can't have one. Most of what I see about Joy in the Bible just references that people will find more joy within their belief. Not that people outside the religion can't be joyful. In fact, out of the 100 references to joy in the English Bible, only one (1 Timoyhy 6:17) could be twisted to say that those who are of the "world" don't have the same kind of joy as a Christian would. But other than that, there is not a single scripture that says that joyfulness is only for believers of Christ. Christians can find joy in Christ, but there is no mention of a monopoly on happiness. Goodness becomes a little trickier because the Bible does make allusions to Christians being righteous and good and basically better then other people because of it. This goes back to the Old Testament too as the Israelites considered themselves blessed by Yahweh and therefore better then the people around them. Here's the thing about Christian "goodness" though. The Bible states very specifically that salvation and the goodness that comes from salvation is not something a person can earn themselves and is not something they should be boasting about. Ephesians 2:8-9 states that specifically. Matthew 6:1 warns people to not display their righteousness in front of others. Hebrews 13:16 says that doing good and sharing with others is pleasing to God. There is no caveat as to the person having to be religious in order to do so. James 4:17 even states that it is a sin to not to the right thing, but again there is no caveat that only the religious are capable of doing these works. I would even posit that some non-believers show more fruits of the spirit and goodness then some believers, based purely off how the Bible defines joy and goodness. Results: Christians do not like to be told that they are just like non-believers. That want to believe that by their salvation they are somehow set apart, more righteous, more joyful, more good then everyone else. Some may concede that this goodness is not because of anything they have done, but simultaneously believe that their salvation intrinsically makes them good. If you try to point out fallen leaders or the fact that many churches do little for the poor in their communities, they'll be quick to use the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy. After all....a true Christian would never do...that. Praying for Material Things What I was taught: Give us this day our daily bread. Ask and you will receive. You receive not because you ask not. Ask and it will be given to you. If you believe you will receive. These were all scriptures that were repeatedly thrown around. It's become even more common these days with the prosperity gospel. Basically, I was taught that you should pray for everything because God wants to bless his people. This ranged from praying for healing to needing money to pay the bills to wanting a new job that paid more. How I combated it: Back in 2000, I was working at Border Books and Music. A book called the Prayer of Jabez showed up on the bookshelves and Christian readers ate that shit up. We sold hundreds of copies of this tiny book. I kind of believe that this was part of the beginning of the modern prosperity doctrine movement. Basically, Dr. Bruce Wilkinson takes readers through 1 Chronicles 4:10 to discover how the reader can release God's miraculous power and experience the blessing God longs to give to his followers. There is one huge problem with this book and this type of teaching--God only seems to care for a select few of his followers. At the same time this book came out thousands of people all over the world who claim Christ as their savior, experienced homelessness, starvation, murder, rape, extreme poverty, sex trafficking, illness, and all the other terrible injustices in our world. The famine in Ethiopia, a predominantly Christian country, lasted from 1998-2000. You don't think those parents prayed for daily bread as they watched their children starve to death anyway? This idea that if we pray for things God will miraculously give them to us because we deserve them as Christians, is a very western idea that comes from a place of extreme privilege. The hubris it takes to believe that you are not just special, but deserving of all the things you ask for simply because you believe in a god is ridiculous. Results: I remember my mother finding $60 in the washer one time and she got so excited because she believed that God had miraculously given her $60 and it had just magically appeared in our washer. Of course, when she brought this up over dinner, I politely informed her that this was MY $60 that had been in the pocket of one of my jeans and I would like it back please. Did she stop believing in this bullshit? No. Not even a little bit. But I keep pointing it out anytime someone brings this up. What makes you more deserving of that money than the mother in Ethiopia? Why would God make sure your electric bill was paid, but ignore the prayers of a man whose children are starving to death? What makes you so goddamn special. They rarely have an answer for it other than...you guessed it...God works in mysterious ways. Not really a mystery here though. Church Attendance What I was taught: We attend church because the Bible says that we should not forsake the fellowship of other believers. We attend several times a week because each service is unique in their approaches. Sunday school on Sunday morning followed by morning service which is more for "the masses". Sunday evening service is more relaxed and treated like a longer Bible Study. (these days this would be a small group) Wednesday night service is to replenish the believer mid-way through the week. Service is more focused on worship. Some churches will have youth group on Wednesday nights. Friday nights are special prayer or worship services, usually under the guise of a ministry or special guest. Yes, you read that right. From the age of 4-17, I attended church 3-5 times a week not including revivals which were usually every night for a week or two. My parents were active in the church on the worship team, children's church, youth ministry, VBS, etc. When we went on vacations, my parents would drag us to some random church in whatever town or city we were in. It was awkward to explain to people that no, we didn't live here and we would probably never come back. My parents just thought that attending church was so important, that we couldn't even take a break during vacation. How I combated it: At 17, I ended up leaving my parents church. At first, I continued doing all the things my parents had done. I attended several days a week and was actively involved. (To be clear, until the day I left the church 7 years ago, I