What Is Your Problem With Christianity?

[Wind Walker]

When you all get to know me better you will discover that I am not a conventional Christian. I do not and will not defend things that the "church" gets wrong, but I do and will defend those things that I know to be true and are not wrong.

 

The Apostle Paul said... "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable."

 

Much of what I see in the exodus away from Christianity is due to well founded gripes about the "church". When I say the "church" I am speaking specifically of the churches that most of us attend or attended. None are perfect and never will be, but the problem with most churches is that they have failed to operate as they are supposed to operate. It's a human flaw, and the price is that humans have rightfully seen through things such the molestation of children, the use of fear to scare people into getting in line and goosestepping as they are instructed to and the use of pressure to get people to act a certain way. None of which are right, and all of which are very valid reasons to take issue with and even leave churches who get it wrong.

 

The Apostle Paul was speaking to this issue when he declared that if this life is centered around the man Jesus Christ, then we are doomed to a life of misery. His point was that that either Jesus is the risen Lord, or every effort we make in life is in vain. Men don't raise themselves from the dead, and it is the make or break issue that Paul proposes of the Christian faith. Either Christ rose from the dead and is in fact the son of God as scriptures claim, or He is not.

 

So my question to those of you who are ex-Christians is very simple...

 

Did you become an ex-Christian because your understanding (faith) in the resurrection of Christ changed? Or is it because people and institutions have failed for a variety of reasons?

[Deva]

Did you become an ex-Christian because your understanding (faith) in the resurrection of Christ changed? Or is it because people and institutions have failed for a variety of reasons?

 

None of the above.

 

I decided the whole "plan of salvation" was bogus. I don't believe in "sin" and I don't believe that human beings are born hopelessly corrupt. Neither do I believe that there is an age of accountability. I don't believe that the punishment of hell equals the crime of being born.

 

I don't believe the Bible is the word of God. Nor do I believe it was even inspired by God.

 

I don't believe in the type of God described in the Bible. A God who requires blood sacrifices and discriminates between people according to whether or not they believe in him - the whole "chosen people" line.

 

I don't believe in heaven or hell as described by Christians, although there may be states of mind and places in the universe that approximate both.

 

Secondary reasons - I don't see Christ as having teachings that are unique in the history of the world and I think his followers misunderstood what he was actually saying. No one really knows what that was now, they twisted it so much afterward. The resurrection - there is no proof. Most likely it never happened except on a spiritual level. By the time the church was an institution, all value Christ's teachings may have had departed.

 

The lies of creationists.

 

The notion that a worldwide flood and Noah's ark was actually real.

 

You asked your questions respectfully and in this forum you will receive a polite answer from me.

[Tabula Rasa]

When you all get to know me better you will discover that I am not a conventional Christian. I do not and will not defend things that the "church" gets wrong, but I do and will defend those things that I know to be true and are not wrong.

 

The Apostle Paul said... "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable."

 

Much of what I see in the exodus away from Christianity is due to well founded gripes about the "church". When I say the "church" I am speaking specifically of the churches that most of us attend or attended. None are perfect and never will be, but the problem with most churches is that they have failed to operate as they are supposed to operate. It's a human flaw, and the price is that humans have rightfully seen through things such the molestation of children, the use of fear to scare people into getting in line and goosestepping as they are instructed to and the use of pressure to get people to act a certain way. None of which are right, and all of which are very valid reasons to take issue with and even leave churches who get it wrong.

 

The Apostle Paul was speaking to this issue when he declared that if this life is centered around the man Jesus Christ, then we are doomed to a life of misery. His point was that that either Jesus is the risen Lord, or every effort we make in life is in vain. Men don't raise themselves from the dead, and it is the make or break issue that Paul proposes of the Christian faith. Either Christ rose from the dead and is in fact the son of God as scriptures claim, or He is not.

 

So my question to those of you who are ex-Christians is very simple...

 

Did you become an ex-Christian because your understanding (faith) in the resurrection of Christ changed? Or is it because people and institutions have failed for a variety of reasons?

 

 

This needs to be moved to The Lion's Den but I'll go and reply here.

 

Why did I deconvert? Neither of the reasons you listed. I deconverted because the idea of Hell, of eternal damnation made me sick to the core of my soul. The idea that good decent people would suffer eternally just because they didn't get "saved". I could no longer believe that an omnipotent god would be so callous and cruel just because people didn't worship him, or worship him "the right way". Finding out how barbaric Yahweh was in the old testament, and the horrors he has in store for us "sinners" in revelations put the nail in the coffin.

