The Last Straw - When Christianity Failed You

[HansMustermann]

How about the fact that "sin" is inherently a judgment by God, not some kind of chemical spill that has to be physically removed, following prescribed procedures. And "original sin" basically boils down to "god still blames you all for what some not-yet-sentient broad did, millennia ago."

If God wants to forgive some sin or give humanity a second chance or anything, well, he can do so. He's the judge, jury and executioner there.

WTH point does the ritual murder of his son have? If he wants to forgive and forget and start the whole deal anew, why does he need _any_ ritual for that? OCD?

I mean, think the situation in the following terms:

Let's say I'm a medieval baron somewhere in the Baltic. Let's say my family came there with the northern crusades, so I'm actually feeling not quite the same as my serfs there, who are locals. And because I'm a hateful and racist prick, in any judgment I dispense (as a baron I'd have the right to dispense justice there), it will already be slanted against the locals. Maybe I'll even rationalize it as because of something their ancestors did. Like because one of the wounded my grandfather when he was a knight in those crusades.

That's "original sin" in a nutshell. They start with negative points before even doing anything wrong. It exists only in my dispensing biased justice, not as some physical taint.

But then one day I read a particularly rousing text on chivalry, and decide to start being a bit more just, and forgive the people for what their ancestors did.

Do you see any reason why I'd require a blood sacrifice to seal that deal? Much less one along the lines of "you must brutally murder my son, so I forgive you for what you didn't personally do."

 

[maddog]

"Last Straw" is a good title for this thread - because it was just that - one last little thing that broke the camel's back.

It was a discussion in church over how people justified Hurricane Katrina. The possible explanations:

1) God caused it
1a) as a test of faith
1b) as punishment for something
2) God didn't cause it specifically, but had a "hands-off" approach and allowed it to happen
3) It is all part of God's plan (predetermination)

and the discussion - with serious, intelligent people, mind you - was kind of circular, and I realized that God couldn't lose. If good things happen, Thank God! If bad things happen, God has/had a good reason for it, and Please God forgive us, spare us, whatever us, bless us because we're faithful through this time of trial.

And that got me thinking of someone I knew who was praying for guidance on a job decision. When he didn't get the job offer suitable to the necessary criteria, it was "It seems that God didn't want me to go to the other company" and I said "It seems that the other company's management didn't want you enough to meet your salary and relocation package requirements"


But those were the last straws. This was after a long time of study of religion and science. The biggest, and most freeing thing, though, was reading a quote (Galileo, I think), something about: why would God give me a brain and not expect me to use it?

For me, that became: if God exists, then he wouldn't mind that I'm using my intellect to try to find out more certainly if he exists or not. In other words, I freed myself to start from a place of assuming that there is NO God, and then look for him - instead of starting from assuming that there is God, and looking to confirm him.

 

[Monster Machine]

I stopped believing in anything supernatural but still considered myself a christian. Once I realized that the bible deals with many supernatural events, it went onto the garbage heap as well.

Monster

 

[iknownothing]

Does the modern, literalist, plucked out of context, implication of these snippets support general Christian principles and understanding? If not, why not? Given that the authors and editorialists throughout much of the last two millenia (or so) for the most part, are generally and widely acknowledged to be intelligent, educated and learned scholars and philosophers, alongside thier religious focus,...and yet simplistic, literalist readings should have revealed such obvious contradictions long ago?!

I don't think I am incorrect to say that the vast, overwhelming majority of Christianity does believe in intercessory prayer. Those Bible verses quoted above are not remotely taken out of context.

Regardless, the main flaw in Christianity is that it relies upon flawed human representatives to emulate its principles and distort its message to others.

And that differs from every other religion how?

Again, best not to confuse the imperfectly presented, flawed metaphors and misunderstandings of individual christians (preachers included) for the principles and core teachings/understandings of Christianity.

Prayer isn't about wish fulfillment

I think maybe you're misunderstanding what I'm talking about? I'm not imagining that Christians generally approve of "wish fulfillment" type prayer in a shallow way. Obviously Christians discourage thinking like, if you ask for a really nice car and a big house you're guaranteed to get it. But that's not the point.

Christians very, very much encourage intercessory prayer. Look on every church bulletin for the "prayer requests." People are to pray for everything. They: pray for healing (entire denominations built around that one), pray before a football game, pray that they person they love will love them back, pray to be able to conceive, pray for safety before going on a trip, pray for a new job, pray that the right people get elected, pray to change a loved one who is going down the wrong path, pray to get into the college they want, pray for a way out of financial problems, pray for the car to hold together for a few more months...

