Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Living The Easy Life ...... Or Is It?


Realist

Recommended Posts

My rant I guess that I am about to post is merely letting off some steam! It has been brought about by seeing a member of this site who was recently one of us return to the safety brought about by nothing more than the indoctrinated position of their fundamentalist Christian upbringing.

One thing that annoys me is this!

What is it with the Christian point of view that being a Christian is so much a more a difficult life to live than not being one? Why is it that they like to spout that those of us that have left the fold are just taking the easy way out?! Is this simply a cop-out and another one of the lies they like to portray? Does the statement prove to them that they are the ones who are suffering and thus makes them feel better? Does this give them the “puffed out chests” in the name of Christ? Give them their proof they are being persecuted for their religion so therefore they must be living it right?

I guess I am in particular talking about those of us who from our earliest memories grew up with this indoctrination crap which infests the mind to the point that ridding it is probably the hardest thing ever that most ex-fundie Christians have to do in their lifetime. To live life outside the safety of that net which once surrounded a person takes nothing but shear guts and determination! The faint hearted will not achieve it! They WILL fall away! I sometimes even myself still think that life would be so much easier if I could just immerse myself under the protection and security of the “brainwash” blanket again. It would be so much easier at times just to stop thinking, just to let the blind faith take over, just to give everything in life that one easy “way too simplistic” and unquestioned answer!

But I guess the older I get the more Christianity does not and cannot answer many of those important questions. It hauls up way short on so many fronts! The more one questions the more the mythology contained within the pages of its guidebook cannot be looked at as anything else! I would still much rather face facts in life than try and live a lie!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know- I think it depends on a lot of things, including your personality and individual circumstances. Personally, I found it very difficult to bend my mind enough to accept that Santa Claus is real- AND I never found the church environment all that supportive or pleasant. For me, it's MUCH easier to live life as an infidel. I don't have to force myself to believe nonsense or to 'be' somebody that I'm not.

 

But I'm sure that isn't the case for everybody. Some people NEED the structure and inclusiveness (such as it is) of religion/church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it with the Christian point of view that being a Christian is so much a more a difficult life to live than not being one?

 

Two reasons (gleaned from watching Christians discuss their struggles):

 

1. The Christian persecution complex. Devout Christians are not the overwhelming majority in the US like they believe they used to be (I'm guessing that even if more people used to go to church, it was more a cultural default and a communal social event, and that the fraction of "true believers" has always been small. Some of the early colonists ran into trouble when not all their kids decided to join the church, but membership was a prereq for voting rights; they ended up letting "unbelievers" into the church for social/political reasons and the church went "downhill" pretty fast). But still, our society tries to be secular, so you do sometime stand out when you're more devout than your coworkers (even if they're still quite Christian). This goes with the perennial fear that as society becomes more godless, that God will no longer bless the country; imagine the feeling that you're fighting an uphill battle for your kids and grandkids to have what you would consider a good life. Doesn't matter if they're wrong about those ideas, as long as they believe in a jealous God and that they are a persecuted minority, they will feel that they have to be courageous to be a Christian. So yes, they feel like they have to try really really really hard to be good Christians. Unbelievers must (in their minds) just be chickening out, since they cannot grasp the idea that unbelievers have simply accepted a set of premises more in line with reality.

 

2. They doubt too. The more honest Christians will admit that they have "spiritual struggles" and don't have all the answers for why Christianity is true and the other religions are not. They're just going on tradition, upbring, and faith. When the questions come, or situations that seem unfair, instead of approaching reality with an open mind they try really hard to keep on having faith. I can't even define faith, other than a desperate fear of becoming one of "them", the unbelievers. I struggled for a long time trying to force some form of Christianity to work out for me because I knew that's what I'm supposed to believe.

 

So yes, in some sense, we took the "easy" way out by accepting a worldview that is in line with reality. We may worry about the future of our race but we don't have to worry that some magical being is going to hate us and add to the damage that humans are already capable of. We don't have to try to live out a set of beliefs that is outdated and irrational. You know how Christians like to believe that unbelievers will notice how loving and godly they are, and convert because of that? Well, they can see that we're living without the stress of doublethink and are jealous.

