Was "having Faith" Stressful?

[Mike D]

I was thinking the other day how many times I "got saved" when I was a Christian. The first time I asked Jesus into my heart I think I was about 10, but I never experienced the "whole new person" thingy that's supposed to happen, I suppose because of my age. But my parents told me to just "have faith" that I was saved and that would be good enough for god. Well as I grew older I started having doubts my salvation really stuck so I went through the whole thing again. The second time I did this, I realized there wasn't really any way to know for sure you were truely "saved" at least not in any objective way. Of course depending on what denomination you are in some people will say that speaking in tongues confirms it, or if you are truely saved you will have stopped sinning, blah blah blah. But there was never really one clear answer from denomination to denomination.....in each instance, you are instructed to just "have faith" that you believe the right thing. WTF?

 

Anyway after a number of years of this I started realizing how stressed out I was becoming because there's so much "faith" involved. Not just does god exist, but am I in the right religion, am I in the right denomination of Christianity, am I reading the Bible correctly, am I saved the "right way", etc.? The problem with all this is that you have to make multiple leaps of faith to get to one belief and in the end there's really nothing objective for you to refer back to if you have doubts, which I had plenty of. And I know I know, i've heard plenty of Christians say "it takes just as much faith to be an atheist!". I totally disagree, because as an atheist all I am doing is disbelieving the god claims of others. There is no religious faith involved in the act of disbelieving what someone tells you.

 

I guess my point of this whole post is I realized that religious faith of any kind is too stressful for me, because I must accept something as true without being able to confirm that it really is, then base every aspect of my life on it. That's every waking moment if you want to walk with Jesus. However, as an atheist I just stick to what I know, and what I know comes from validated facts obtained through objective means (i.e. empirical data, evidence, etc), and there's nothing stressful about facts because if I am in doubt I can test them. So I guess that's another reason I choose not to "have faith" anymore.... who needs the stress?

[insomniac]

Yeah it's an obscenely difficult and stressful task to submit to some invisible external god who doesn't even have a myspace.

[Mike D]

Exactly.

 

That reminds me the other thing I forgot to say along the lines of being able to test things. Facts can be tested, but faith can't. If I want to know if Jesus is real and I ask him to appear in my living room to confirm it, I will be very disappointed. In fact I think the Bible even tells us to not test God, for if we do we are in effect mocking him .

[insomniac]

Facts can be tested, but faith can't.

 

I've found a lot of circular logic in xian thinking. For example, I find it hard to put faith in a god that doesnt DO anything. yet xian logic argues that faith is faith because it's a "hope of things not seen," therefore faith justifies having faith. Why is Jesus God? because the bible sez. Why the bible? because by now you met Jesus.

[Ouroboros]

In fact I think the Bible even tells us to not test God, for if we do we are in effect mocking him.

Right. And that's why Idiotic Dumbness (Intelligent Design) is worthless as science. Because in science you should be able to do a test. But God can't and shouldn't be tested. So the God concept is not and cannot be considered science... ever. Unless God comes down and tell us to test him.

 

But then again:

Malachi 3:10

Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this," says the Lord Almighty, "and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it.

Would that be an argument that the Judeo God is not the same as the Christian?

 

And I tested God in this, according to the scripture. I was giving tithe, and I almost went bankrupt. Since I deconverted my finances turn to the better. God blesses he who does NOT believe or trust him.

[LosingMyReligion]

Was having faith stressful? I can answer with an affirmative hell yes.

 

The irony is that Christ Insanity is supposed to give you peace and contentment. The entire seven years I was a devout christian I was unbelieveably stressed out, emotionally. I was always worrying about going to hell or missing the rapture.

 

I used to always worry about whether or not I had been saved the right way. I kept replaying my conversion experience over and over again...I didn't say, precisely, that I wanted Jesus as Lord of my life...So am I going to hell on a technicality? So I would stay up nights praying and watching TBN and getting saved over and over again(I think I've been saved atleast 200 times).

 

Furthermore, I worried about whether or not I was "Lukewarm." I would do the most humiliating stuff to myself to try and prove that I was "on fire for god." I would carry a bible around, buy gospel music cd's, and then preach to any and everybody that I ever met.

 

Even my mother, a devout christian, told me that I needed to chill out with my christian zealotry...

 

I was stressing myself to the point of having migraines.

 

Remebering all of this makes me so glad that the religion is just as phony as the rest of them.

 

I'm still a believer in a higher power but I refuse to allow a religion to drag me into the doldrums.

