Come on in, get comfortable, read some of my blogs if you would like, and please feel free to share your thoughts...

Wednesday, July 6, 2011

Where would I be without God???

Someone once challenged me to consider where I would be if it wasn’t for this whole “Christianity” thing…as if it’s real and valid BECAUSE it can save us from bad things or wrong choices.
I wasn’t buying it.
A good healthy conscience and a sense of wrong and right (along with a little luck) can also keep us from bad things, and I’m pretty sure you don’t have to be a Christian to have either.
In fact, I would challenge that Christians may not really have a lot of either of those things either…what they really have is guilt. They feel guilty about doing (or wanting to do) everything that the Bible tells them not to…and guilty about all the things they don’t do that the Bible tells them they should. How do I know?? Because I once was one! (And just to be fair…let me clarify that I do realize that my story is not everybody’s story and that not every Christian walks around with guilt hanging from their neck…but from experience I can say that a lot of them do)
What do you think? Is the fact that Christianity can keep us from bad things and bad choices enough to prove that it’s real? Is it enough reason to believe?

13 comments:

  1. Enough to believe? I don't know.

    I also have lived with guilt for many years (but have been free from it for quite a while, now, too). I think for me it was the style and content of the message that had me (and others i know from that church) wrapped in myself and my sin. I have rejected that kind of preaching that leads us into bondage and have embraced the idea of freedom in Christ, even tho at times i do doubt the entire thing.

    Someone asked recently in a service i attended, "What do you say to people who ask you what Jesus has done for you?"

    That had me flummoxed for a bit. Much of my unhappiness in life i attribute to the church and my unhappy, but religious, family.

    However, i did realize that i have benefited. I think i would be far deeper in despair and depression had i not had Jesus/Christianity in my life. I do think that the admonition to forgive is much more freeing for ourselves than it is to make us "be good." Forgiveness helps to negate bitterness and helps us be free. I also know that i do not love as Jesus preached for us to do. There are a number of people in my life i "should" love, but don't really. My natural tendency would be to wash them out of my life, but for the admonition to "love one another."

    So, right or wrong, good or bad, real or not, i do think Christianity has brought positives into my life.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There is no denying that Christianity has it's value. There's many an addict that kicked the habit, many a murderer or rapist who changed because of the gospel. Does that mean it's true? I don't think that is proof of it's "realness". That's proof that someone who really believes can make better choices either out of fear of hell or love of God/Jesus. Ultimately it is up to the individual, though, to make those choices. You know, free will and all that. God, if he's real, doesn't "make" you do anything. You have to want to do it yourself.

    I say that for the person who needs Christianity to keep them from killing someone else, or abusing someone, or raping someone, or becoming an addict, or to recover from addiction, then by all means believe away.

    Fear isn't a very good reason to believe (i.e. if I murder I'm going to hell). Over the long haul that will fail to be a good motivator. Love is essentially the best deterrent against bad behavior. But do we really need to love God to deter it? Maybe if we just loved each other more that would do it.

    It's kinda freaky that you made this post today. I have a similar one over on my blog.

    ReplyDelete
  3. @Kathryn - I would agree that being a part of Christianity did probably bring positive things into my life (although at this time it's not enough to get me to commit to it once again).

    @D'Ma - I'm headed to your blog!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I very much enjoyed this post. Very thought provoking, I am not sure that is a good thing.

    English is sometimes a complicated language.

    Do you mean save and keep as the same idea? Or do you mean save as in rescue? And keep as in prevent?

    ReplyDelete
  5. @Tragedy101 - I'm glad you asked the question because it got me thinking and analyzing...which I must admit is something of a hobby if I'm being honest.

    When I say "keep" I'm meaning prevent. When I say "save" I suppose I mean both.

    For instance, (and this is just one example) I could have started drinking or doing drugs when I was in high school (a lot of classmates were) but the fact that I was a "Christian" saved (prevented) me from the drugs and drinking which could have caused a lot of pain and problems for myself.

    On the other hand, I believe being a "Christian" has at times saved (rescued) me from painful things. It's saved me from despair, from depression, from pain.

    Does that make sense?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yes, that does make sense. I think we share a hobby.

    This post raises many questions. I would like to ask you, if you don't mind?

    I wonder:

    My understanding of the Christian:

    The Christian believes Jesus Christ is Diety/God. And believes what Jesus Christ is described in the Bible as saying and doing is true, and profitable to the Christian.

    If you disagree or think this is insufficient:
    Could you define Christian for me? Or direct me to a definition of Christian you agree with?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I've been a better person since I became an atheist. Realizing that I have only one life is a pretty powerful motivation to do my best.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @Tragedy101 –
    I can agree with your definition but I would say it’s not complete (although in all fairness it probably should be).