 

The whole thing stinks. Not only were Adam and Eve set up, but Yahweh couldn't forgive them for something he himself tricked them into doing.

 

I believe in a God, but I do not believe in the christian god. I would rather go to hell than serve that tyrant.

 

Unless you're armed to the teeth with good apologetics, you better move along. There are other posters here who can destroy most arguments for Christianity with the utmost ease.

[Deva]

The Apostle Paul was speaking to this issue when he declared that if this life is centered around the man Jesus Christ, then we are doomed to a life of misery. His point was that that either Jesus is the risen Lord, or every effort we make in life is in vain. Men don't raise themselves from the dead, and it is the make or break issue that Paul proposes of the Christian faith. Either Christ rose from the dead and is in fact the son of God as scriptures claim, or He is not.

 

Paul was setting up a false dichotomy, which Christians are very fond of doing. Always either/or with no area in between. Its just typical.

[Karhoof]

 

So my question to those of you who are ex-Christians is very simple...

 

Did you become an ex-Christian because your understanding (faith) in the resurrection of Christ changed? Or is it because people and institutions have failed for a variety of reasons?

Two options of either/or isn't enough.

For me it was more than 40 years of ringing the phone off the hook and nobody on the other end answering. As soon as I started to seriously look at why that was, huge gaping holes appeared. In trying to fill those holes, the entirety of it fell apart in my hands.

 

His (Paul's) point was that that either Jesus is the risen Lord, or every effort we make in life is in vain.

A view of "god is everything or I might as well kill myself" isn't a very healthy outlook on life, don't you think?

 

but I do and will defend those things that I know to be true

I, for one, would be very interested in what exactly these "truths" are that you know.

[florduh]

Hello Wind Walker.

 

I think my own circumstances might be the most common among reasons people leave the religion.

 

It's not hypocritical people in the congregations or pulpits. It's not the bad press generated by Ted Haggard, Jim Bakker, etc., etc. It's something much more relevant.

 

I tried to be a better Christian by working to understand the somewhat confusing Bible. The mental gymnastics needed to maintain a belief in the Bible was taking a toll. Lots of study, including Moody, resulted in discovering the history of the church, evolution of the Bible, and the many instances the inspired word of god contradicted itself, history, and known scientific fact. I prayed for faith and understanding. I got the understanding, but I had to do all the work.

 

Too much study, thinking and rationality often leads to ex-Christianity, if not atheism. It's a common theme around here.

[Ouroboros]

What is my problem with Christianity?

 

There is no God.

 

What else?

 

I like to think (the greatest sin of all).

[par4dcourse]

Top Ten reasons I de-converted:

 

10-They were against wine, women, and song. Three of my favorites.

9- Hated gawds "leave a message, maybe I'll get back" attitude.

8- OT gawd was reeeealllllly fucked up. Jealous, angry, petty, etc.

7- I wasn't getting anything for the 10% of my allowance I had to give up.

6- Jebus spoke in parables. I hate parables.

5- Flying people, talking animals, and a talking bush. Sounds like a bad acid trip.

4- Did I mention wine, women and song?

3- An old black guy once told me "the harder they thump the bible, the more

you gotta watch 'em. So true.

2- Xian rock sucked.

And the number 1 reason I left the fold:

1- The wholly babble.

[bdp]

 

So my question to those of you who are ex-Christians is very simple...

 

Did you become an ex-Christian because your understanding (faith) in the resurrection of Christ changed? Or is it because people and institutions have failed for a variety of reasons?

 

I no longer believe because I can't believe. It was a case of personal integrity.

[monkeygirl]

This is not necessarily the order of what was most important but the order in which i started having issues with Christianity and what made me an exchristian.

 

1. Theodicy - the problem of suffering and evil is what got all the deep questioning started.

2. The Bible I have read the Bible my whole life. Some things about it always bothered me and caused me to quesiton but I just accepted the weak answers I got from pastors, friends and family that supposedly corrected the contributions I saw and the violence in the OT and the way women and slaves were treated throughout the Bible. It wasn't til I started having problems with number 1 that I started viewing the Bible differently, its like i had my eyes opened and i saw what it really was.