 

And in case my wording wasn't clear enough, just because Christians believe something doesn't make it true. I still flip in and out of their worldview a bit too easily, so I'm not sure how well I communicated "this is what they believe but I think is wrong". This post is part sarcasm, part pity, and quite a bit of fascination and sadness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it with the Christian point of view that being a Christian is so much a more a difficult life to live than not being one?

 

1. The Christian persecution complex. Devout Christians are not the overwhelming majority in the US like they believe they used to be (I'm guessing that even if more people used to go to church, it was more a cultural default and a communal social event, and that the fraction of "true believers" has always been small. Some of the early colonists ran into trouble when not all their kids decided to join the church, but membership was a prereq for voting rights; they ended up letting "unbelievers" into the church for social/political reasons and the church went "downhill" pretty fast). But still, our society tries to be secular, so you do sometime stand out when you're more devout than your coworkers (even if they're still quite Christian). This goes with the perennial fear that as society becomes more godless, that God will no longer bless the country; imagine the feeling that you're fighting an uphill battle for your kids and grandkids to have what you would consider a good life. Doesn't matter if they're wrong about those ideas, as long as they believe in a jealous God and that they are a persecuted minority, they will feel that they have to be courageous to be a Christian. So yes, they feel like they have to try really really really hard to be good Christians. Unbelievers must (in their minds) just be chickening out, since they cannot grasp the idea that unbelievers have simply accepted a set of premises more in line with reality.

 

Adding a bit to the persecution complex: regardless of their relative pull in modern society, fundie Christians would have to believe they are being persecuted, as Jesus taught that if they're not, then they're not really good Christians:

 

Indeed all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted,

2 Timothy 3:12

 

"If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. 15:19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. 15:20 Remember the word that I said to you, 'A servant is not greater than his master.' If they persecuted me, they will persecute you; if they kept my word, they will keep yours also.

John 15:18-20

 

By choosing to be "of the world" we're really just running away from that awful persecution of...not getting our way all the time. Oh, wait...still don't. Of...having people think we're weird sometimes. Oh, wait...I'm a freak. Well, some sort of awful persecution, anyway.

--------------------------------------------------------

 

Also...does this happen often? A forum member going back to the dark side I mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it is easier not believing, much easier. Asceticism is never an easy route to take. The fact that it all adds up to nothing just makes it a stupid one. Just because something is easier doesn't mean it's wrong. It's easier not to rub salt in my wounds and it's easier not to stick pins in my eyes and no, there is no honor should I choose to do these things to myself anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen some Christians who go through a brief phase claiming to have become unbelieving atheists, to return to the fold as "Born-again" Christians. I suspect they do this for no other reason than to present themselves as an example of an atheist who has converted to Christianity, and never really actually stopped believing. Often they claim to have lost their "Moral compass." These fakers generally fit a profile:

 

1. They go from hard-core Xtian to Atheist/Agnostic overnight. A true Ex-Christian knows this cannot happen; that the loss in faith is a gradual process. Even moving from being a moderate Christian to Agnostic takes a great deal of time, often years, and courage.

2. They claim to have lost all sense of morals. A true Ex-Christian knows that this does not happen; that leaving Christianity doesn't mean changing who and what they are. Often, the reverse happens; that leaving Christianity leaves one with a greater sense of morals.

3. While posing as an Atheist/Agnostic, they tend to be unconcerned about things that tend to bother true Ex-Christians. Things like how to deal with overbearing friends or family.

 

Finally, I think we all know that, once the genie is out of the bottle, it doesn't go back in. Ever try to convince yourself Santa Claus is real after discovering the truth? It doesn't work with the fat man in the red suit, and it also doesn't work with the bearded guy nailed to the cross.