was always actively involved in the church.) But I also started to think about how much time had been robbed from my family because of church. We spent the vast majority of our Sunday at the church. We didn't get to have family breakfasts or go on day trips or visit with friends. I also pointed out to people that whether one goes to church or not, the state of your salvation is not at stake. People agreed, and yet the pressure to go was there. Results: By the time I was 21, I was down to one or two services a week and my parents were grappling with the heavy toll all this church attendance had taken on our family. When my dad was passed over as worship leader, despite spending years giving to the church, it became clear to him that none of his sacrifice had meant anything to the people in charge. He was just another guy who could play guitar. If he hadn't done it, someone else would have. He told me once that he absolutely regretted the years of service he put into the church and sees now how it took away his time with his family. I mean, our family lost years to the church. And I can't tell you how much I would have loved to have two parents who weren't exhausted all the time and more worried about their church attendance then the time they spent with their children. These days, my parents can go weeks without going to church. And my dad especially prioritizes family time over the church. Church Membership What I was taught: If you are a true believer and are attending a church regularly, you should become a member of a church. This is a contract between you and the church stating that you will obey their rules, tithe your money to them, and when you do things they disagree with, be disciplined by them. If you are a part of denomination, that membership can be moved to another church but only with permission, otherwise you are stuck and can't become a member somewhere else. Some churches want you to be a member before you can start volunteering to do things with the church as they want to make sure that you are truly aligned with their church and its teachings. How I combated it: Show me one scripture verse where it says you have to be a member of a church. Also, who keeps track of this shit? I have attended and been a member of several churches. No one called the other ones (or even asked where I used to attend) to make sure I had been a good member. If there is actual documentation, I've never seen it. It isn't legally binding in any way. As for the volunteering thing, what kind of lunatic organization would refuse to accept volunteers for events based solely on whether you are a member or not. I've volunteered for numerous organizations and, at most, I've signed a waiver saying I won't sue them if I get hurt. I've never been required to donate 10% of my money to them, agree with all their tenants of faith, or agree to be disciplined by them if I do something they don't like. They can ask me not to volunteer anymore, but I don't have to sign anything. Results: My parents have not been a member of a church in 20 years. Even the churches they were fully behind and liked, they have not signed anything. Anytime the subject has come up, I just shake my head sadly and state how unBiblical that is. They agree.
0 Comments
Part of my job as an editor requires me to read books that aren't always my cup of tea. For example, a book on China's globalization strategies is certainly not the gripping read I would choose for myself. However, I get paid money and thus, I read anything that is put in front of me.
This week I got to read a young woman's memoir on her sexual exploits and general sluttiness. I don't use that term slut lightly. In fact, it's a term I have been taught never to use. But this woman happily takes up the moniker and seems blissful in its use. She quit counting sexual partners at 75. This number seems absolutely crazy to me, not just because of my repressed religious upbringing, but because it IS absolutely nuts. Most were one-night-stands although several were repeats over a period of years. On top of the constant Tinder hook-ups, there was also copious amounts of sexting and a few dates that never led to sex for whatever reasons. Who has time for all this? As I read, I realized that while I would choose to play board games, read, write, go to a museum, watch a movie, paint miniatures, or play violin...this woman is simply using her free time to have sex. When she is bored, she hops on Tinder and finds someone to hook up with. Lunch sex, dinner sex, late night sex, bar hookups. When she is traveling, part of the adventure of a new place is seeing what the local sex cuisine is like. Again, not what I would do, but then, she probably would think my life is super boring and definitely sexually repressed. I appreciate how matter-of-fact she is. That she never says anything against anyone who lives their life differently. She is unapologetic in her sexual exploits, but makes no judgment concerning others. In a way, this was a refreshing view of sex. I was taught all my life that sex always had an emotional attachment to it. That you couldn't help but develop feelings for the person you were intimate with. This woman proves that wrong. Although she had feelings for some of the men she encountered, very few of them did she care about on any emotional level. It was a bit of fun. Her version of a rousing board game night. She talks about how nice it is to have early evening sex and then go out by herself for dinner and to read. It literally meant nothing more than a good time. Sometimes the encounters were obviously less than optimal. And she's a bit of a hypocrite at times. Like the time she had an evening with a banker off Tinder who didn't even remember her the next week when looking for another one-night-fling. This really bothered her, that he didn't recognize her and the evening meant nothing. Yet, she admits that she doesn't remember all her sexual encounters and some of them were too blasse to even write about. If that is the case then you wonder how many people she has mistakenly not recognized on the street after a sexual encounter or who she tried to have sex with again through Tinder or Pure, without realizing that she already had. If sexuality was a pendulum, I feel like this woman's story would be at the complete opposite of the arc from mine. Virgin bride with only one partner on one side. Self-proclaimed slut who, even though she has a fiancee now, will never be monogamous on the other. Honestly, I think there is problem a much healthier version in the middle. |
AuthorThis is a personal, but secret, blog archiving my deconversion from a Christian to a non-believer. Archives
December 2020
Categories |