5 ms·

A bit over 10 years ago I was still an evangelical Christian. I decided to ask myself, "What's the most logical way to live in light of your religious beliefs?

A bit over 10 years ago I was still an evangelical Christian. I decided to ask myself, "What's the most logical way to live in light of your religious beliefs? Why aren't you living that way?" That line of questioning was scary, but also invigorating. Scary, because it probably meant leaving behind a cushy tech job. Invigorating, because I imagined I'd end up as a missionary somewhere, which is a pretty amazing life if you really believe that Christianity is true. After 18 months of staring into the abyss, I wasn't a Christian anymore. It was the hardest and most important thing I've ever done. Two things made the journey possible: 1. I made it impossible to stop. I'd decided that I wanted to live as consistently as possible with my beliefs, so I couldn't stop until I knew what those beliefs were. The only possible outcomes were a) missionary, or b) non-Christian. 2. I found others who went through the same thing. A few were friends, but most were authors or random people online who wrote about their experience, like lukeprog on lesswrong.com.

jondeval 4y ago
What were the reasons that made you embrace that change? Consistency is certainly admirable, but you can consistently embrace incorrect world views.
- physicles 4y ago
  As I wrote in a sibling comment, my faith always rested on Christianity's historical truth claims. So once I reached the conclusion that they weren't true, there was no way I could continue to embrace Christianity. I had to rethink everything from the ground up.
  - fuzzfactor 4y ago
    >dating the wrong person or praying to the wrong god I must be really screwed since I did both at the same time One more form of staring into the abyss is undertaking restoration of vintage equipment. Not for the faint at heart either.
  - jondeval 4y ago
    What specific truth claim are you skeptical about?
prewett 4y ago
> The only possible outcomes were a) missionary, or b) non-Christian. That seems like an unnecessarily tiny set of possibilities, and pretty much guaranteed from the beginning you were going to choose (b), since "non-Christian" allows a huge flexibility of options, while "missionary" is one specific vocation and chosen only by a small subset of Christians. It's sort of like a person saying he will only stay an American if he's going to be a federal judge otherwise he'll emigrate. Now, Evangelical thought lends itself to the sort of conclusion you came to: it really only values spiritual activities, so there is not any value for daily life in and of itself. I've heard pastors say "the reason why God doesn't take us to heaven immediately when we're saved is so that we can bring others to Christ" and "there is nothing for you in this world [because the Bible says 'the world is evil']". Which I'm coming to regard as functionally heretical, since there is no balance at all, certainly no celebration that the world God made is good and very good, and functionally limits you to careers of evangelist or pastor. The larger history of Christian thought is more robust, though. Consider Paul: "make it your ambition to lead a quiet life: you should mind your own business and work with your hands" (1 Thess 4:11, emphasis added) Or Tim Keller on work: your work is your gift to the people around you; by extension, your work is bringing God's gift to the people you interact with. ("Gift" here not meaning you don't get paid; there was a great barbecue place where I lived, and it was a gift to me to have fantastic barbecue, but I can assure you that it was not cheap)
- Apocryphon 4y ago
  It's like the Evangelicals forgot Luther's doctrine of vocation. https://credomag.com/article/martin-luther-and-the-doctrine-of-vocation/ https://credomag.com/article/martin-luther-and-the-doctrine-...
- physicles 4y ago
  For me, the truth of Christianity always rested on its objective historical truth claims, especially the resurrection. And for many years I believed these truth claims had sufficient evidence going for them. But then I was hoping to find evidence that would convince a rational non-believer, so I looked closer. I found out that Adam and Eve didn't exist, the flood didn't happen, the exodus didn't happen, Daniel was written much later than it claims to be, the slaughter of the innocents in Matthew didn't happen, and the founding miracles of Christianity aren't that different from other religions of that time and place. I started giving the benefit of the doubt to skeptics instead of Christian apologists. It became impossible to make the leap that, despite all these issues, the bodily resurrection of Jesus was nevertheless historical. I never wanted to lose my faith, but once I saw that its historical truth claims didn't hold up to scrutiny, it just kind of crumbled. I understand that others have a different standard of proof for these miracles than I do. Plenty of people I've talked to over the years have said that looking for evidence is foolish, but I find that ridiculous: if Christianity doesn't have enough of a foothold in reality that we can find evidence for its unique claims, then why should we think it's true? If I should "just have faith", why is it Christianity that I should just have faith in? I also understand that there are other ways of being Christian that don't depend on any of the miracles in the Bible being historical. But that never made any sense to me either: if we're dismissing huge swaths of the Bible because "we know better," how is what's left not just the religion we've made up? What would be the point of that?
1123581321 4y ago
That is very interesting; also a shame because it highlights how harmful bad theology within Christianity can be, from the perspective of Christianity. That branch of Protestantism has tended to create unstable churches that occasionally produce a lot of energy, but don't last long and especially don't have good intergenerational relations (hard to accomplish with the most eager to learn running off to the mission field.)
- physicles 4y ago
  I think you're right, although I'd say bad theology is in the eye of the beholder (unless we're talking about prosperity gospel theology, which is objectively terrible) I grew up a rather serious Lutheran, then branched out within Protestantism in college. John Piper, Francis Schaeffer, Tim Keller. Tons of Bible studies and podcasts. I found it to be rather intellectually satisfying. This is all to say that I don't think bad theology was the issue here. My only issue was that I made too many friends who were missionaries (some with Wycliffe) and, inspired by how they were living life, I flew too close to the sun, as it were.
  - 1123581321 4y ago
    I know all those names. Totally understand, and am sympathetic. The "confessional" (theologically and vocationally serious) Lutheran church is having a big moment right now, and I think has a good framework for harnessing the strength and eagerness of young men, whether they should move away or take on parenting or local community-creating. But it's very small and asserts itself against the baby boomer/gen x conservatism in the same churches, to a degree. Always some difficulty.
fjfaase 4y ago
Read my story at https://www.iwriteiam.nl/RTE.html https://www.iwriteiam.nl/RTE.html
wunderbaba 4y ago
I abandoned my faith once I was unable to rationally reconcile secular and divine morality, which was a theory I played around with in college and later wrote a paper about. https://specularrealms.com/godsmorality https://specularrealms.com/godsmorality
npteljes 4y ago
Being on a mission like this, and finding people who are on a similar mission, or having written about their experience, is such a fantastic feeling.
stephenjayakar 4y ago
I think you should give staring into the abyss another try on Christianity. Maybe though get it out of the dichotomy, and also expand your search beyond Evangelicals. I’ve found learning about Jewish history (Jonathan Sacks is a great author, Jewish Rabbi) or Biblical authorship has been really enlightening.
- physicles 4y ago
  Do it again? I’m resigned to the fact that no matter what, someone out there will insist that I misrepresented Christianity (as if it were obvious how to correctly interpret the Bible), that I “did it wrong,” that if only I could’ve read books XYZ or tweaked my epistemology then I would’ve reached a different conclusion. Staring into the abyss involved putting my life on hold, basically doing nothing in my free time but reading and talking with friends and mentors. I read a pile of books from Dawkins and Sagan to NT Wright and Dale Allison. I stopped when, after 18 months, I realized that the next step would basically be to get a degree in New Testament studies. It’s not an experience I’m eager to repeat, especially since the probability that I’ll reach a different conclusion is vanishingly small.

