The Christians Making Atheists

[EclecticWheel]

I will preface this comment with the statement that I have *nothing* against Christianity. I actually respect many of its ancient and beautiful traditions and rituals, especially the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic ones. HOWEVER:

I can attest to the truth of this article, from firsthand experience. I was raised Protestant, and by moderates no less, yet the toxic attitudes of American Christianity still drove me away from God. The hatred of Jews and Muslims, the rejection of science, and the constant pursuit of unconstitutional blue laws drove me to atheism.

From the time that I was 11, to the time that I was 18, I was an atheist. Not just an atheist, but a positive, Gnostic atheist, an anti-theist, and a nihilist, who was certain of the non-existance of God, magic, and the afterlife. I hated religion, and hated religious people.

This was all because some (IE: Not all) Christians kept telling me that I could not be (classically) Liberal and still be Christian. Believing in science, rather than fundamental Biblical liberalism, was sinful. Supporting freedom of religion for non-Christians, or endorsing Science and reason, would send me to hell, so I was frequently told.

At a certain point, I decided that God had no place in my life or my world.

The fact that I am theistic now STILL amazes me, after almost a decade. It happened by accident. I do know that it was the result of encountering ISKON missionaries, but I'm not sure exactly why their message, as opposed to all the others I had heard, was able to penetrate my anti-theistic defenses and get me back in touch with religion.

What drove me to skepticism was being taught a ridiculous view of the Bible -- that it was inerrant, that it was all history and fact -- and coming to realize through reading it how bogus that was before even attaining adulthood.  I am amazed to know people who have read the bible fifty or more years, and they still believe it has no contradictions, that it all reflects a single theology, etc.

I have always been somewhat skeptical, but this experience probably solidified that trait.  Even after becoming involved with the Episcopal Church I tend to look at it as drama and theatrical play and a story about what is important to our community.  I gravitate toward non-realist theologians like Anthony Freeman who are basically religious atheists who still value Christian symbols.

I sometimes still struggle with Christianity even with this approach, but it is the only source of community I have, and I need that, and they are inclusive.  My personal religious rituals, though I still approach them as art and drama, are more directly tied to my personal worldview.

So it is possible that I might be somewhat less skeptical if I had not had the experience of having a religious worldview overturned early on.  That said I do value skepticism, so this is not necessarily bad, but I have had to renegotiate my approach to religion and the role of faith in my life.  I still have faith, but I have had to learn the difference between faith and blind assent and repression of the critical faculty.

[Uneryx]

Yeah. I remember spending literally *hours* on my hands and knees praying to Jesus to save my soul. I did not understand how my mind and my concision could be so *wrong* about science and about human rights. I begged God to make me "right" and to make me feel the way other Christians did...

Oh man, 100% totally feel you on this one. The begging. The pleading. The reading the Bible front to back and sobbing to God for a clear indication that either everyone else was wrong about him, or to put the "right" ideas in my heart. Nada. Radio silence, after years and years of conviction.

I typed up a lengthy response to this, but as I did it I basically reached the same conclusion that you did. The church isn't gonna change, and I can't fight that fight or worship the God they do.

[Hariti]

Oh man, 100% totally feel you on this one. The begging. The pleading. The reading the Bible front to back and sobbing to God for a clear indication that either everyone else was wrong about him, or to put the "right" ideas in my heart. Nada. Radio silence, after years and years of conviction.

I typed up a lengthy response to this, but as I did it I basically reached the same conclusion that you did. The church isn't gonna change, and I can't fight that fight or worship the God they do.

Wow. It's amazing how similar our experiences seem to be. I thought it was kinda unusual how long and hard I clung to Jesus before leaving the Christian faith, but I guess not.

[Naunau]

Oh man, 100% totally feel you on this one. The begging. The pleading. The reading the Bible front to back and sobbing to God for a clear indication that either everyone else was wrong about him, or to put the "right" ideas in my heart. Nada. Radio silence, after years and years of conviction.

This is horrible to read 

[Castus]

Read the entire article

Oh wah.

[Hariti]

Oh wah.

Who is this direct towards?

[Castus]

Who is this direct towards?

John Pavlovitz.

I have very little time for smug... ugh I don't even know what to call that. Not an article, not quite a proclamation. Whatever. The basic formula is "Christians don't like gays, so clearly they oppose everything Christ stood for and their opposition to love, charity, etc etc is what's losing them members." Now I don't disagree with the main point (Christianity in the US is declining because much of it refuses to step in line with the popular zeitgeist concerning sexuality et al) because it is fairly obvious that that is the case. What I do very much have a problem with, though, is whenever liberal non-Christians comfortably assert that conservative Christianity goes against the 'real' teachings of Christ.