 

 

P.S.

 

If the god of the bible wants us to know that he is real then he is doing a really shitty job of providing evidence.

 

And, he is a jerk off. He ruined my life and he wants me to love and adore him for that?

[Mike D]

Totally agree with what everyone said. I also worried about getting sent to hell on a technicality, like for some misunderstanding about the "correct" way to get saved, or not being able to speak in tounges, or yeah not being "on fire for Jebus!".

 

I think I remember seeing that verse about testing God on the tithes thing, and yeah it didn't work for me either. Well I didn't work because I was bad at managing my money, not because any god had anything to do with it. Although I vaugely remember some other part of the Bible where it says DO NOT test the Lord.... anyone familiar with this?

[insomniac]

I think I remember seeing that verse about testing God on the tithes thing, and yeah it didn't work for me either. Well I didn't work because I was bad at managing my money, not because any god had anything to do with it. Although I vaugely remember some other part of the Bible where it says DO NOT test the Lord.... anyone familiar with this?

"Thou shalt not put the Lord, thy God, to the test" (Matt. 4:7).

 

this is when satan tempts jesus the second time.

[Mike D]

Ah thanks I knew I wasn't hallucinating it. So in one part of the Bible god tells us to test him, but then in another part of the Bible god tells us not to test him. Got it

[Godless Wonder]

I guess my point of this whole post is I realized that religious faith of any kind is too stressful for me, because I must accept something as true without being able to confirm that it really is, then base every aspect of my life on it. That's every waking moment if you want to walk with Jesus. However, as an atheist I just stick to what I know, and what I know comes from validated facts obtained through objective means (i.e. empirical data, evidence, etc), and there's nothing stressful about facts because if I am in doubt I can test them. So I guess that's another reason I choose not to "have faith" anymore.... who needs the stress?

 

While I don't disagree that having faith is probably stressful -- as a never-Christian I wouldn't really be ina position to know -- this strikes me as more of a side-issue than as getting to the crux of the matter. (Hmmm. Now I have to wonder about the etymology of "crux" being used that way....) Anyway...

 

The best definition of faith I've been able to come up with over the past few years is this: Faith is believing to a degree of certainty which exceeds that warranted by the available evidence.

 

Of course attempting to believe something to a degree of certainty which exceeds that warranted by the available evidenceis stressful. How do you even go about doing it? How could I believe, for instance, in the existence of leprechauns, were I to attempt it? How does one go about attempting to believe something? It's kind of a crazy thing to even suggest, this attempting to believe weird things. And then add to this that you're told that you must do it, and failing means you're under penalty of torture worse than that imaginable by mortl man? No wonder that's stressful.

 

But, the stress is completely a side effect of the situation that the person under stress has, to some degree bought into. The stress is not the reason to get out. The faulty premises, which if accepted result in stress, are the reason to get out.

 

The lack of stress on getting out is a side benefit of getting out. The stress is not the reason to get out.

 

Probably I state the obvious -- but then, what's obvious to me is so rarely obvious to others that I can never be sure about the obviousness of something.

[Mike D]

How does one go about attempting to believe something? It's kind of a crazy thing to even suggest, this attempting to believe weird things.

While I understand where you are going with this, there are certain things that I would have to say I personally "believe" and I take on faith... for example some things I have read about quantum field theory seem pretty "weird" if you ask me, and my understanding is that much of it isn't even based on observations or direct evidence, but on inferences. What would I do if a scientist told me he inferred the existence of invisible magical leprechauns? Do I accept what he says because it's presented as science with a fancy name, i.e. quantum field theory vs. invisible magical leprechauns? Anyway my point here is that I pretty much just believe what scientists tell me on this, which I suppose is a matter of faith. But this doesn't stress me out, because scientists aren't threatening to brutally torture me if I don't believe them. Which you pretty much pointed out. But I guess what I am saying here is that there are certain things I would say I take on faith, although it's not some religious type of faith that requires me to change my life upon acceptance of it.

[Ouroboros]

Mike D, agree, just and addition:

 

And also, the scientist will change the theories when new better theories are at hand. So if Quantum Field Theory suddenly can be replaced with a Loop Quantum Gravity theory instead and it proves to be more accurate and improve the understanding, then it is replaced.

[Godless Wonder]

How does one go about attempting to believe something? It's kind of a crazy thing to even suggest, this attempting to believe weird things.