There's really no way to stop the list.

The primary appropriate prayer in Christianity, IMO, is for self-acceptance of God's role for the supplicant in His plan of all that is.

OK, maybe in theory? Maybe there are actually Christians out there who primarily pray this way?

"God, please help me accept your plan as to whether or not I am healed of cancer."
"God, please help me align myself with your will regarding whether or not I am evicted and become homeless."
"God, please help my accept my role in your plan regarding whether or not my son quits drinking."

I will grant you, a lot of people will fervently pray for what they want, and will tack on an attempt to do what you've described: "God, please help me get this job, I really need it, I know it would be great for me. Oh, and thy will be done, though."

The church is extremely mild in its rebuke of those who pray for material, selfish and petty gain, but that is a flaw in most churches and the people who run them, not in the tenets of the faith.

This is what makes me think you're talking about a Joel Osteen type thing? It wasn't what I was meaning though. I agree that most churches discourage that kind of thinking.

Entreaties and intercessions are considered mostly harmless but are frowned upon because of the expectations that are often associated with them.

But I think that's totally inaccurate. You are supposed to "cast thy burdens upon the Lord." At many churches the pastor calls for prayer requests. They have prayer circles, prayer trees, prayer lists. In the more evangelical churches, people stand up and give testimony about how God answered their prayers.

Other than this we are left with the prayers that praise and glorify the Heavenly Father, and ask forgiveness for weaknesses.

There are certainly those too.

Given the issues mentioned by most so far, it is easy to understand why they lost faith in the churches of their beliefs and understandings. I'd still question whether these were actual and established church beliefs or just the mis-understanding/statement of the given church's actual beliefs.

On the contrary, I think what you are describing is a very rare attitude that I don't recall seeing put into practice.

 

[SonOfLaertes]

When I was around 12 years old, we moved out of the city to the 'burbs and my parents put me in public school. They also placed me in catechism classes (we were Catholic) so I wouldn't lose out on the valuable indoctrination I was getting in the Catholic schools I had attended. When I was younger I wanted to be a priest but by this time - though still a Catholic - I was beset by many confusing thoughts due to the many contradictions I was noticing in the real world.

I was also an alter boy at this time, and took the opportunity to discuss my doubts with the priests who were set to guide us (no jokes here, please - my experience with the priests were all positive). I received very insightful, well considered answers which helped a lot but , alas, always brought up more questions. The priests were delighted that I was questioning my faith and thinking for myself. I realized that the concept of Catholicism as understood by the clergy bore little resemblance to the concept as understood by the sheep faithful. A revelation, but not a faith-killer.

Then I began attending the catechism classes. Our teachers were a couple of well-meaning lay people (husband and wife) who were fanatical in their devotion to the faith.
Innocent that I was, I began asking questions as various lessons unfolded which were brushed off by the couple as ignorant or misguided. This troubled me. So I purposefully asked them a question that I had asked a priest they adored to see how their answer compared (I believe it had to do with the plight of Adam & Eve, and gods omniscience).
My question made them furious. I was told to keep my "opinions" to myself, and to stop planting the seeds of doubt in the rest of the class.

It was then that I realized that this very religious couple had not only never questioned their faith, they were terrified of questioning their faith. The problem was, they were intelligent enough to sense the road that questioning would take them down.

I said, "Ask Father John the right answer to that question!" ( I was angry, surprised, and hurt). I don't know if they did, and I never saw Father John again. He had left the priesthood to marry a member of the church he had met and fallen in love with.

 

[SonOfLaertes]

...
Does the modern, literalist, plucked out of context, implication of these snippets support general Christian principles and understandings?
...

I see you are from the David Henson school of Christianity. The greater Christian world has got it all wrong. Somehow you have been privileged to interpret what the scriptures truly reveal.

Very convenient as a nebulous base to debate with. Everything we bring up, like intercessory prayer, which is quite obviously widely accepted by people much smarter and more knowledgeable than you or I, is wrong. You know whats right, but it would take too long and be too involved for you to impart that superior interpretation to us heathens.

 

[The Shrike]

Not the last straw, but a personal favorite of mine: the "flood."