 

Why would a Christian do this? Simple; they do it for attention. They effectively become celebrities; a "Poster child" for those who desperately feel the need to prove that an atheist became a Christian, in light of the fact that many Christians become atheists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Vigile and would like to draw a distinction: It may be easier now to be an ex, but what was hard enough to make it worthy was taking my Christianity (when I was one) seriously enough to have faced the hard questions directly (Since the damned clergy refused to.), done the hard work myself (Since the damned clergy refused to.), and been honest about the results I found (Since the damned clergy refused to.).

 

I did that as a Christian and it led inevitably to my facing the fact that I cannot believe. I don't have a choice to believe, any more than I am able to choose to believe that a fire hydrant is a ham sandwich. This process also taught me clearly the profound difference between the type of Christian who is willing to purchase the illusion of security by placing the value of obedience to authority above truth and the type who is unable to do that and retain any sense of honor. Having had that experience highlights the former ex-Christians who are able to return to the sheep fold and go right back to spouting the old party line about having "chosen" to not believe, among other things.

 

Clearly, they never did do the work in the first place. If they had, they wouldn't be able to say such things. On the surface, this statement appears to be the ex-Christian version of Luke's old feeble bullshit line about, "If they had truly been of us, they never would have left us," but it's not, really. There are some types of inner work which never fail to produce certain consistent and recognizable results. If the result isn't there, then regardless of how convincingly they manage to mimic the rants and so on, the work has plainly not been done.

 

Which brings me to something I've observed in my years on this site and elsewhere: The type of person someone is as a Christian is generally the kind of person they'll be as an ex-Christian. A shallow, smug Christian tends to be a shallow, smug ex. A selfish, self-righteous Christian tends to be a selfish, self-righteous ex. And a caring person who is moved by compassion to help others when pain is seen tends to remain a ministerial-minded person as an ex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Marty

My rant I guess that I am about to post is merely letting off some steam! It has been brought about by seeing a member of this site who was recently one of us return to the safety brought about by nothing more than the indoctrinated position of their fundamentalist Christian upbringing.

 

OK, which member is now a xtian again? I must have missed that thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly, they never did do the work in the first place. If they had, they wouldn't be able to say such things. On the surface, this statement appears to be the ex-Christian version of Luke's old feeble bullshit line about, "If they had truly been of us, they never would have left us," but it's not, really. There are some types of inner work which never fail to produce certain consistent and recognizable results. If the result isn't there, then regardless of how convincingly they manage to mimic the rants and so on, the work has plainly not been done.

 

I agree Loren. The parallels to Luke and the not a true Scotsman falacy are a bit sticky to argue but there really is a difference. Like you, I struggled to believe but that belief became more and more impossible until it truly was no longer possible. You don't get to this point by making emotional decisions. You get there by truly asking the hard questions and then refusing to compartmentalize the answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Loren and Vigile said rings true for me. I didn't make a sudden decision based on emotion to discard christianity from my life. Questions naturally leak from Christianity's belief system for those who listen with their ears and to their own "gut" feelings, as opposed to spoon-fed beliefs. It is a long, hard road to clear and honest thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen some Christians who go through a brief phase claiming to have become unbelieving atheists, to return to the fold as "Born-again" Christians. I suspect they do this for no other reason than to present themselves as an example of an atheist who has converted to Christianity, and never really actually stopped believing. Often they claim to have lost their "Moral compass." These fakers generally fit a profile:

 

1. They go from hard-core Xtian to Atheist/Agnostic overnight. A true Ex-Christian knows this cannot happen; that the loss in faith is a gradual process. Even moving from being a moderate Christian to Agnostic takes a great deal of time, often years, and courage.

2. They claim to have lost all sense of morals. A true Ex-Christian knows that this does not happen; that leaving Christianity doesn't mean changing who and what they are. Often, the reverse happens; that leaving Christianity leaves one with a greater sense of morals.

3. While posing as an Atheist/Agnostic, they tend to be unconcerned about things that tend to bother true Ex-Christians. Things like how to deal with overbearing friends or family.

 

Finally, I think we all know that, once the genie is out of the bottle, it doesn't go back in. Ever try to convince yourself Santa Claus is real after discovering the truth? It doesn't work with the fat man in the red suit, and it also doesn't work with the bearded guy nailed to the cross.

