The Lies of the Past

One book that I have read that helped me in my path away from Christianity has been "Losing Faith in Faith." It was written by Dan Barker, a former evangelical preacher who went through an enormous struggle in his journey away from the faith. In it, he describes not only his reasons for no longer believing the Christian myths, but also the pain he experienced in the processes of leaving his beliefs and even his livelihood behind. I found it to be a very moving book, one that puts into words much of what I felt when I finally stopped believing.

Oddly enough, what I found to be moving and full of expressions of the things I had gone through is not viewed by some people in the same light. On one site dedicated to Christian apologetics, I found a review of Mr. Barker's book that said, in part:

Barker openly admits that he spent several months pretending to be a faithful Christian during his "deconversion" process from a less faithful Christian to an atheist. During this time he put on a face to others - pretending to be a genuine believer, to the point of leading religious services, when in truth his heart was elsewhere. He admits this openly, along with admitting the shame, guilt, and embarrassment he felt (and apparently continues to feel) at ever having believed as he did.

The question I have is this: If Barker so willingly and willfully deceived others in this fashion, for several months no less, what reason is there for taking his word on the matter of his conversion to atheism being the product of a sincere and well-intentioned search and analysis? Why should we take his word about his own honest and searching now?

I admit that I have mixed feelings in reaction to this passage. To me, it is saying that Mr. Barker should not be listened to because he told lies about his religion. This is a very simplistic view from a person who appears not to have any idea what it's like to go through the process of questioning the view of the world to which one has become accustomed. It also appears to be setting the bar rather high - a person must either have been an atheist from birth, or he must have simply switched from being a believer to an atheist with no second thoughts and no emotional turmoil, before his thoughts should be considered.

First of all, we need to recall that no person is perfect - I think even the Christians will agree to this. In light of this, we can easily see that any concept or thought or evidence should be considered with this in mind. This is one reason why in debates, it is considered to be a fallacy to attack the quality of the person making an argument. The fallacy is know as ad hominem - Latin for "to the man." Logically, attacks should be directed toward the real issue - whether Mr. Barker's thoughts are valid.

But let's return to the evaluation of Mr. Barker's experiences. Any person who has lived any part of their lives as a believer in a religion, regardless of which religion it may be, knows that the central point of religion is an effort to avoid death. Every religion I've ever heard of teaches that those who follow the religion are on the winning side in the struggle with death. The Christian religion has this feature as strongly ingrained as any on the planet, and certainly more strongly than most. The Christian religion teaches its followers that it is the only way to get the extravagant and unearned reward of eternal bliss in heaven. Most versions of Christianity also teach that those who don't belong in heaven will be sent to hell for eternal torment, though many branches of the religion are toning this concept down, due to a lack of popularity.

So what, you ask? So anyone who believes this set-up spends a lot of time thinking that he's going to live forever, which is not a bad deal. But that isn't all. They are taught that they are loved by God, and that they can experience this love. Anyone who wants this constant, non-judgmental love (and who wouldn't?) will rather enjoy thinking that they have it. In fact, after a few years, it becomes ingrained. Something that is just as natural as breathing. It doesn't need supporting evidence - it's something wished for so deeply that the mind is able to supply the feelings automatically. There are a surprising number of habits that the religious mind sets up and carries out automatically when one is steeped in a religion for years on end.

I would have been quite happy to continue on that path the rest of my life. However the questions that came up in my mind bothered me, and I felt compelled to investigate. The process was not one of cold, purely logical inquiry. I really don't see how it could be, when there was that set of beliefs in place that told me that even considering such questions was evil. Instead, what I found myself going through was a period of indecision. I would struggle with my doubts for months on end. Was I an ex-Christian at that point? Was I living a lie? I don't think so, though that's an open question in my mind. I know many people who would have lots of different opinions on it.

Later, however, I did decide that I couldn't actually believe the things required by the Christian religion. The problem, though, was that it wasn't a cut and dried event for me. I didn't really believe, but I felt hesitant to admit to myself that I DIS-believed. I kept thinking to myself that there must be something that I had missed in my process of questioning. I wanted to be diligent. I certainly didn't want to give up on the loving, warm friend I thought I had had in God. Oddly enough, I don't recall being much concerned about losing my ticket to heaven, but I don't know many people for whom the concept of heaven is all that real, anyway. I spent several months keeping the issue of whether I believed in abeyance. Sure, I told myself, I don't believe right now, but you never know when something will pop up and make things OK again, and I will be happy to return to my comfortable life of faith once again. So I didn't tell anyone I had lost faith. Instead, I went through the motions, waiting to see what would turn up.

This is just like what happened with Dan Barker. I told the same lies, sitting in my Sunday School class, waiting for something to help fix the problem in my mind. The thing was, what finally came was the last straw - I finally saw that there was no point in waiting any longer. I had to stop the lies, at least those I was telling myself. That was when I stopped going to church at all. Any lies I have told since then have been told to avoid trouble toward myself. Living in a deeply religious area, where even belonging to the "wrong denomination" gets you certain looks, I think this fear is well-founded in many cases.

So we come back to the question that was asked in connection with Mr. Barker's book: Why should we take his word about his own honest and searching now? I leave the answer to that question to you. I have explained my feelings in my experience of leaving the Christian faith. It's very likely that much of what I have described is exactly what happened with Mr. Barker. I did things I no longer agree with, it's true. I'm not a perfect person, that is also quite easy to see. If those things make me unbelievable to you, that's your choice. I, like Mr. Barker, have been through a long journey, a process that was difficult and painful. I haven't made any money from what I went through. I seriously doubt the Mr. Barker is making so very much as to make the trouble worthwhile to him. In the end, what I say must either stand on its own or not. Decide to believe the ideas and arguments or not. What you think of me personally should be immaterial.