Faith (part 1)

I attended a Lutheran high school just north of Detroit. One day the theology teacher explained “faith” to our class. I do not remember exactly what he said, but I do remember that he pointed to his chair and told us that we all have “faith that the chair will hold us up.”

Faith, to a Christian, is “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” (Hebrews 11:1, KJV) And this is precisely the point our teacher was trying to make that day: that just because we do not understand how god works, just because we have no corporeal evidence for the accuracy of the bible, we should still have “faith”.

Faith in the alleged truth of an alleged god’s alleged word.

Allegedly.

But what are we actually buying into when we accept this scripture as truth?

1. the substance of things hoped for
   We all hope for things -- that plans will work out, that the weather will be decent, that there won't be a screw-up in the payroll department on the 15th. Christians hope that there is a god and a heaven and a Christ whose work will bring about salvation to those who follow him. But what exactly is hope? According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, hope is “to want something to happen or be true and think that it could happen or be true.” So therefore it would be fully logical to say that the “substance of things hoped for” is wishes.
2. the evidence of things not seen
   There are millions of things we do not see; quarks and black holes are good examples. Now, I realize that the scripture is dealing with the concept of spiritualism, but I have to ask: what, exactly, does this spiritualism encompass? Up until about 500 years ago it was the magical will of the gods that governed how our universe functioned. When the gods became angry, they caused storms or earthquakes or falling stars. People had “faith” that this was how the universe worked. For our predecessors, claiming faith to be (spiritually speaking) the “evidence of things not seen” was logically the same as claiming faith in magic.

In the end, all we have with Hebrews 11:1 is wishes and magic. That is your faith, dear Christian, if you’re really going to be honest and examine it for what it is.

Those twenty years ago, sitting in that classroom, I didn’t really consider fully what the teacher was saying. As a young, impressionable, fundamentalist Christian, I was eager to lap up anything theological about my religion.

Now I know better. I do not have faith that any chair will hold me up: I have reason and logic, and applied scientific principles which all together state that if the chair held me up yesterday, there is no reason -- barring decay or destruction -- why it should not hold me up today. I do not need faith or a god to understand and observe how basic physics work.

Let’s have a little parable, shall we?

Little Harold went to school one sunny Spring day. At first glance, his desk chair looked fine, but as he began to look closer -- to examine its legs, and seat, and back -- he noticed that it was not in very good shape after all. There was a good deal of rust, some of the screws had fallen out, and a leg was slightly bent. It was wobbly. Harold didn’t mind; the chair had always looked like this, but he had FAITH it would hold him up. And so he sat down and smiled. And as usual, nothing bad happened. His faith had been justified! But ten seconds later he was laying on his back, the ruins of the chair underneath him.

Is there a lesson to be learned here? Perhaps, if you think about it. Go on - I have faith that you can work it out…

In part 2 I will be discussing New Testament teaching on faith and how it miserably fails at moving mountains.

Until next Monday,

Frank

No Excuses!

Sorry I’m late… I spent most of last week working on a workplace presentation on same-sex marriage, and my creative energies are about sapped.

I spent yesterday giving the presentation, then I helped friends move, and today after work I have a wake to attend.

These are not excuses, but rather a begging of pardon for lateness and the brevity of this post!

I finished reading “Godless” by Dan Barker, and now have added him to the very short list of deconverts I would love to meet one day (the only other entry is Bart Ehrman -- I'm actually thinking about converting to polytheism so I can worship these two as gods -- just kidding!). His book was inspiring, to say the least, especially since I followed some of the same path, and had many of the same questions (and objections).

Certainly, “Godless” was a very refreshing read, especially after the more scientific Dawkins and philosophic Carrier. I mean no disrespect to either, but sometimes one is thirsty for an easy read and these two learned gentleman can make one’s brain ache with knowledge!

Speaking on thirst for reading, I cannot believe that I have so far read 11 books in aid of my deconversion! Number 12 is in progress. This is nearly double what I read last year... a new record!

On a more bittersweet note, I feel that soon I will be ready to start moving past the self-centricity of this topic to start working on redeveloping this blog into a more useful resource for Christians looking to deconvert, or for those who have already done so and are seeking information and/or fellowship. This means my blog will probably become a bi-weekly or monthly affair (but hopefully more informative posts).

The fact is, I am moving out of the inquisitive phase, where one tries to learn as much as possible as quickly as possible. I’m starting to feel the itch of needing to take action. To find others like me, to mobilize, and to start helping to hit back against the monster that Christianity is.