Think about it. A guy in the Middle East builds a huge boat and two of every animal species on earth (plants and other things out of luck, of course) "come to the ark", survive in it, and later disperse across the whole world to repopulate it. This fairy tale always made me think of the kangaroos swimming across the Indian Ocean to save them from the impending doom of floodwaters. (Umm, what?) Then that bastard Noah didn't even have the decency to drop them off in Australia again - they had to swim back once the ark came to rest in Turkey.

 

[Trakar]

.
The Lord's Prayer (Fnordic Version, from the earliest manuscripts of Matthew 6:9-13)...

I generally prefer Luke's version [Luke 11:2-4]

Our Heavenly Father, Holy is your name (worship).

Rule over us on Earth as you do in Heaven, according to your will (supplication -- another way of saying "Make this world into the likeness of Heaven and deal with us as you see fit").

or
And he said to them: "When you pray, say: 'Father, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come.'" (I would wouldn't call this supplication, so much as glorification perhaps a touch of supplication as the expectation of joining the spiritual kingdom of God is implicit --my translation would be closer to "We love You and look forward to full communion with you."

Feed us today (supplication -- more generally "Provide for our basic needs for living").

or
"Give us this day our daily bread." again, there is the everpresent danger naive literalism. Is the passage referring to physical food to sustain the physical body or is it a metaphor for spiritual sustenance to sustain and encourage spiritual growth? (John 6:33-35 one of many temporally/regionally similar passages further demonstrating ancient connections between the term "bread" and spiritual guidance and understandings)

Forgive us in the same way that we forgive others (supplication -- maybe "Judge and Forgive..." would be more appropriate).

Let us not go where we would tempted (supplication -- "where" may also indicate a state of mind).

Bring us back into your presence (supplication -- Another way of saying "Rescue us from sin").

(The earliest manuscripts do not have the next part, by the way. It was added later. So maybe Jesus did not instruct the apostles to pray these next words.)

For you are the Eternal, Powerful and Glorious King (worship -- Acknowledging His status as the everlasting, omnipotent king who is worthy of our praise and worship.)

Luke's much shorter version ends with:"And forgive us our sins, for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation"
which may well be considered supplication, but is in line with my earlier statement.

Nowhere in the Lord's Prayer does it present a quid-pro-quo arrangement. The supplicant offers only worship in exchange for all that he or she asks. Even then, the supplicant is not being instructed to ask for wealth, influence, status, or justice -- only a little food, mercy, guidance, deliverance and the opportunity to live under God's rule.

In other settings I might quibble with a few bits, but essentially my impression and understandings as well.

Not a bad deal if God is loving, merciful, wise, caring and just. Too bad the most visible of those who present themselves as His most 'devout' followers also behave as the most hate-filled, merciless, stupid, indifferent and cruel people you could ever want to avoid.

selfish orientations and self-righteous delusions can corrupt and distort any belief system, again, people are best judged by word and action, not by self-applied labels.

"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." -- The Mahatma, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869 - 1948)

Christ set an example that is difficult to accurately emulate.

 

[Trakar]

...On the contrary, I think what you are describing is a very rare attitude that I don't recall seeing put into practice.

Rare, perhaps, but fully in accord with the overwhelming majority of RCC practices, teachings and studies, as well as a lifetime's worth of personal involvement and consideration of my own religious beliefs and understandings. In most cases that I've seen presented so far, it isn't an issue of Christianity or God having failed these people, it's more that the christians/churches of their acquaintance misunderstood, misled or misrepresented issues to them leading to expectations that never materialized. The problem is in reconcilling the misperceptions and the sources of such. I strongly suspect that most of these people are leading more fulfilling and functional lives seperated from the christianity that failed them than they would have otherwise. I regret that their life experiences have led them to (appropriately or not) extend their bad experiences into a stereotype for all Christian beliefs and followers, but their reaction is understood.

Spend a bit of time among a bunch of Franciscans, a very grounded sect of Catholicism.

 

[Trakar]

I see you are from the David Henson school of Christianity. The greater Christian world has got it all wrong. Somehow you have been privileged to interpret what the scriptures truly reveal.

Very convenient as a nebulous base to debate with. Everything we bring up, like intercessory prayer, which is quite obviously widely accepted by people much smarter and more knowledgeable than you or I, is wrong. You know whats right, but it would take too long and be too involved for you to impart that superior interpretation to us heathens.

You make a fine argument, unfortunately, it is little related or even relevent to anything I actually said, implied or intended.