I had the pleasure, a few weeks ago, of being confirmed in the Apostolic Johannite Church. The AJC has no problem whatsoever with the LGBT community -- the priest who confirmed me is a gay man whose boyfriend was present at the Mass -- and I am learning slowly to be okay with the community as well. Therefore I should be clear that none of what I'm about to bitch about is representative of my church's doctrine -- or, for that matter, of La Santisima Muerte; who I'm trying to establish a cultic relationship with and is well known for Her ties to gay devotees. In fact most of it doesn't even apply to Gnostic Christianity, and is instead directed toward criticism of normative Christianity. That all having been said I am extremely sceptical of the notion that the claims of any non-Christians or ex-Christians in re the teachings of Christ should be taken seriously. If we are lucky enough to see a more substantive criticism beyond cherry-picked quotes from Jesus painting him as a purveyor of love and candy to the exclusion of any actual message, it is almost always rooted in a pseudo-Protestant sola scriptura hermeneutic which offhandedly discards the teachings of the Church Fathers and Apostolic Tradition (they were, after all, reactionary bigots) and even important figures such at St Paul himself.

The Church's job is not to make anyone feel better about themselves. It is not to make Christians feel comfortable, to make them feel loved or valued, or to legitimise whatever identity one has assumed for themselves. If these things happen then great, all the better, but they aren't the point. The Church's job is to establish and propagate the Kingdom of God and to lead mankind toward its salvation. In the lion's share of Christian denominations that includes the twin cardinal sins of saying that people will go to hell, and saying that homosexuality is a moral evil. If one doesn't agree with those opinions, fine. Nobody is forcing you into the pews at gunpoint and there are plenty of Christian denominations and non-Christian religions which will be more obliging. But the part of that article that I really, truly loathe and fills me with a great deal of anger towards the author's sniveling self, is this:

And one day soon, these same religious folks will look around, lamenting the empty buildings and the irrelevance of the Church and a world that has no use for it, and they’ll wonder how this happened. They’ll blame a corrupt culture, or the liberal media, or a rejection of Biblical values, or the devil himself—but it will be none of those things.

No, the reason the Church soon will be teetering on the verge of extinction and irrelevance, will be because those entrusted to perpetuate the love of Jesus in the world, lost the plot so horribly, and gave the world no other option but to look elsewhere for goodness and purpose and truth.

Soon these Christians will ask why humanity has rejected Jesus and we will remind them of these days, and assure them that they have not rejected Jesus at all—they just found no evidence of him in the Church.

This revolting, ignorant, triumphalist, on-the-right-side-of-history screed embodies everything which is foul and odious within the cottage industry of "I left the Church and here are 12 reasons why so you can feel smugly superior", nine of which are variations upon 'they hate the gays'. For some reason the love of Jesus has now become firmly intertwined with the liberal culture consensus which is well under 30 years old; because only reactionary fools believe that the teachings of Christ are a hard road, a cross that must be carried rather than a gooey re-affirmation of Progressive Democratic policy points. The author's preening assertions that any who oppose those policy points have 'lost the plot' are phrased as unequivocal statements of fact which might as well be carved in stone. Goodness, purpose, and truth cannot be found in churches which oppose homosexuality, or divorce, or abortion, or birth control, or women clergy, or non-celibate clergy, and this is an immutable truth which has henceforth been decreed.

But honestly what I find so breathtakingly ignorant and arrogant is Pavlovitz's evident belief that the entire world, all of humankind will align itself with the New Truth and leave fossils of older times to teeter and collapse. Nevermind the fact that many liberal churches -- most notably the Church of England, but extending to others as well -- also find themselves gasping for air and grasping at empty pews. Nevermind the fact that since the process of the Anglican Realignment has begun tens of thousands, possibly millions, of people have broken with liberal Anglicanism and instead filled Continuing Anglican pews. Nevermind the fact that places like Central and South America, Africa, and Asia are such strongholds of conservative Christianity that African jurisdictions were the driving force behind TEC being formally censured only a few short years ago; or that one of the leading papabile and the leading conservative in the Roman Catholic Church, Robert Cardinal Sarah, is a native Guinean. Countless more examples exist and any broader viewpoint can quickly establish that the decline in organised religion and uptick of liberal Christianity is very much a European and North American problem as opposed to a global one; but of course what can be gleaned from that? Nothing at all. After all, Christians from the Global South are hopelessly outdated creatures mired in backwards conservatism, and it is only a matter of time before American and European benefactors bring them the light of progressive Christianity, isn't it?

But yeah, no problem whatsoever which those who left the Church (broadly speaking) because it didn't align with their values, or with their identity. That's their prerogative and I do not resent it of them. Every problem with those who left the Church because it didn't align with their values/identity and then proceed to repeatedly shit on the Church for having the audacity to not agree with them.