 

Why would a Christian do this? Simple; they do it for attention. They effectively become celebrities; a "Poster child" for those who desperately feel the need to prove that an atheist became a Christian, in light of the fact that many Christians become atheists.

You hit it right on the head!

 

Some Christians have a phony deconversion just to return to the fold a 'greater believer'. They think this will make others reconvert to xtianity and make them a celebrity for the faith. There is big bucks in reconversion ministries! Xtians will bleed money all over you if you go back to the fold and show others how Jezzus saved your miserable hide, AGAIN! Somebody say, 'amen!'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I would say that it's extremely difficult to generalize the idea that religious believers have it "easier" in life. For one, there are many people who see religion as pure metaphor and don't take any part of it literally. And secondly, even taking into account the ones that believe religion literally and the third category that have some hybrid of literal/metaphorical belief within their particular religious mindgame, exterior variables come into play. So perhaps they might live in a society where having religion or a particular form of religion makes life easier and having no religion makes life barely tolerable (Saudi Arabia, perhaps Iron Guard Romania?), and in this case they would have it easier. Then they might live in another society like the USSR where having no religion would give them a sense of superiority and respect from their peers and thus perhaps having no religion would make life easier.

 

It's just very hard for me to say that religious people would have it "easier" in general when it comes to life in general. Even if we are talking strictly about America it's still very difficult, especially in lieu of what's going on in our country nowadays. Certainly there where times in our country's past within which having no religion and people knowing you have no religion would make your life extremely difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PhucWadGawd

I don't think it's possible, when your notions of god have come crumbling down under the weight of experience, reason, and knowledge, to rebuild that notion of god so as to return to it. Whoever it was who returned to the fold never left -- they always believed but came here while they were struggling. Once you stop believing, you can't re-believe.

 

I was a believer for what would have been 19 years this October. I de-converted in May. By de-convert, I'm talking about what happened in my mind when the glass house of faith, already cracked and scratched by years of doubt, finally shattered and came crashing down. I felt like I stepped into a new mind, free of faith, all of my religious beliefs gone. I had no urge to pray or to think about things with a religious mindset. I felt brand new. There's no putting that glass house back together.

 

This person who came here, then returned to Christian fundamentalism, never left. By de-convert, such a person would be talking about leaving a church or walking out on the church community because he or she was disgusted and angry at the time, but still believed. They misunderstand what it means to de-convert.

 

As far as what's easier, I think it depends on where you are in your journey. In many ways, Christianity was easier. God had a plan, God had a will for me to discern, so I didn't have to have my own plan. How's that for lack of responsibility? Also, it was nice to believe that God would make everything right, so it didn't matter that there was little justice on earth. I liked the idea of an afterlife, too.

 

I have none of that now. I'm responsible -- not God -- for creating the life I want. I'm not sure how to do that after relying on God to do things for me ALL of my adult life. I feel like I never grew up. I'm also angry when I look back and see that it really was me, on my own, the whole time. No wonder my life didn't turn out any which way; I was too busy waiting for God to order my steps. That's just the tip of the iceberg. My entire foundation is gone, and I have to rebuild it. My support system -- "brothers and sisters in Christ" -- I haven't even told them because I don't want to deal with the fallout just yet. I haven't been a regular church-goer for years now, yet they've stuck by me. Every time they start talking about God, I change the subject. I don't want to lie. I don't want to be a hypocrite. It's just easier not to talk about it at all, so I don't have to pretend that I still believe.

 

I do think it's kind of like The Matrix. The fake world looks a lot better in many ways, and people who are in it don't even know it's just a facade. Once your mind is free, you can see the world as it is, but is it "better"? Maybe it's not as grim as all that. I'm exaggerating just a bit, but you get the idea. I think I will feel like I'm much better off once I get my footing.