Your early experience was one that I experienced rather often, my entire primary and secondary education was at various Catholic institutions and strongly considered the priesthood even as hormones steadily forced re-considerations. Eventually the hormones won, but not before being well exposed to what you seem to be describing as the scholarly religious considerations more common among the fraternities of religious devotion within the major Christian denominations. Now certainly there are varying schools of thought and consideration even within different sects so you might expect there to be significant difference between say a Jesuit and a Franciscan, or a Benedictine and an Augustine, but they are all in general accordance with each other and more issues of perspective and subjective focus. I present my understandings only, though to the best of my knowledge most of what I account are in accord with official Roman Catholic teaching and studies. But please, if you see something that you feel is not in accord with official Catholic practice and understanding please point it out and I'll be happy to clarify and more thoroughly support my understanding, or cede the issue.

 

[arthwollipot]

I was AOG on my mom's side. Were you a Royal Ranger, too?

No, I don't even know what that is. I got out after less than two years.

 

[Aepervius]

There were no turning point. I never believed in all that stuff. Well maybe when I was 4 and believed in Santa, I can't recall anything before I was 5 except a few disjointed pictures. But by the time I was 6, I clearly recall I never pried, and considered God to be equivalent to the tooth faery, santa so a made up stuff by adult. By 12 I came to accept that adult had strange behaviour which made no logical sense, and made up stories from small white lies (no you don't look fat) to big horrible one. I did not believe in gods (any). I was still forced to do my communion (or whatever it is called) and told my parents that if they wanted me to participate in any future church stuff, they would have to manacle me , and carry me there.

I simply can't even begin to grasp why people which looks rational at the outset, say they believe in any sort of gods. The only reason I can think of is compartmentalisation to avoid their rationality crushing their belief.

 

[Mister Agenda]

No, I don't even know what that is. I got out after less than two years.

Boy Scouts are too worldly, so the AOG has it's own version.

 

[Personal Grudge]

Hmm, I wouldn't say that Christianity has ever failed me. But, I also would not consider myself the typical Christian.

I have been a Mormon for about 13 or 14 years. Do I believe that the Bible or the Book of Mormon are literally true? Of course not. Joseph Smith was obviously a conman that made up a religion. I think the religion has some beautiful theology, but I don't really think there's a God out there that makes this theology correct. I guess I'm a bit of an atheistic member of the LDS church.

I don't agree with the church's position on gay marriage, and I fought against their efforts in the Proposition 8 matter. I don't really bother to follow all of the doctrine involved. I obviously ignore the Law of Chastity, since I live with my longtime girlfriend of nine years outside of marriage. I don't drink often... but if I want a glass of wine, I'm not going to deny myself.

What I do like is the community of people. I know some people have had problems with the LDS church, but I myself have not had any bad experiences. Indeed, in times of turmoil, fellow members of the church seem to be really supportive of one another. I like attending the church on Sundays, I like the outside activities. I feel like I've made a lot of good friends through the church, and they overall seem to accept me as I am. I have not been ostracized just because I am not "temple worthy." I have been told that people pray for me, but I just take that as a token of kindness.

So, I don't know if I would consider that a failing of Christianity. I don't believe Jesus Christ was the Son of God... I don't even know if he really existed at all. I don't particularly believe in an afterlife. If there is one, hopefully it's decent. If there isn't, I'm obviously not going to care. If the Church disagrees with modern science, then obviously the Church has it wrong.

I'm probably not answering in the true spirit of this thread, however. I think the question inquired about what turned me from a true believer to a non-believer. I don't actually remember being a true believer, even when I was baptised. I'm just there because I like the community. Much for the same reason that I'm a member here at the JREF forums.

 

[Trakar]

Hmm, I wouldn't say that Christianity has ever failed me. But, I also would not consider myself the typical Christian.

I have been a Mormon for about 13 or 14 years. Do I believe that the Bible or the Book of Mormon are literally true? Of course not. Joseph Smith was obviously a conman that made up a religion. I think the religion has some beautiful theology, but I don't really think there's a God out there that makes this theology correct. I guess I'm a bit of an atheistic member of the LDS church.

I don't agree with the church's position on gay marriage, and I fought against their efforts in the Proposition 8 matter. I don't really bother to follow all of the doctrine involved. I obviously ignore the Law of Chastity, since I live with my longtime girlfriend of nine years outside of marriage. I don't drink often... but if I want a glass of wine, I'm not going to deny myself.