Until next Monday,

Frank 

Confusion

This post will be very brief but, I believe, powerful to the point that I am trying to make about the Christian religion.

There are four points I wish to quickly address regarding Christianity in general.

1. Christian Denominations

   A Christian denomination is an identifiable religious body under a common name, structure, and doctrine within Christianity. In the Orthodox tradition, churches are divided often along ethnic and linguistic lines, into separate churches and traditions. Technically, divisions between one group and another are defined by doctrine and church authority. Issues such as the nature of Jesus, the authority of apostolic succession, eschatology, and papal primacy separate one denomination from another. (Wikipedia)

   Denominations are typically formed for two reasons, the first being that of revelation. If an individual or a group decides that their understanding of scriptures, traditions, etc., is unique they will often form a new denomination in order to support their view. The second reason is that of disagreement, and is usually formed when an individual or group disagrees with the understanding of scriptures, traditions, etc. of an existing denomination and so seeks to branch off.
   
   
   How many different denominations of Christianity are there? According to this Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary report (line 41), there are currently approximately 45,000.
2. Christian Bibles
   While it is true that the Christian bible has been translated into almost every language on the face of this planet, most people don't seem to realize that, in the English language alone, there are dozens -- if not hundreds -- of translations. Here is a list of many of them.
   
   
   Multiple translations have arisen because of different theories in how the ancient Hebrew and Greek should be translated, because of discrepancies in the thousands of different copies of the manuscripts, and because of the way the translators feel the particulars of the ancient languages should be represented in English. And unfortunately, sometimes things were added and sometimes they were removed.
   
   For instance, here are three translations of Matthew 5:3 --
   

   Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (NIV) 

   God blesses those people who depend only on him. They belong to the kingdom of heaven! (CEV) 

   You're blessed when you’re at the end of your rope. With less of you there is more of God and his rule. (The Message) 

3. Christian Commentaries
   
   There are, literally, thousands of commentaries on the bible. Here are some on Amazon. Commentaries are the personal ideas and thoughts, arguments, compilation of data, which hope to bring to light further information on scripture.
4. Contradictions
   

   There are hundreds of contradictions in the bible, some subtle, some glaring.
   
   For instance, the gospels disagree over who was present at Jesus’ tomb. Genesis contradicts itself with the order of creation. And god tells us he does not tempt people, only to then tempt people. For more information check out this list at EvilBible.com. Andy Marlo at Project Reason created this beautiful poster visualization of contradictions.

Considering the thousands of denominations, hundreds of English bible translations, thousands of commentaries, and hundreds of contradictions, I challenge any Christian to offer an explanation for the following verse:

For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. 1 Corinthians 14:33 (WEB)

Confused and scratching your head? Yeah, so am I.

Until next Monday,
Frank

The 24th Caprice

Between 1805 and 1809, Niccolo Paganini wrote his 24^th Caprice. It is a beautiful and complex violin solo, widely regarded as one of the most difficult violin pieces to master.

The 24^th Caprice has been so popular that, over the last 200 years, no less than 42 "variations" have been developed by other composers. These variations use Paganini's piece as a springboard and inspiration for derivative works; in fact, many of the variations are based on other variations by other composers! (My personal favorite is Rachmaninov's)

If you were to listen to all of these variations performed, no doubt you would eventually hear most of what Paganini composed two centuries ago. And if you grab the common fragments from these variations you can, with dedication and time, assemble them together to have a piece which would be very close to the original. Moreover, since we still have Paganini's original score, you can listen to it being performed, and therefore verify your assemblage.

But! Since my blog is not about music, we will flex our brain muscles and consider a hypothetical situation. Let's say that, for reasons beyond our understanding, Paganini decided not to document the score -- instead requiring that every performer learn it by rote memorization, note by note, as they hear it. After three years of teaching this complicated piece to perhaps a dozen pupils, Paganini dies, leaving nothing behind.

In those days, only a select few had the education necessary to document musical notation, and even fewer had the finances to afford quill and parchment. Let's say that thirty years pass by before violinists are able to commit the 24^th Caprice to paper.

