It is interesting that the kind of painful circumstances that lead some people to doubt and deconstruct are the kind of circumstances that push other people to dig in even deeper and emerge even more committed. I think you are right that deconversion is a complicated equation that involves subtle differences in beliefs people start with, the chemistry of their own personality and preferred ways of knowing, the response of their faith community to their pain and processing, the dynamics of close personal relationships they have with believers, and sometimes, the overall attractiveness of competing truth claims and support they find in new communities.
3 Likes
Thereās something Iād like to learn from you, Stephen. Iām curious as to how they point this out to you. Do they do so inadvertently by expressing triumphalism? Or are they reasonably self-aware, doing their best to express humility, and lament the triumphalism that is so perversely woven into American evangelicalism?
Yours,
Chris
Itās not essential to salvation, but itās āfoundational to the gospel,ā at least according to AIG. I can see why people would have a hard time seeing those two ideas as being all that separate.
Ken Ham also says: āGenesis is the basis of all doctrine, including the gospel.ā And by that he means his interpretation of Genesis. So I can see why someone would interpret that statement to mean that if they interpret Genesis differently, they must not be believing in the ātrueā gospel.
2 Likes
Paul says the resurrection is a bodily resurrection to a spiritual body and science has nothing whatsoever to say about spiritual bodies, so I think it is YOU who reinterpret the Bible in order to contradict science.
And that is just on the topic of resurrection, I think you do the same thing on other the other topics as well, using the literalism Jesus warns against in Matthew 13 to reinterpret the Bible as contradicting the findings of science.
Oh ugh I was unclear, sorry. My Christian friends (and family) get frustrated when I express my disdain for all of Christianity, and so they are quick to (accurately) note that it is largely evangelical Christianity (as opposed to other Christian subpopulations, including non-white evangelicals) that embraces triumphalism and erases humility. Thatās what I was trying to say.
2 Likes
But I donāt think that is correct at all. I think this hypocrisy is a universal problem in all of Christianity inherent in human nature and I think it just happens that you have met more of one attitude than the other in these groups. It may fluctuate somewhat over time, but the history of triumphalist attitudes in all branches of Christianity is not difficult to find.
I, for example, might be tempted to suppose that the Eastern Orthodox suffers from this less than others. But I strongly suspect that this is same kind of limited exposure on my part which is also giving your impressions of the different sectors of Christianity you talk about.
Of course if you were somehow able to objectively measure this in some scientific study I would bow to such results. But otherwise I am skeptical.
In factā¦ I might even hypothesize that there is a strong connection to personality types and a balance between those types is necessary for the long term functionality of any group.
I think you might be mistaking the nature of the conversation. Itās not about vanilla human hypocrisy, and I didnāt mean to claim that only white evangelicalism is in the thrall of triumphalism while denying humility. You are right that there are Christian sects that are brazenly sold out to nationalism and other triumphalist viruses. But those really werenāt the context of the conversation. Hope that makes sense.
Thank you for the back story. I hope you are content without God. Always available to talk about that with you if you like but it sounds like you have it covered.
I am more than content, but was lucky because I didnāt go through the process alone and I am embedded in a few healthy and supportive communities. God himself is, IMO, of no value at all. But when someone deconverts, they risk losing things much more important than a connection to a god. Much has been written about this, and humanist communities should know that one of their many big challenges is to be ready to help people who have left toxic communities (and gods) but who donāt have another community to go to. Religion is a huge historic success because it provides those other things. Replacing them is a huge, but worthy, struggle.
Regarding pride, in our review of āMere Christianityā in Sunday School today, Lewisā theme was how pride is the cardinal of all sinsāthe foundation, as it were. Lewis is accepted by many evangelicals, though Iām not sure heās really considered an evangelical. My church is very Baptist and YEC, but they accepted the premise well. I like Lewisā observation that oneās fight against pride is problematicāonce one thinks āBy jove, Iām being humble!ā the battleās lost.
My straight-laced, Baptist, YEC class is quite surprisingly open. They loved the video setting of the tavern, āThe Eagle and Child,ā where Lewis and his Inkling friends reviewed writing together, with reenactments of beer on tap and smoking pipes. My pastor remarked that itās the sin of spiritual pride that keeps us from accepting people who do that, and from looking at what really matters.
1 Like
If it were that simple, it might not be so bad, but we see ever more clearly that Evangelicals have confused the Bible with a particular [negative generalization of a diverse group removed by moderator] point of view.