What I do like is the community of people. I know some people have had problems with the LDS church, but I myself have not had any bad experiences. Indeed, in times of turmoil, fellow members of the church seem to be really supportive of one another. I like attending the church on Sundays, I like the outside activities. I feel like I've made a lot of good friends through the church, and they overall seem to accept me as I am. I have not been ostracized just because I am not "temple worthy." I have been told that people pray for me, but I just take that as a token of kindness.

So, I don't know if I would consider that a failing of Christianity. I don't believe Jesus Christ was the Son of God... I don't even know if he really existed at all. I don't particularly believe in an afterlife. If there is one, hopefully it's decent. If there isn't, I'm obviously not going to care. If the Church disagrees with modern science, then obviously the Church has it wrong.

I'm probably not answering in the true spirit of this thread, however. I think the question inquired about what turned me from a true believer to a non-believer. I don't actually remember being a true believer, even when I was baptised. I'm just there because I like the community. Much for the same reason that I'm a member here at the JREF forums.

In my experience, this is probably the more typical, rather than the unusual, nomative christian perspective regardless of which denomination or sect of christianity one looks at, at least with the mainstream christian followings. The more fringe groups probably have a strong self-selection aspect that favors the focussed and devoted.

 

[ToddH]

Although I was already an atheist, one situation in particular reinforced my decision.

Back in September of 2001 my 16-month old nephew was diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor. My bother and sister-in-law were faced with the decision to either put him through chemo which would be painful and probably not buy him any extra time or take him home and let him be with his family. They chose the second option.

Over the next four months he slowly wasted away as the tumor quickly grew. The pain became so bad that medicines wouldn't dull the pain and he would spend most of his day screaming. Finally, at the beginning of December he fell into a coma. On December 25th he passed away in my sister-in-law's arms.

During all this time, their house was constantly visited by prayer groups telling my brother and sister-in-law that if they believed hard enough, Jesus would cure him. Instead of a cure, all my nephew received was some of the worst pain and suffering I have ever witnessed.

That pretty much sealed the deal for me. To this day, just thinking about it brings tears to my eyes.

 

[thenigotoffthebus]

It was hearing a preacher talking about the story where 42 children are making fun of the prophet Elisha for being bald, and so God sends a couple of bears who devour the children.

As a bald man I could never understand why god didn't just make Elisha's hair grow back? Granted I'm no prophet but given the choice between my hair growing back or vengeance via bear induced child death, I'd probably pick new hair most days.

 

[SonOfLaertes]

...

Regardless, the main flaw in Christianity is that it relies upon flawed human representatives to emulate its principles and distort its message to others.



Again, best not to confuse the imperfectly presented, flawed metaphors and misunderstandings of individual christians (preachers included) for the principles and core teachings/understandings of Christianity.

...

My apologies if I misunderstood or misrepresented you earlier. I took the above as a preamble to a claim akin to a few other posters I have encountered here: "organized religion has got it all wrong, they are misrepresenting scripture for their own benefit". The problem with that argument is that a coherent new interpretation of scripture never follows. Posters like David Henson would spout scripture, then tell us that they have an interpretation superior to that of mainstream Christianity. This was annoying because it allowed them to continually shift the goalposts whenever "inconvenient " Biblical passages were brought up.

 

[Trakar]

My apologies if I misunderstood or misrepresented you earlier. I took the above as a preamble to a claim akin to a few other posters I have encountered here: "organized religion has got it all wrong, they are misrepresenting scripture for their own benefit". The problem with that argument is that a coherent new interpretation of scripture never follows. Posters like David Henson would spout scripture, then tell us that they have an interpretation superior to that of mainstream Christianity. This was annoying because it allowed them to continually shift the goalposts whenever "inconvenient " Biblical passages were brought up.

No problem. I'm assuredly no more correct or objective in my considerations and understandings, but they are generally built upon a foundation and framework drawn from (selectively-mind you!) centuries worth of Roman Catholic contemplation and study. And there are a few areas where my considerations lead me to differ with official church doctrine, but I try to clarify the distinctions between my considerations and church doctrine in the discussion of those topics.

 

[The Shrike]

Although I was already an atheist, one situation in particular reinforced my decision.

That's a truly dreadful story, and you have my sympathy.

Sadder still is that there are twisted people out there who believe with absolute conviction that had your nephew not been baptized (I assume he had been) he would not today be enjoying his eternity of bliss with their so-called lord and savior.