 

There are certain things that are easier about apostasy: not having to listen for the voice of God, not having to discern his will, not having to rationalize inconsistencies in the Bible, not having to annoy my non-Christian friends with attempts at evangelism and witnessing, not having to pray, then to rationalize and deal with the anguish and angst of unanswered prayer, not having to make everything fit into a Christian framework, not having to create, maintain, and sustain a "relationship" with Christ, not having to prove and defend God to everyone who doesn't see any evidence for his existence, not having to make God look good anymore, etc. I finally realized that if he were really here, he would do all these things himself.

 

Right now I'm more of a scrawl than a straight line, but it was a relief to shed God. And now, to face the realities of life . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Which brings me to something I've observed in my years on this site and elsewhere: The type of person someone is as a Christian is generally the kind of person they'll be as an ex-Christian. A shallow, smug Christian tends to be a shallow, smug ex. A selfish, self-righteous Christian tends to be a selfish, self-righteous ex. And a caring person who is moved by compassion to help others when pain is seen tends to remain a ministerial-minded person as an ex.

 

I wrote a blog on another site that got a bit of attention (compared to my other blogs) about this exact thing. Many Christians became adamant that they would be very different people if they were atheist (one claimed to have been an atheist and converted to Christianity). I suppose little things could be different. But people as a whole definitely do the same things regardless of religious leanings. I talked about how some people need structure and an answer of certainty to the question - 'is there a god?' But an atheist will rarely be able to answer straight up "no". They would say 'I don't know, but I don't think so and I don't care.' Or they could answer with certainty against the bible but not against the entire idea of god. A believer on the other hand has all the certainty in the world. The type of person that need certainty is much more likely to convert or stay converted. They then talk a lot about the evidence but fail to produce any beyond personal experience and feelings - which could lead one to any number of religions or none at all. I could never reconcile all the inconsistencies between christians of various denominations. Over and over people tell me that I deconverted because I was exposed to incorrect doctrine. Please, explain to me what means of measurement we can use to determine true doctrine??

 

I think (some) that deconvert and then reconvert don't stop getting spoon fed answers to their questions. I have known a few people that have very little backbone or ability to think for themselves. They deconvert after a few conversations of sense with an atheist and the first time a christian challenges them on their disbelief they have nothing and get easily talked back into it. These people are also the type who decovert and loose all sense of morality because they are the type that did only refrain from idiotic behavior because their god told them to. So these people, when reconverted, have all these horror stories of what its like to be non-christian, when their real problem is that they are sheep always. Again, christian or no, they are unable to make their own decisions and simply follow the loudest voice wherever it leads them. It must be frightening to be such a person...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, often a bit of "showmanship" in returning to the fold after a brief few months of engaging in the "pleasures of the flesh" (which is often the case)

 

Had a friend who pulled this trip. Now he's back at another evangelical/fundy church, being fawned over and getting all the attention that many people crave so badly that they will play any manner of games.

 

True deconversion is when you realize that it is all a psychosis, an artificial reality made up of childhood concept-thinking, and imaginary "systems" operating beyond "this reality". When you reach that point you will never go back, although a degree of agnosticism may still be present.

 

It would be too hard for me to go back; jumping into that swimming pool of confusion, magical thinking, and theology that conflicts so much with my present ideals about "right and wrong". If the price of being saved is mental illness, "no thanks".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can honestly say that I can imagine myself worshiping another god/goddess/deity (provided of course that that deity falls in my criteria of evidence) , but certainly not the Christian god. The Christian god has failed, and still does, to provide the evidence I require.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This person who came here, then returned to Christian fundamentalism, never left. By de-convert, such a person would be talking about leaving a church or walking out on the church community because he or she was disgusted and angry at the time, but still believed. They misunderstand what it means to de-convert.

I feel obliged to point out that this is the kind of faulty reasoning most of us hate to hear from Christians. "If you left, you clearly never believed in the first place."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PhucWadGawd

This person who came here, then returned to Christian fundamentalism, never left. By de-convert, such a person would be talking about leaving a church or walking out on the church community because he or she was disgusted and angry at the time, but still believed. They misunderstand what it means to de-convert.

I feel obliged to point out that this is the kind of faulty reasoning most of us hate to hear from Christians. "If you left, you clearly never believed in the first place."