jondeval 4y ago

What were the reasons that made you embrace that change? Consistency is certainly admirable, but you can consistently embrace incorrect world views.

physicles 4y ago
As I wrote in a sibling comment, my faith always rested on Christianity's historical truth claims. So once I reached the conclusion that they weren't true, there was no way I could continue to embrace Christianity. I had to rethink everything from the ground up.
- fuzzfactor 4y ago
  >dating the wrong person or praying to the wrong god I must be really screwed since I did both at the same time One more form of staring into the abyss is undertaking restoration of vintage equipment. Not for the faint at heart either.
- jondeval 4y ago
  What specific truth claim are you skeptical about?

prewett 4y ago

> The only possible outcomes were a) missionary, or b) non-Christian. That seems like an unnecessarily tiny set of possibilities, and pretty much guaranteed from the beginning you were going to choose (b), since "non-Christian" allows a huge flexibility of options, while "missionary" is one specific vocation and chosen only by a small subset of Christians. It's sort of like a person saying he will only stay an American if he's going to be a federal judge otherwise he'll emigrate. Now, Evangelical thought lends itself to the sort of conclusion you came to: it really only values spiritual activities, so there is not any value for daily life in and of itself. I've heard pastors say "the reason why God doesn't take us to heaven immediately when we're saved is so that we can bring others to Christ" and "there is nothing for you in this world [because the Bible says 'the world is evil']". Which I'm coming to regard as functionally heretical, since there is no balance at all, certainly no celebration that the world God made is good and very good, and functionally limits you to careers of evangelist or pastor. The larger history of Christian thought is more robust, though. Consider Paul: "make it your ambition to lead a quiet life: you should mind your own business and work with your hands" (1 Thess 4:11, emphasis added) Or Tim Keller on work: your work is your gift to the people around you; by extension, your work is bringing God's gift to the people you interact with. ("Gift" here not meaning you don't get paid; there was a great barbecue place where I lived, and it was a gift to me to have fantastic barbecue, but I can assure you that it was not cheap)