Naturally, over the course of some decades, it is certain that the score would have changed. The score would slowly start to change -- to evolve -- as certain violinists (intentionally or unintentionally): modified arrangement, added flourish, removed difficult bars, etc. Compounding this evolution is that, the more pupils a teacher had, the more potential for branching and subsequent changes. After so many years, three distinct problems would manifest:

1. The score undoubtedly would be modified. This would be glaringly evident by taking all the (eventually) documented scores and comparing them to each other.
2. Since the original score was never documented, we have absolutely no way of ever comparing the documented scores of decades later to the original, to determine what has changed. All we can do is compare the different variations and try to find the common themes, assigning priority based upon prominence.
3. As time progressed, hundreds of copies of the scores would be made, with hundreds of different "schools of interpretation" on how Paganini originally wanted it performed. Arguments would ensue over which notations were oldest, or more numerous, or more "correct."

I am sure by now that my thinly-veiled allegory has become transparent. And so what we find is that the overarching problem with Christianity isn't so much its message, as it is its messenger.

The bible is rampant with contradictions which exist due to competing legends, forgeries, religious motivations, and politics. It is very well documented that all of the gospels were written between 30 and 60 years after the events they record and were not written by any witnesses to the events recorded. They weren't even written in the native language of Christ and his followers!

During the course of the 400 years following the death of Christ, the biblical canon slowly evolved. There are actually more gospels left out of the bible than there are left in. There are possibly dozens of other "books" of the New Testament which were abandoned. The choice of the canon we use today was not a final, judiciary decision - it evolved out of political and spiritual convenience to a certain point and has remained thus for 1600 years. And even today there is conjecture as to what books should be included, which translations are more accurate, and which interpretations are correct.

Undoubtedly Paganini would be proud to learn that his beautiful work spawned so many beautiful variations. But here is the challenge to Christians: do you really suppose that Christ -- who was allegedly teaching the "one way" to god -- would be so proud to learn that his story has spawned so many thousands of variations of that "one way?"

Until next Monday,

Frank

Surprises

Something which I did not fully anticipate when deconverting was how others would handle it. Most of my friends and family are not religious (per se), so "surprise" was the least expected reaction I received. This surprise stems from two things:

1. The perceived hypocrisy. Many -- if not most -- of the arguments I now make or rally behind are the same exact arguments they presented to me every time we would engage in religious debate. Back then, although I most certainly wasn't "living at the foot of the cross" as some would say, I still claimed an unshakable belief in Christ. That I am now using those same arguments has actually caused some laughter -- and I certainly can appreciate the irony!
2. The change from Christian to agnostic was very sudden and jarring. Almost anyone who has spent time with me knows that I don't typically make hasty decisions. The fact is, although the actual decision to deconvert -- and my subsequent abandonment of Christianity -- took only a few days, the process of trying to contemplate and understand my spirituality began nearly four years prior. The sound, logical arguments brought forth by Guy Harrison, Bart Ehrman, and Sam Harris pushed me over the edge of mythos and into reality.

My friends are surprised by the change, so is my family and such co-workers who know. But none nearly as much as I. It has been difficult to come to grips with the sudden annihilation of my soul, with the throwing down of eternal paradise, and with the realization that all of my interactions in life are purely material. And -- surprisingly -- as much as I used to begrudge the giant eyeball in the sky staring down on everything I did, I find that I miss the comfort of someone always looking out for me. Even if it is in judgment.

It was surprisingly easy from the start to let go of the intellectual beliefs of Christianity; most of these beliefs are founded on poor philosophy or just plain bad logic, anyways. But the emotional aspects of Christianity were -- are -- harder to abandon. I grew up in the church, for the first 18 years of my life I was constantly groomed to rely on god or be punished in hell. Naturally, 36 years later, I still struggle with problems of self-worth and fear of hellfire.

What was not surprising, however, is the rhetoric I receive from religious folk. I knew it was coming, because I used to be one of those who meted it. For instance, I've actually been told that I've abandoned religious belief in a god for a religious belief in no god. Please tell me how this is supposed to make sense -- is there some atheist / agnostic church I'm supposed to attend? And of course I'm waiting with baited breath for the proverbial "you're just angry at god" statement to be spat out: that will, I'm sure, be the day that marks my final footstep from idiocy to reality.

The overarching challenge for deconverts is that the church is a one-stop shop for social interaction, worldviews, direction and meaning in life, emotional and spiritual satisfaction. Once one leaves the church, what can one find as a replacement for these things?

And that is the final surprising thing, at least for today: the utter lack of support for recent deconverts into atheism / agnosticism. If such people and groups are out there, they are seemingly difficult to find here in metropolitan Detroit. Perhaps it is my lot in life to start such a group. Who can say? However I have run across two local atheist groups which I plan to investigate further: Minority Atheists of Michigan and Detroit Atheists. I hope that I run into some other recent deconverts, I am itching for some good conversation!