Is it faulty reasoning? I don't see that it is. By "left", I was talking about the difference between mentally leaving and physically leaving. I physically stopped going to church a long time ago, but I was still a Christian because I still believed. I did not "leave" Christianity until I stopped believing in it.

 

By the same token, someone who physically stops going to church to post here, yet posts here thinking they're sticking it to God or making him mad by doing so, i.e. "Look at me, God, I'm posting on an ex-Christian website! I hope you're crying your eyes out!", still believes in that god. So when they return to church, recommit to their fundamentalist community, etc., they do so not out of a change in anything they believed.

 

There is a difference between belief and action. That is what I described. If there is any faulty reasoning going on, it's not mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This person who came here, then returned to Christian fundamentalism, never left. By de-convert, such a person would be talking about leaving a church or walking out on the church community because he or she was disgusted and angry at the time, but still believed. They misunderstand what it means to de-convert.

I feel obliged to point out that this is the kind of faulty reasoning most of us hate to hear from Christians. "If you left, you clearly never believed in the first place."

Is it faulty reasoning? I don't see that it is. By "left", I was talking about the difference between mentally leaving and physically leaving. I physically stopped going to church a long time ago, but I was still a Christian because I still believed. I did not "leave" Christianity until I stopped believing in it.

 

By the same token, someone who physically stops going to church to post here, yet posts here thinking they're sticking it to God or making him mad by doing so, i.e. "Look at me, God, I'm posting on an ex-Christian website! I hope you're crying your eyes out!", still believes in that god. So when they return to church, recommit to their fundamentalist community, etc., they do so not out of a change in anything they believed.

 

There is a difference between belief and action. That is what I described. If there is any faulty reasoning going on, it's not mine.

 

I think the problem is that, unless I'm mistaken you don't even know the person who supposedly returned to fundamentalism. How can you make all these generalizations about his/her experience if you don't know them. You don't seem to have any backing evidence for what you state. If you don't have evidence how can you know why, something happened. Unless you have something to back it up like a statistical survey examining those who leave the church and return and their reasons, or in depth knowledge of the person in question, then sorry it's just some stuff which you made up which you think sounds right. It may truly be the case that what you say is correct, but without actually investigating we can't have any real degree of certainty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Davka

I would just like to point out that my opinion is far superior to that of any other poster on this thread.

 

Please, don't all bow at once. Just throw money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were some great replies here already, but I just feel like chiming in.

 

Looking at it from the other side, for me at least it was a LOT easier being a Christian - I had (or tried to convince myself of it anyways) someone to guide me, someone to blame for my problems other than me, a large support network, instant friends in new areas, and cohesion with my family. Now, I can only blame myself for being stupid (which I try to avoid but we all have our moments), I don't have that same support network, I've lost friends and have a harder time finding new ones, and haven't even breached the topic with my parents yet.

 

My personal reasoning aside, I think some of the other posters have some great insight.

 

There are some things that are easier - I don't feel the need to second guess my decisions all the time like I used to when I was a fully fundy xtain ("is this REALLY what god wants me to do?"), and I no longer wonder why something bad happened ("did I mess up somewhere?"), and don't feel guilty about not doing what I really hate doing just because someone says I should (like going to boring church services 3X a week).

 

Beyond that, life is still life, and it's no easier just because I've gotten rid of a bunch of un-enforced rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ephymeris

For me it was easier in some ways to be a christian. I was in sync with my family, I had that fake little support net, I had community connections (need help moving? cheap vacations in the form of retreats? discount on car repair? just ask your fellow church member), I had tons of external affirmation that I was a "good person," when life is horrible, senseless and cruel I could just rely on satan/god did it, I had an answer when people asked (and they do often in the south) what church I go to. Lots of little things that basically add up to fitting into my old community and my family. It's harder being an exchristian (and subsequently an atheist) in a sea of christians. I don't want to offend people or be a pain in the ass but then I wrestle with anger over what people say around me because they assume I'm "one of them" and they don't leave me much choice but to tell them they are wrong.