Apocryphon 4y ago
It's like the Evangelicals forgot Luther's doctrine of vocation. https://credomag.com/article/martin-luther-and-the-doctrine-of-vocation/ https://credomag.com/article/martin-luther-and-the-doctrine-...
physicles 4y ago
For me, the truth of Christianity always rested on its objective historical truth claims, especially the resurrection. And for many years I believed these truth claims had sufficient evidence going for them. But then I was hoping to find evidence that would convince a rational non-believer, so I looked closer. I found out that Adam and Eve didn't exist, the flood didn't happen, the exodus didn't happen, Daniel was written much later than it claims to be, the slaughter of the innocents in Matthew didn't happen, and the founding miracles of Christianity aren't that different from other religions of that time and place. I started giving the benefit of the doubt to skeptics instead of Christian apologists. It became impossible to make the leap that, despite all these issues, the bodily resurrection of Jesus was nevertheless historical. I never wanted to lose my faith, but once I saw that its historical truth claims didn't hold up to scrutiny, it just kind of crumbled. I understand that others have a different standard of proof for these miracles than I do. Plenty of people I've talked to over the years have said that looking for evidence is foolish, but I find that ridiculous: if Christianity doesn't have enough of a foothold in reality that we can find evidence for its unique claims, then why should we think it's true? If I should "just have faith", why is it Christianity that I should just have faith in? I also understand that there are other ways of being Christian that don't depend on any of the miracles in the Bible being historical. But that never made any sense to me either: if we're dismissing huge swaths of the Bible because "we know better," how is what's left not just the religion we've made up? What would be the point of that?

1123581321 4y ago

That is very interesting; also a shame because it highlights how harmful bad theology within Christianity can be, from the perspective of Christianity. That branch of Protestantism has tended to create unstable churches that occasionally produce a lot of energy, but don't last long and especially don't have good intergenerational relations (hard to accomplish with the most eager to learn running off to the mission field.)

physicles 4y ago
I think you're right, although I'd say bad theology is in the eye of the beholder (unless we're talking about prosperity gospel theology, which is objectively terrible) I grew up a rather serious Lutheran, then branched out within Protestantism in college. John Piper, Francis Schaeffer, Tim Keller. Tons of Bible studies and podcasts. I found it to be rather intellectually satisfying. This is all to say that I don't think bad theology was the issue here. My only issue was that I made too many friends who were missionaries (some with Wycliffe) and, inspired by how they were living life, I flew too close to the sun, as it were.
- 1123581321 4y ago
  I know all those names. Totally understand, and am sympathetic. The "confessional" (theologically and vocationally serious) Lutheran church is having a big moment right now, and I think has a good framework for harnessing the strength and eagerness of young men, whether they should move away or take on parenting or local community-creating. But it's very small and asserts itself against the baby boomer/gen x conservatism in the same churches, to a degree. Always some difficulty.

fjfaase 4y ago

Read my story at https://www.iwriteiam.nl/RTE.html https://www.iwriteiam.nl/RTE.html

wunderbaba 4y ago

I abandoned my faith once I was unable to rationally reconcile secular and divine morality, which was a theory I played around with in college and later wrote a paper about. https://specularrealms.com/godsmorality https://specularrealms.com/godsmorality

npteljes 4y ago

Being on a mission like this, and finding people who are on a similar mission, or having written about their experience, is such a fantastic feeling.

stephenjayakar 4y ago

I think you should give staring into the abyss another try on Christianity. Maybe though get it out of the dichotomy, and also expand your search beyond Evangelicals. I’ve found learning about Jewish history (Jonathan Sacks is a great author, Jewish Rabbi) or Biblical authorship has been really enlightening.

physicles 4y ago
Do it again? I’m resigned to the fact that no matter what, someone out there will insist that I misrepresented Christianity (as if it were obvious how to correctly interpret the Bible), that I “did it wrong,” that if only I could’ve read books XYZ or tweaked my epistemology then I would’ve reached a different conclusion. Staring into the abyss involved putting my life on hold, basically doing nothing in my free time but reading and talking with friends and mentors. I read a pile of books from Dawkins and Sagan to NT Wright and Dale Allison. I stopped when, after 18 months, I realized that the next step would basically be to get a degree in New Testament studies. It’s not an experience I’m eager to repeat, especially since the probability that I’ll reach a different conclusion is vanishingly small.