Until next Monday,

Frank

Letter to Marvin Walker, pastor at Faith Apostolic Church of Troy

What follows is an letter that I sent today, to my former pastor (Marvin Walker) at Faith Apostolic Church of Troy.

Pastor Walker, 

13 years ago, on the evening of June 6th, 2001, I sat in your office, along with my boyfriend Jeff, while you tried to introduce us to some form of Reparative Therapy. When we tried to ask questions as to the function and veracity of the "treatment" being offered, such questions were dismissed. When we tried to directly debate the issue, we were given an ultimatum: either follow through with your plans for us, or leave Faith Apostolic Church of Troy. 

Since I have never been the type of person to just blindly accept what I'm being told (regardless if it is from, as Paul Giertz so haughtily phrased it that night, "the man of God") I left, with Jeff in tow. It was one of the most difficult decisions that I had made up to that point in my life. Compounding that pain was being told that God would sear our minds, and that our relationship would last only six months -- very hurtful things to say to two individuals who had placed their complete trust in someone that we wholeheartedly believed had our best interests in mind.

In the months following our departure from FACT, I researched Reparative Therapy. A lot. And what I found is that it does NOT work -- in fact, it has been known to cause psychological harm. Of course, I am grateful that I did not submit to your request; but I also have to question whose best interests you had in mind that night, ours or your own? Were you really trying to "save our souls" or were you just afraid that two gay individuals (with very strong walks in the faith) would shine light upon the hurtful lies about homosexuals that fundamentalist Christianity has been spewing over the pulpit for the past 40 years? Did you even bother to research Reparative Therapy's efficacy and potential side-effects first? And how many other members of FACT have you coerced into it during the past 13 years? 

Ok, enough with the angry questions. I'm not seeking answers, excuses, or justifications. 

To be honest, it does not matter to me whether you continue reading or condemn these words to the office shredder, as I certainly do not expect (nor care) to receive a response. This letter is but a simple quelling of my own vanity, a catharsis -- to try and move on, to forgive the hurts, and to perhaps offer but a glimpse of a perspective into how my life has progressed. 

First, and foremost, Jeff and I did continue past six months. In fact, we were together for another 7 years. True, the last few years were not very good for either of us, but we far exceeded your prediction. 

God never seared anyone's minds. In fact, we had a very successful burgeoning ministry for several years. Ultimately it died, as do most gay-affirming ministries: a casualty of the barbaric attitude that Christianity carries towards homosexuals. One cannot expect homosexuals to participate in a religion which is constantly preaching them into hell simply for who they are.

In February 2002, I wrote you a letter, citing my research into Reparative Therapy, calling you out for your actions, trying to plead my case. I did not have the courage at that time to send it, so I posted it to our ministry website as an open letter. I don't know if you ever knew about it or read it; I'll not reprint it here, as the writing style of my 24-year-old self is slightly embarrassing.

Later that year, on a mad impulse, I stopped in at FACT to ask you to allow us to return. I vividly recall part of that conversation, where you told us that you did not want the church knowing that we were homosexual because the parents would be afraid we would molest their children. Never mind that several families -- including Paul's -- were already aware of our homosexual orientation and had no issue with us being around their children. 

You invited Jeff and I to attend church that evening, and promised to discuss the issue with us afterwards. Yet, after the service, we never heard from you again. In fact, during the past 13 years, I have never received so much as a phone call or email from any of the members of FACT. Above all else that transpired, that crushed my soul. 

For the past 13 years, I refused to join another church for fear of again being treated as I was at FACT. To be told to leave because of who I am, because of something I have no control over, was just not something I wished to experience a second time. 

In 2008, my relationship with Jeff came to an end. It was not pleasant; we both lost the gumption for our religious beliefs and unfortunately our religion was part of the foundation of our relationship. 

That same year, I began another relationship with a man who I am proud to say I married. When Michigan temporarily dropped the gay marriage ban this past March, we were one of the first 100 couples in the state to legally wed. 

And so I am finally happy; I have found peace with myself, with the small group of friends I maintain, and with my husband. Sadly, I did not find this peace from any religion. Religion seems to constantly promise peace but all I ever see across this old world is religion causing destruction. 