 

Of course, on the "easier" side of being nonchristian, I am finally at peace with the afterlife or lack thereof. I don't have panic attacks worrying about demons or going to hell. I'm no longer at odds with my understanding of science and the natural world. I can be myself instead of fitting into a stupid mold of a "submissive wife/christian woman"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PhucWadGawd

This person who came here, then returned to Christian fundamentalism, never left. By de-convert, such a person would be talking about leaving a church or walking out on the church community because he or she was disgusted and angry at the time, but still believed. They misunderstand what it means to de-convert.

I feel obliged to point out that this is the kind of faulty reasoning most of us hate to hear from Christians. "If you left, you clearly never believed in the first place."

Is it faulty reasoning? I don't see that it is. By "left", I was talking about the difference between mentally leaving and physically leaving. I physically stopped going to church a long time ago, but I was still a Christian because I still believed. I did not "leave" Christianity until I stopped believing in it.

 

By the same token, someone who physically stops going to church to post here, yet posts here thinking they're sticking it to God or making him mad by doing so, i.e. "Look at me, God, I'm posting on an ex-Christian website! I hope you're crying your eyes out!", still believes in that god. So when they return to church, recommit to their fundamentalist community, etc., they do so not out of a change in anything they believed.

 

There is a difference between belief and action. That is what I described. If there is any faulty reasoning going on, it's not mine.

 

I think the problem is that, unless I'm mistaken you don't even know the person who supposedly returned to fundamentalism. How can you make all these generalizations about his/her experience if you don't know them. You don't seem to have any backing evidence for what you state. If you don't have evidence how can you know why, something happened. Unless you have something to back it up like a statistical survey examining those who leave the church and return and their reasons, or in depth knowledge of the person in question, then sorry it's just some stuff which you made up which you think sounds right. It may truly be the case that what you say is correct, but without actually investigating we can't have any real degree of certainty.

How am I generalizing? Are you saying that it's possible to believe again even after you've dismantled your former beliefs? How would you piece back together everything you used to believe when there's no evidence or reason to support it? I haven't said anything different than what others have said in this thread regarding not being able to believe again; not being able to go back -- but I think the "problem" is that you don't like the way I worded it. Every de-conversion story I've read talks about how the person came to stop believing. Not believing anymore seems to be common to de-converting. Is that somehow not clear?

 

I'm not "making it up" that people can stop going to church but retain the Christian mindset they had when they still went to church, i.e. still Christian, still believing, still maintaining a "relationship with Christ". Similarly, many ex-Christians have not "come out" yet and still take part in Christian activities like going to church, Bible study, etc. Would you say they have returned to the fold? I wouldn't. They have de-converted because they do not believe, but they still have to keep up appearances for now.

 

If you still do not understand, I'm not sure I can explain this in a way that will satisfy you. Frankly, I don't care. It seems like plain English to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me it was easier in some ways to be a christian. I was in sync with my family, I had that fake little support net, I had community connections (need help moving? cheap vacations in the form of retreats? discount on car repair? just ask your fellow church member), I had tons of external affirmation that I was a "good person," when life is horrible, senseless and cruel I could just rely on satan/god did it, I had an answer when people asked (and they do often in the south) what church I go to. Lots of little things that basically add up to fitting into my old community and my family. It's harder being an exchristian (and subsequently an atheist) in a sea of christians. I don't want to offend people or be a pain in the ass but then I wrestle with anger over what people say around me because they assume I'm "one of them" and they don't leave me much choice but to tell them they are wrong.

 

Of course, on the "easier" side of being nonchristian, I am finally at peace with the afterlife or lack thereof. I don't have panic attacks worrying about demons or going to hell. I'm no longer at odds with my understanding of science and the natural world. I can be myself instead of fitting into a stupid mold of a "submissive wife/christian woman"

 

It's definitely not easy being the odd man out in situations with a lot of Christians - especially when so many of the Christians are family. Often, in my case, it's my family making the comments that assume I'm "one of them" - and I can't correct them because I haven't told them yet that I'm not.

 

Still, it's better this way - very freeing to know I'm responsible for my own life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.