While I understand where you are going with this, there are certain things that I would have to say I personally "believe" and I take on faith... for example some things I have read about quantum field theory seem pretty "weird" if you ask me, and my understanding is that much of it isn't even based on observations or direct evidence, but on inferences.

But, most of the weirdness predicted by quantum theory has been borne out in observation, eg.. the double slit experiment. If you believe quantum theory on faith (that is, if you believe it to a degree of certainty which exceeds that warranted by the avaliable evidence) then that is your failing, not the failing of quantum theory.

 

What would I do if a scientist told me he inferred the existence of invisible magical leprechauns? Do I accept what he says because it's presented as science with a fancy name, i.e. quantum field theory vs. invisible magical leprechauns?

Of course not, fool.

Anyway my point here is that I pretty much just believe what scientists tell me on this, which I suppose is a matter of faith. But this doesn't stress me out, because scientists aren't threatening to brutally torture me if I don't believe them.

Good point. Scientists have earned a bit of trust, on account of delivering the goods, (those goods being sometimes good and sometimes bad) unlike so many preachers who promise all sorts of things, but fail to deliver anything concrete at all, most especially when their promises are of a concrete nature.

 

Which you pretty much pointed out. But I guess what I am saying here is that there are certain things I would say I take on faith, although it's not some religious type of faith that requires me to change my life upon acceptance of it.

I would fault you for taking it on faith then. Faith, of any kind -- and by that I mean believing things to a degree of certainty which exceeds that warranted by the available evidence -- is always a bad thing and unethical., in my estimation.

 

And as you note, nobody is asking you to "believe" quantum theories. Mostly they're saying, "Look at this, istn't his weird? Quantum theory predicts this very bizarre counter intuitive result! Let's try to figure a way to test it!"

[Mike D]

If you believe quantum theory on faith (that is, if you believe it to a degree of certainty which exceeds that warranted by the avaliable evidence) then that is your failing, not the failing of quantum theory.

Well yes, for those of us who are not career cosmologists or who have lots of free time to study the area of quantum field theory with any depth, then I guess we are all failures for taking what we are told about it on faith.

 

Of course not, fool.

That was a rhetorical question, it didn't require an answer. And it definitely didn't require name calling

 

I would fault you for taking it on faith then. Faith, of any kind -- and by that I mean believing things to a degree of certainty which exceeds that warranted by the available evidence -- is always a bad thing and unethical., in my estimation.

Ahh I see, so now the non-coslmologists and the unstudied in the field are faulty and unethical for taking what we are told on faith? Of course nobody is forcing me to believe what I am told, but there's lots of things i've been told/taught during the course of my life ~ especially in the area of science and history ~ that I pretty much must take on faith because I either haven't been in a position to personally examine all the available evidence myself, or I was not present at the time said history occured. So as faulty or unethical as you feel it is, it sort of follows that I have to take those things on faith.

 

Going back to your question "how does one believe something".... does this mean you reject (i.e. don't believe) any and all scientific claims until you can personally examine the evidence yourself? If so, do you actually do this yourself in a lab enviornment, or do you just review published papers dcoumenting the experiments as carried out by others?

[Asimov]

No, my faith was never stressfull at all.

[Ouroboros]

I have to go with Mike D on this. Because I've read a lot about scientific theories and studies, but most of them I have never done myself. I trust the book or article to be honest and to report the findings accurately, but also I trust the scientist (proclaiming certain findings) to be honest. And sometimes this actually fails. Fortunately, the community of scientists usually refute or support new found ideas, and I (again) trust them to be honest when they do so. In lack of my own particle accelerator (way to expensive) and my lack of years of study to become some sort of professor, I can only assume a certain level of integrity of the people performing the experiments, doing the calculations and the media that reports it. In essence, some faith does come into play. (And now I'm gonna get chopped into pieces again. )

[narcissist]

Yes.

 

The stress of living in a world / reality that wasn't behaving the way the christians taught that it would behave.

 

The stress of being told that God has all the answers, but finding him strangely silent when you go to him looking for answers.

 

The stress caused when god doesn't answer your prayers, when you're indoctrinated with the "fact" that god always answers your prayers.

 

The stress of guilt of sin, and a god who refused to free you from it, despite the promises.

 

The stress of having to put your trust in a demonstratably untrustworthy god.

 

The stress of keeping up the appearance of the happy blessed christian whist inside you're struggling with the turmoil caused by all these stresses.

 

etc. etc.

 

 

etc...

[Mike D]

(And now I'm gonna get chopped into pieces again.)