3. Evidence. I looked into the history of Christianity, how the Bible was formed, I looked into evolution and many of the different claims Christianity had made over time (like miracles, evidence of god in everyday life)

4. Experiences- the whole time i was asking god to reveal himself to me if he was real, to give me strong personal experiences. Never got one and the people i talked to about there personal experiences (before i was a self proclaimed agnostic) didn't seemed to be blown away by them. They seemed questionable and emotional. What is funny is now a few of those same people know I'm agnostic and they now claim strong personal experiences with god. lol it's kind of funny.

 

 

That is just a quick synopsis.

[Jedah]

My reasons for giving xianity the shaft are in the link in my signature. You can feel free to read it if you like.

 

If you are honest in your inquiry you will find that the reasons why people leave the faith are completely different than what you were previously led to believe.

[The-Captain]

There are many reasons I belong to no religion but why I don't follow Christianity specifically? Well, I don't believe in the concept of remission of sin, or in worshiping a man as a God the two cornerstones of Christianity basically.

[qadeshet]

I was no longer willing to believe in or worship a god who would condemn billions of his children to eternal torment just for not believing. Infinite punishment is infinite cruelty. Pretty simple. If there is no Hell then there is nothing to save us from. If there is a Hell, then god is a cruel and vengeful monster. He can kiss my ass.

[thefriendlyghost]

I can't love a monster who throws anyone- ANYONE- in an eternal hell. The fact that a lot of churchgoers are hypocritical douchebags really didn't factor into my choice. I was never really that 'churchy' anyway. It was reading the bible itself that made me walk away from it all.

[thefriendlyghost]

If I had a nickel for every 'non conventional christian' I've come across, well, I'd be able to buy some really, REALLY good coke.

[Wind Walker]

Wow, lot of replies!!!

 

All of you pretty much replied with more or less with the same message... issues with the rules as set forth in scripture or just flat out believing that scripture is just a work of mankind.

 

The only response I have an issue with was the one where the quote from Paul is presented as him presenteding false choices. Paul didn't present an either or case to compel folks to pick a side. Paul wrote that the Christian faith was of no value if the resurrection did not happen. He was speaking to Christians in that particular instance, so it is in fact not correct to connect his point about the resurrection with a tactic used by Christian apologists to force a person to make a choice in an attempt to invoke movement with regards to fence sitting.

 

I was warned to move along by one poster, but honestly I find that type of talk very presumptuous. If after talking with me here you still think I should move along, then perhaps I will. But to suggest I move along before that isn't very nice, wouldn't you agree? I didn't come here to argue with anyone. I came out of curiosity. I asked a very simple question and got a lot of very good answers for which I thank you all for sharing.

[thefriendlyghost]

The sign on the door says 'EX-christian'. That might have something to do with it. Just sayin'...

[par4dcourse]

Windwalker, we've recently had an incident on these boards that ended with an agreement that we will play nice in these forums, but xians who want honest opinions are urged to post in the Lion's Den, where no such self-censoring exists.

If you wa nt an honest opinion, and aren't just 'nuther xian here to save the heathens, then post your question there. I'tll be more fun for us, and, well, .... it'll be more fun for us.

[Deva]

The only response I have an issue with was the one where the quote from Paul is presented as him presenteding false choices. Paul didn't present an either or case to compel folks to pick a side. Paul wrote that the Christian faith was of no value if the resurrection did not happen. He was speaking to Christians in that particular instance, so it is in fact not correct to connect his point about the resurrection with a tactic used by Christian apologists to force a person to make a choice in an attempt to invoke movement with regards to fence sitting.

 

So you take issue with my response? Well, that is just how it reads to me. Maybe within the context in which it was written you are right. Its true that I cannot get inside Paul's head to exactly discern his motive and what exactly he intended by it. It is a fact, however, that Christians often use either/or false dichotomies in order to "prove" parts of their faith that are beyond proof. It strikes me as the same type of thing. I think C.S. Lewis was the master of this technique.

[Wind Walker]

In reply to "The notion that a worldwide flood and Noah's ark was actually real."

 

That may be what some believe, but it's not what the Bible demands. Here is an article that is very scholarly and speaks directly to this point... The Noachian Flood: Universal or Local?

 

In fact how that particular scholar approaches scripture is exactly how I approach scripture. I look at what is actually said while weighing in the original language, context and audience and I look for answers that are logical. I do not look to theological apple carts and defend points of view that have implications. that is putting the horse before the cart.

[Wind Walker]

So you take issue with my response? Well, that is just how it reads to me. Maybe within the context in which it was written you are right. Its true that I cannot get inside Paul's head to exactly discern his motive and what exactly he intended by it. It is a fact, however, that Christians often use either/or false dichotomies in order to "prove" parts of their faith that are beyond proof. It strikes me as the same type of thing. I think C.S. Lewis was the master of this technique.