    When I think of what it means to be a Christian, I think of 20 some years’ worth of all the most negative things that were correlated with my time in the church and that’s just a reflection of my perspective right now and also completely biased. Right now when I think of a Christian, I think of a person who:
    -Believes the Bible is inerrant, the literal “word” of God
    -Believes Jesus came to die on the cross for our sins so that we can have eternal life
    -Goes to Church on a regular basis
    -Is judgemental and constantly worried about somebody else’s “sin”
    -Does all the right things/says all the right things
    -Doesn’t cuss, doesn’t go to clubs or bars, doesn’t drink, doesn’t smoke, doesn’t have sex outside of marriage, doesn’t…doesn’t…doesn’t…

    In all fairness, I know that I shouldn’t put Christianity in a box like that. I would probably do well to abide by your definition alone and simply let all of the “other things” fall where they may. I’m not sure that I can do that right now. I grew up in the church and I still have such an ingrained perspective of what it means to be a Christian and I haven’t yet found a way to free myself from it yet.

    @Reason’s Whore –
    I’m curious, if you don’t mind me asking – when did you become an atheist and what was the main reason for the switch? At this point, the path that you have chosen is one of the options before me and I’m curious about other people’s journey.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I should like to know: Why is it unfair to put Christianity in a box like that? What is unfair about defining Christianity within those parameters?

    I think it is unfair to use the term Christianity without giving it parameters. Not boxing in what Christianity means seems unfair and unreasonable.

    How can there be any fair or reasonable decisions made about an undefined term?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I say its unfair because it's biased, one-sided and incomplete. It's not everybody's experience within the walls of Christianity.

    And I suppose I criticize myself for my views because if I continue to view Christianity within those parameters I may never be able to choose it again...which is ultimately something that I still desire.

    I see your point though...if I'm ever going to make the decision to accept Christianity again I'm going to have to define it. And I'm going to have to take the good along with the bad. I'm just hoping for more of a fluid definition.

    I'm curious - what's your current take on Christianity? If you've had experience with Christianity, how do you feel about my definition of it? Agree/Disagree?

    ReplyDelete
  11. My current take on Christianity is complicated. It is less complicated to establish some common understandings. I would say I am a Christian by my definition and yours points: 1), 3), and 4). I would also caution against assuming I believe anything I have not stated I believe.

    I know many Christians by my definition of Christian that are not members of Christianity by your definition of Christian.

    I think: 1) If what the Bible describes Jesus Christ saying and doing is true, it would be reasonable to extrapolate those portions of the Bible are inerrant. Any portions of the Bible Jesus quotes can also be considered inerrant. Any of the Bible that quotes Jesus as recorded in the Bible would also be considered inerrant. [I think: That is a significant portion of the Bible.]

    2) If the Bible records that Jesus said he came to die on the cross for our sins so that we can have eternal life, that would be believed by the Christian as true, by my definition of Christian. [I don't think the Bible records this.]

    3) I am not aware of Jesus going - or saying others should go - to Church.

    4) If I catch someone stealing from me, I get a bit judgemental. It causes me to secure my possessions in such a way as to discourage stealing from me in the future. If this is judgemental and worried about someone else's "sin," then I think it is common among all people. It does nothing to define Christian as opposed to human. [My guess: This is not what you meant.]

    5) If I did and said all the right things, how could I sin? If I did not sin, then Jesus Christ did not die for my sins.

    6) Dead people don't do those things, doesn't make them Christian, by your or my definition.

    I think your current definition is much broader than mine, but that does not make it wrong. If we use your current definition of Christian, I will tell you, now: I am not, nor do I ever want to be a Christian.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Fair enough. Thanks for the breakdown. I will continue to ponder...

    These are my thoughts for now...

    4) - You're right, that's not what I meant. Instead I was referring more to talk such as... "I can't believe so and so did such and such...aren't they supposed to be a Christian?? They shouldn't be doing stuff like that, they're going to go to hell..."

    ...Although, after typing that I just came to realize that I've done that before, save the whole... "they're giong to hell" part (and I'm thinking of one person specifically who has hurt me very much all the while claiming to be a "Christian" - but it still counts)...so I guess I'm guilty of doing what I criticize them for doing...such is life...go figure.

    5) - Of course I don't mean that they literally do and say all the right things, but rather I was thinking of the facade that is put up to cause others to believe that they do (even though we both know that is not possible, Christian or not). I prefer to be honest about my failings and unfortunately I haven't found, in my experience, that the church is a very welcoming place for me to talk about my mistakes because few others do.

    Definition is still in transition...

    ReplyDelete
  13. My definition is also, constantly, in transition...

    I failed to define "inerrant." That really bothers me. So I will try to put it in a nice, snug little box:

    Inerrant: Without error.

    In the case of the accounts of what Jesus Christ said and did the accounts are only "inerrant" as they accurately portray what the authors remember and understand of the accounts witnessed or learned through witnesses relating those accounts; Not "inerrant" as without any error on the part of the witnesses' observations.

    ReplyDelete