Why should you get chopped into pieces Hans? Everything you said is correct. It's just not practical for most non-scientists to personally examine the evidence of every scientific claim made in every field of science. Hell, I don't even think it's practical for an actual scientist to examine the evidence of every scientific claim made outside of their own field. If a scientist makes a claim that they've discovered the fat gene, to what extent should we take it before we believe what they say? Is reading a news article in the NY Times sufficient? No? Maybe a science journal should be read instead? Maybe not, maybe we need to review a study which documents the evidence? No, still not good enough? Do we need to physically recreate their experiments ourselves to see the actual evidence with our own eyes so we can validate they weren't hallucinating or made a mistake? Perhaps take a class prior to going into the lab so we even understand what the hell we are doing and looking at? See what I am saying? How many hoops should one jump through before it is considered "ethical" and not an act of faith for that person to make a statement of belief about something?

[Ouroboros]

(And now I'm gonna get chopped into pieces again.)

Why should you get chopped into pieces Hans?

Because the idea that and an atheist also have belief and faith has been a kind of hot issue from time to time. But I knew you wouldn't, since I can see we both have very similar understanding.

[Mike D]

Because the idea that and an atheist also have belief and faith has been a kind of hot issue from time to time. But I knew you wouldn't, since I can see we both have very similar understanding.

I understand, i've seen a few of those debates but pretty much steer clear of them myself. I think it is important though to distinguish between having faith because it's not practical to examine the evidence vs having faith in something with full knowledge that there's little to no evidence to examine, or even worse, contrary to the evidence that there is, which is how I would describe religious faith. Big, BIG difference in my opinion.

[Ouroboros]

I understand, i've seen a few of those debates but pretty much steer clear of them myself. I think it is important though to distinguish between having faith because it's not practical to examine the evidence vs having faith in something with full knowledge that there's little to no evidence to examine, or even worse, contrary to the evidence that there is, which is how I would describe religious faith. Big, BIG difference in my opinion.

 

Right.

 

Faith, belief and even opinions are kind of in the same bucket. And there is a scale from complete skepticism to complete faith. And I think we can never be completely on the skeptical side, we wouldn't trust ourself even, we have to be somewhere in the middle I guess. And we have to choose our trusted sources carefully. Being aware that we do make choices of what we doubt and what we believe probably helps to analyze the information more, and not just jump with both feet into things. I think maybe that's the big difference, having a somewhat doubting mind, and knowing it, but holding things we believe just for most likely or most probable, not as absolute truths.

[Mike D]

I think we can never be completely on the skeptical side, we wouldn't trust ourself even, we have to be somewhere in the middle I guess.

Totally agree, we think very much the same on this issue...

[Ouroboros]

On my way to work I was pondering a little more about his topic. And I think the difference in mindset between a skeptic and a religious person is the starting point. A skeptic or rational person starts with the doubt, not setting any pretense that what they're looking into absolutely have to be a truth or a fact, but start with the idea and test and reason to see if it fits. While a religious person accepts ideas based on faith and belief only, no questions ask, and not only that but questions are banned and anti-skepticism is encouraged. The only tool a religous *) person can use is either a holy book, words of their prophets, preachers or pastors, or they can use their emotions, how they feel something being true. They don't have natural tools to validate their new found claims, only "supernatural". Which leaves people open as targets of hoaxes and scams. (Basically what you said before, just in a different wording.)

 

 

 

*) Religious in the sense of a strong, almost fanatical believer.

[ricky18]

My faith was stress full especially when the doubts started.Every day I was mentally drained trying to fight my doubts.Sometimes it seemed as if God helped me but that was just my mind playing with me, It all came back again.Everyday I was emotional,living in fear.Once youve crossed over the bridge of doubt chances are very small of going back if you want to.You'll never be the same

[RedFox]

When I was a believer, I was stressed when the Christian god did not help me. A Christian told me that I was doing it the wrong way and said that god knows best what to give. What about what Matthew 21:22 says? "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive." I also kept going to the Chrisitan gatherings instead of counselors at my school to feel better about what ended up making me feel suicidical enough to want to do things like jump in water and stay there, jump in front of buses, beat up a cop, zap myself or jump from a 12th floor window over 100 feet above concrete. I stopped ignoring my problems and went to counselors after I deconverted. I also saw demons at night, which kept me awake. That declined and then stopped after I deconverted. When I told a Christian about the demons going away, she told me that Satan was fooling me. I asked her for evidence of Satan and she never gave any.