 

I understood what you said perfectly and I even agree that using that tactic isn't correct. There are indeed choices that you (I or anyone) must make when confronted with choices, but my point was that Paul wasn't using that angle when he said that. The point I was making from it was simply that if Jesus did not rise from the dead, then he is just a man and that the faith is in vain. It makes no sense to follow a man who claimed to be God if it is not true that He rose from the dead. It's not given to get a response, just an observation of something that I myself hold the faith to. If Jesus is just a teacher like Buddha or Mohamed, then it is pointless IMPO.

[florduh]

The views of the Noachian Flood is one of dozens (maybe hundreds) of instances where the Bible is vague, contradictory, and wide open to interpretation. A book inspired by an all-powerful deity would be a bit clearer to his intended audience. Ostensibly I am created in his image, yet he can't communicate clearly to me or anyone else since nobody can agree on the messages.

 

Believers have argued, fought, tortured, splintered and gone to war over what the book "really" says. Of course you believe your interpretation is correct, but why? Others have made just as valid a case for doctrines you dismiss. That is the problem with the "Word of God". Since that book is the reason Christianity exists today I think it should make one question the validity of a religion based on words that can mean almost anything.

[Non-Redneck]

 

I tried to be a better Christian by working to understand the somewhat confusing Bible. The mental gymnastics needed to maintain a belief in the Bible was taking a toll. Lots of study, including Moody, resulted in discovering the history of the church, evolution of the Bible, and the many instances the inspired word of god contradicted itself, history, and known scientific fact. I prayed for faith and understanding. I got the understanding, but I had to do all the work.

 

Too much study, thinking and rationality often leads to ex-Christianity, if not atheism. It's a common theme around here.

 

Except for Moody, sums up my circumstances. I got sick of making of excuses for the Bible contradicting science (especially evolution and archeology) and trying to make up different interpretations to match science. Plus it got to point where I realized the Bible had been edited by many groups (Jews, Christians, Romans, European rulers, etc,), copied down wrong, and forged in places. Christians edited other books like the historian Josephus (I've read his works BTW) to manufacture evidence for their religion. The Bible became untrustworthy on multiple levels.

 

I realized that the only reason I was a Christian, was because I was forcing myself to be a Christian, engaging in cognitive dissonance. There was no God helping me with the Bible, I was doing all the work!

[Antlerman]

My basic reason for leaving Christianity was because it wasn't working for me. Now why it wasn't working can range anywhere from really simple answers, to some pretty involved explanations. The simple answer is the whole notion of an anthropomorphic god as presented in the Bible, one who gets happy, sad, angry, jealous, etc. Moreover, this view that this deity needs to have blood sacrifices, whether it was with livestock or the human blood of Jesus of Nazareth in order for Him to work correctly in Himself in to be able forgive sins (like some sort of battery-operated deity needs "juice" in order to function properly, creates an unhealthy view of ourselves and any relationship with some higher truth. The mere fact of that as a teaching about God can never be overcome by claims of 'reconciliation'.

 

So fair turnabout, what is it about seeking enlightenment in other religions or through science and reason that lead you away from them into your non-belief in them?

[Deva]

The point I was making from it was simply that if Jesus did not rise from the dead, then he is just a man and that the faith is in vain. It makes no sense to follow a man who claimed to be God if it is not true that He rose from the dead. It's not given to get a response, just an observation of something that I myself hold the faith to. If Jesus is just a teacher like Buddha or Mohamed, then it is pointless IMPO.

 

I don't have any problem that the statement was written by Paul, but I have to disagree with the whole idea behind it. A lot of teachers in India not only would claim they were God, but would say you are also God. They obviously don't mean the same type of God you do, but it is an idea of God.

 

As far as Buddha being "just a teacher". Feel free to believe what you like, I happen to think he was more than that, but I know you don't believe in the enlightened mind so I won't waste my time.

 

I don't know much about Mohammed, nor do I like Islam, but for his influence to have continued in the world as long as it has is quite an accomplishment. I somehow doubt the Muslims would have a view that their faith is "pointless."

 

Actually, unlike some of my fellow Ex-Christians here, I think there is some evidence to support the existence of an apocalyptic Jewish teacher who we now know by the title "Jesus". Do I think he bodily resurrected - no . He was a human being.