[Hariti]

That all having been said I am extremely sceptical of the notion that the claims of any non-Christians or ex-Christians in re the teachings of Christ should be taken seriously. If we are lucky enough to see a more substantive criticism beyond cherry-picked quotes from Jesus painting him as a purveyor of love and candy to the exclusion of any actual message, it is almost always rooted in a pseudo-Protestant sola scriptura hermeneutic which offhandedly discards the teachings of the Church Fathers and Apostolic Tradition (they were, after all, reactionary bigots) and even important figures such at St Paul himself.

I agree with most of what you have said here, but there is one thing that bother's me;

Is it not true that a "sola scriptura hermeneutic which offhandedly discards the teachings of the Church Fathers and Apostolic Tradition" is actually accepted Orthodoxy for many protestant churches? I can't see how this is anything other than a legitimate Protestant frame of reference. What makes it pseudo-protestant rather than just protestant?

When I was still a protestant christian, I attended services from multiple denominations; Methodists, Pentecostals, and Baptists. All of these denominations taught sola scriptura and said that the literal word of the Bible was the only source of divine knowledge. If the Bible says it, it is true, and if it doesn't, it isn't.

Theoretically, when a liberal-Christian leaves a Protestant church, where sola scriptura is the accepted doctrine, and justifies doing so on basis that they were not following the word of the Bible, how is that invalid?

[Emma Eldritch]

I have very little time for smug... ugh I don't even know what to call that.

Dude, can we lighten up a bit on the insulting language? "Author's sniveling self" and shit is being a bit harsh. No issues with your criticisms mostly because I could not humanly care less about Christianity, but there's no need for name calling even if it's directed at people not present.

[EclecticWheel]

John Pavlovitz.

I have very little time for smug... ugh I don't even know what to call that. Not an article, not quite a proclamation. Whatever. The basic formula is "Christians don't like gays, so clearly they oppose everything Christ stood for and their opposition to love, charity, etc etc is what's losing them members." Now I don't disagree with the main point (Christianity in the US is declining because much of it refuses to step in line with the popular zeitgeist concerning sexuality et al) because it is fairly obvious that that is the case. What I do very much have a problem with, though, is whenever liberal non-Christians comfortably assert that conservative Christianity goes against the 'real' teachings of Christ.

I had the pleasure, a few weeks ago, of being confirmed in the Apostolic Johannite Church. The AJC has no problem whatsoever with the LGBT community -- the priest who confirmed me is a gay man whose boyfriend was present at the Mass -- and I am learning slowly to be okay with the community as well. Therefore I should be clear that none of what I'm about to bitch about is representative of my church's doctrine -- or, for that matter, of La Santisima Muerte; who I'm trying to establish a cultic relationship with and is well known for Her ties to gay devotees. In fact most of it doesn't even apply to Gnostic Christianity, and is instead directed toward criticism of normative Christianity. That all having been said I am extremely sceptical of the notion that the claims of any non-Christians or ex-Christians in re the teachings of Christ should be taken seriously. If we are lucky enough to see a more substantive criticism beyond cherry-picked quotes from Jesus painting him as a purveyor of love and candy to the exclusion of any actual message, it is almost always rooted in a pseudo-Protestant sola scriptura hermeneutic which offhandedly discards the teachings of the Church Fathers and Apostolic Tradition (they were, after all, reactionary bigots) and even important figures such at St Paul himself.

The Church's job is not to make anyone feel better about themselves. It is not to make Christians feel comfortable, to make them feel loved or valued, or to legitimise whatever identity one has assumed for themselves. If these things happen then great, all the better, but they aren't the point. The Church's job is to establish and propagate the Kingdom of God and to lead mankind toward its salvation. In the lion's share of Christian denominations that includes the twin cardinal sins of saying that people will go to hell, and saying that homosexuality is a moral evil. If one doesn't agree with those opinions, fine. Nobody is forcing you into the pews at gunpoint and there are plenty of Christian denominations and non-Christian religions which will be more obliging. But the part of that article that I really, truly loathe and fills me with a great deal of anger towards the author's sniveling self, is this:

This revolting, ignorant, triumphalist, on-the-right-side-of-history screed embodies everything which is foul and odious within the cottage industry of "I left the Church and here are 12 reasons why so you can feel smugly superior", nine of which are variations upon 'they hate the gays'. For some reason the love of Jesus has now become firmly intertwined with the liberal culture consensus which is well under 30 years old; because only reactionary fools believe that the teachings of Christ are a hard road, a cross that must be carried rather than a gooey re-affirmation of Progressive Democratic policy points. The author's preening assertions that any who oppose those policy points have 'lost the plot' are phrased as unequivocal statements of fact which might as well be carved in stone. Goodness, purpose, and truth cannot be found in churches which oppose homosexuality, or divorce, or abortion, or birth control, or women clergy, or non-celibate clergy, and this is an immutable truth which has henceforth been decreed.