Instead, my peace stems from my "deconversion" -- my abandonment of religious beliefs. Because I no longer subscribe to Christianity or its "morality" of condemnation-under-the-guise-of-love, I no longer feel like I have to wallow in anxiety and depression over who I am, over the state of the world, over whether or not I am meeting the requirements for conditional love set forth by some god. 

I am ready to move on with my life, to let go of the hurt, to bring about forgiveness and healing. I cannot otherwise expect to be a productive man and have a successful life. 

Pastor Walker, the situation was handled very poorly. It caused a lot of mental and spiritual anguish, yet I am not sorry it happened as my life would not be what it is today. I am agnostic, perhaps even atheist, so I cannot forgive because of some religious duty -- instead I will forgive because we are all human beings and deserving of just forgiveness, and that is good enough. 

Thank you for the part you've played in my life, brief and tumultuous as it was. Though part of me is still indignant at how I was treated, at heart I truly only have pleasant wishes for you and your family. I hope that one day you will come to the place where you realize that, in the grand scheme of things, dress codes, hair length, beards, versions of bibles, and even sexual orientation do not make any difference; but it is the disposition of a man's mind and heart which are truly important. 

If you made it this far, then I thank you for your time. I will also be posting this letter on my blog, http://www.deconvert.me, so that it may serve to help others going through the same process of leaving religion and superstition for reason and science. 

Sincerely,
Frank K. Clark
June 2nd, 2014

Christianity: The Next Generation

I just finished watching Jesus Camp, a 2006 documentary about Children who are essentially brainwashed by the Fundamentalist Evangelical movement plaguing our country this millennium. This documentary holds a certain level of irony for me: at the time it was being filmed, I was also part of that very same movement.

It is not hard to get enraptured by the charismatic movement -- the dancing, shouting, speaking in tongues, alleged miracles, etc. But the weights of the world they placed upon the shoulders of these teens and preteens was shocking! Children, crying out to god, tears in eyes, for an end to abortion? I cannot -- even old, Christian Frank cannot -- understand the line of thinking which forces children from playgrounds and into picket lines.

Children are being taught that science is in error. They are being taught that climate change is a liberal political farce. They are being taught that our country was founded upon Judeo-Christian values. They are being taught that to die for their beliefs is good, that homosexuals are evil, that athiests are satan worshippers, that all other religions are false.

In short, they are being taught lies.

Children are being taught that everything outside of Christianity is false, and that Christianity teaches the truth. But the tragic irony is that the complete opposite is true: reality and truth begin just outside the church doors, and Christianity seems content to keep those doors deadbolted from the inside.

Fortunately, every now and again, people like me escape through a window left open somewhere.

You cannot look at the world through the lense of Christianity and expect to have a coherent viewpoint: there are just too many errors and contradictions, and the majority of Christians are not taught this -- in fact, they are repeatedly taught that there are no contradictions in the bible.

In truth, a key problem with Christianity is that it doesn’t understand that each author of each New Testament book was writing from his own interpretation of the movement, through his own point of view, and into his own narrative; and that each of these narratives are unique and diverse -- often to the point of contradicting each other. Because of this, the bible should not be read as a harmoniously written book but as a compilation of different points of view concerning the Christian movement.

Since the bible is not cohesive, it should not be used as an all-inclusive rule book. For instance, Matthew’s Jesus states that one must follow the law perfectly to attain salvation, whereas Paul’s Jesus implicitly states that one must absolutely not follow the law to attain salvation (Galatians). Who is correct? This type of contradiction (of which this is but one of many) presents an irreconcilable conundrum and a schizophrenic Christ.

Children are not taught about errors and contradictions such as these. They are not taught the alternative theories put forth by historical and theological scholars (this, in itself, is yet another irony since the Fundamentalist Evangelical movement is trying desperately to have the “truth” of creationism taught in schools as an alternative to evolution). Children are not taught how to answer to the atrocities committed in the name of their religion -- most of the time they are not even made aware of any atrocities! They are not taught that their belief is just one of thousands in Christianity, and their god just one of millions throughout history.

They are not even being given a choice. This religion is what their parents have chosen for them, and the level of their engagement is mostly dictated by the parents and the church. They are being brainwashed, hoodwinked, and forced into perverse dictates of worship to some god that they are trusting exists based not upon personal revelation or experience, but purely on the words of the authority figures in their lives.

They are not being taught to think, they are being taught to react. Shame on their parents. Shame on the churches. And “god” help us all when they become the next generation of political leaders and scientists.

Until next Monday,

Frank