Well, I guess sometimes Iām a little worried that @Mervin_Bitikofer and his denomination might feel I would have to go through some more Purgatory to get into Heaven because Iām from a Baptist background! (tongue firmly in cheek).
Point well taken on Ham. Thanks.
1 Like
I thought Baptists and the Anabaptists were Pietist, Armenian brothers (and sisters). Maybe thatās just my kind of Baptists.
3 Likes
Iām not totally sure what that even is but I thought it would be fun to yank his chain. Iāll have to read up on that. I actually grew up nondenominational, with Catholics, Anglicans and such in the mission, and joined the Baptist church when I moved here 14 years ago as it was the closest one to my work and residence (and my wife had family members there) My suspicion is that you mean we didnāt grow up believing in Purgatory. Yes, thatās true; though Iām intrigued by C S Lewisā writing that he sort of hoped there would be such a thing, to improve him before he was fit for fellowship; and I think that thatās sort of what Iād like, sometimes, too.
I appreciate your list of reasons for deconversion. Macdonald felt that an atheist who was one because he considered the faith he spurned to be a source of evil would be accepted by God as doing His work. For example, in āThe Ladyās Confessionā that Iām reading with my wife now, he writes, āIt is better to be an atheist who does the will of God than a so-called Christian who does not. The atheist will not be dismissed because he said, āLord, Lord,ā and did not obey.ā
1 Like
The contention between YEC and OEC is that neither is falsfiable? YEC uses scripture to plead their case which they need to fit with biblical aurhority.
OEC uses natural empiracle methods to demonstrate the old age, which is needed to fit with the broader scientific narrative (fossils, evolution etc).
Both options are an artical of faith.
I think Scripture suggests both are plausible but perhaps the answer isnt critical in the context of choosing to follow the call of Christ.
I like Heb 11:3 By faith we understand that time was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made from things that are invisible.
The real battle we have is that humans, as a result of the fall, have gone astray and wandered off to ābe like God, knowing both good and evilā. Therefore, it is a battle of morality for the sake of our salvation, but also for the pursuit of the greatest commandments. To love God and our fellow humans, who are specially created by Him and for Him.
The issue with old earth is that it is extrapolated to reduce the significance of God as the Creator and to question/doubt or diminish His involvement. This leads me back to The Fall, and our natural sinful tendancy to replace God with our own selfish pursuits.
The Old Earth is not an extrapolation intended to reduce the significance of God and diminish his involvement. Itās a measurement. One that can be taken various ways.
6 Likes
You did not clearly read what I wrote. You seemed to have skimmed and selected certain text, assumed that it was mine, and replied.
First, one one speaks of the Resurrection, it is that of Christ, which was a bodily resurrection. That it was merely spiritual is apostacy. When Paul speaks of resurrection, it is spiritual.
Second, what you have responded to above are the words and thoughts of Ken Ham, and not me.
Reread and let me know if youād care to discuss. Iāll be glad to answer for me, but not for Ken Ham.
Thatās two more months of purgatory for you!
Iām thinking that last sentence got away from you and is not stating what you intended?
3 Likes
I tremble a bit when I write this, because I donāt want to offend anyone 
, but the quote was awkward. What Macdonald said was that in contrast to lip service (āLord, Lordā) believers, the atheist who did Godās will would not be condemned as someone who believed in word only. Instead, they would be among those who did give food and clothing to those who needed them. Let me know if thatās not clear. I had to read it over, too.
Two months in Mennonite purgatory would help! Thanks.
1 Like
Randy, I think the day that you offend someone around here is the day weāll just pull the plug on the entire forum, turn out the lights, and step outside to await the imminent apocalypse.
Yeah - I think I know the thought youāre getting at (and youāre just fine expressing it here even if many or most Christians disagree with us on this); I just wasnāt grammatically reading your sentence as saying that. It sounds like youāre saying that some Atheists say āLord, Lordā and do not obey - whereas I think what you meant to say was that some Atheists refuse to say āLord, Lordā and yet do many of the very loving things that Christians ought to be doing.
A lot of Christians may bristle at these sentiments, but I think you and I are in pretty good company as we settle down on the hillside to hear Jesus begin some strange new story that involves sheep and goats.
Added afterthought: I shouldnāt presume to know what yourāre trying to say - so my apologies if Iām just being dense and missing your point entirely. [And the thought of āMennonite purgatoryā just makes me shudder. Best not to go there at all - may be too easy to confuse it with the other place.]
4 Likes