But honestly what I find so breathtakingly ignorant and arrogant is Pavlovitz's evident belief that the entire world, all of humankind will align itself with the New Truth and leave fossils of older times to teeter and collapse. Nevermind the fact that many liberal churches -- most notably the Church of England, but extending to others as well -- also find themselves gasping for air and grasping at empty pews. Nevermind the fact that since the process of the Anglican Realignment has begun tens of thousands, possibly millions, of people have broken with liberal Anglicanism and instead filled Continuing Anglican pews. Nevermind the fact that places like Central and South America, Africa, and Asia are such strongholds of conservative Christianity that African jurisdictions were the driving force behind TEC being formally censured only a few short years ago; or that one of the leading papabile and the leading conservative in the Roman Catholic Church, Robert Cardinal Sarah, is a native Guinean. Countless more examples exist and any broader viewpoint can quickly establish that the decline in organised religion and uptick of liberal Christianity is very much a European and North American problem as opposed to a global one; but of course what can be gleaned from that? Nothing at all. After all, Christians from the Global South are hopelessly outdated creatures mired in backwards conservatism, and it is only a matter of time before American and European benefactors bring them the light of progressive Christianity, isn't it?

But yeah, no problem whatsoever which those who left the Church (broadly speaking) because it didn't align with their values, or with their identity. That's their prerogative and I do not resent it of them. Every problem with those who left the Church because it didn't align with their values/identity and then proceed to repeatedly shit on the Church for having the audacity to not agree with them.

I also tend not to like characterizations of Jesus as a modern liberal or memes characterizing him as a socialist and so on.  Some of his reported sayings are certainly compatible with a modern liberal worldview, but some are much harder sayings and some are apocalyptic and others are mystical and some seem very harsh or perhaps even intolerant and so on.

It has been said that attempting to find the historic Jesus is like looking down a well and seeing one's own image.  There are multiple traditions and theologies regarding Jesus, and it is well and fine with me for different peoples and individuals to see something of themselves in Jesus, but it is important not to mistake a reflection for the substance.

As to church decline I think the reasons are many and complex, so I am reluctant to ascribe it to homophobia or church teachings regarding sexuality.  Some members leave over these issues, but then again many left the Episcopal Church since it has become more accomodating to the LGBT community.

I suspect mainline churches are in decline because they have reduced boundaries, in-group out-group distinctions, they require less, and they are becoming less distinctive.  This is not a judgment: I have managed to find a home in the Episcopal Church because she has made herself accomodating to variant, even heretical doctrines and interpretations by traditionalist standards that once dominated the Church.  But I suspect that many people want to know clearly what a religion's boundaries are, and liberal Christianity is not doctrinally unified and is in a state of flux liturgically.

[Naunau]

I also tend not to like characterizations of Jesus as a modern liberal or memes characterizing him as a socialist and so on.  Some of his reported sayings are certainly compatible with a modern liberal worldview, but some are much harder sayings and some are apocalyptic and others are mystical and some seem very harsh or perhaps even intolerant and so on.

It has been said that attempting to find the historic Jesus is like looking down a well and seeing one's own image.  There are multiple traditions and theologies regarding Jesus, and it is well and fine with me for different peoples and individuals to see something of themselves in Jesus, but it is important not to mistake a reflection for the substance.

... I'd never thought I'd think on this issue regarding Christianity of all things, but damn, primary sources would be useful. (I mean, to me, most Christians instead don't care)

[Uneryx]

I also tend not to like characterizations of Jesus as a modern liberal or memes characterizing him as a socialist and so on.  Some of his reported sayings are certainly compatible with a modern liberal worldview, but some are much harder sayings and some are apocalyptic and others are mystical and some seem very harsh or perhaps even intolerant and so on.

It has been said that attempting to find the historic Jesus is like looking down a well and seeing one's own image.  There are multiple traditions and theologies regarding Jesus, and it is well and fine with me for different peoples and individuals to see something of themselves in Jesus, but it is important not to mistake a reflection for the substance.

As to church decline I think the reasons are many and complex, so I am reluctant to ascribe it to homophobia or church teachings regarding sexuality.  Some members leave over these issues, but then again many left the Episcopal Church since it has become more accomodating to the LGBT community.

I suspect mainline churches are in decline because they have reduced boundaries, in-group out-group distinctions, they require less, and they are becoming less distinctive.  This is not a judgment: I have managed to find a home in the Episcopal Church because she has made herself accomodating to variant, even heretical doctrines and interpretations by traditionalist standards that once dominated the Church.  But I suspect that many people want to know clearly what a religion's boundaries are, and liberal Christianity is not doctrinally unified and is in a state of flux liturgically.