Since I was considering several items concurrently at this time in my life I am now going to start dealing with my transition from Christian to atheist in a more topical instead of timeline fashion.
One thing that I believe that I have dealt with slightly (although I am much too lazy to go back and read what I had already written) is the experience of God as evidence of God’s existence.
Many people cite personal experience of the power or grace of God in their lives as reason for their belief in God. I found this a less than convincing argument for the simple reason that almost all the other religions can also cite a personal experience with their God or metaphysical reality (Buddhism) as evidence for their beliefs.
Now many Christians argue that those who do so are insincere, deluded, or wrong. I have always found these arguments rather shallow and self serving.
The insincere, or put another way is not as deeply committed, it seems to me not only shallow and self serving, but also insulting. Given the fact that those of other beliefs allow those religious beliefs to permeate their life at least as often as Christians do and the fact that they are willing to suffer and die for their beliefs I do not see how any Christian could rationally make this argument.
I once spent some time researching how people of other beliefs lived their lives, with a special look at how they bore up under persecution. Christians always point to their martyrs as proof of truth of their faith but they overlook the fact that other faiths have their martyrs too.
Now deluded and wrong overlap but there is a difference. Many of the more literalist Christians assign responsibility for these other religions to Satan and will refer to those who believe differently as caught up in Satan’s snare or trap. Wrong just means wrong, they are mistaken.
Deluded is a strong word. It implies not right in the mind or mentally ill. Further, since most people stay within the religion they are born into, theologically it implies that Satan can create a delusion so strong that the truth cannot penetrate it. In which case why is God punishing humanity?
Wrong is not so strong and indicates a mistake. But if Christianity is true then why do so many reject it and stay in their own religious tradition? Why cannot the Christian find enough evidence to convince the majority instead of just a minority? And why do some Christians switch to another religion? If the evidence is that weak then again is God justified in damning someone to eternal hell for not believing correctly?
Then there is the question of how do you tell if an experience is true or not? Many Christians say by the way people live their lives; that this religious experience, the experience of God changes lives. However I have already mentioned that other religions have their martyrs too. They have their ordinary people who continue to follow their faith despite severe persecution too.
Further when you examine the rates of imprisonment, crimes committed, divorce statistics, you do not see a difference. In fact in some of these you see atheists being more moral than Christians. It is also interesting that those countries with some of the lowest crime rates are those that are the most secular.
The bottom line for me is that if God were basing his whole plan of salvation on solely on belief in his existence then, if that God were moral and just, he make his presence and existence just a little bit easier to see than it is? I would think so.
I believe that the reason so many Christians cling to these false ideas about religious experience is because they need something to justify the traditional ideas about salvation. Without some way for people who are born into a different religious tradition or who have never read the Bible to come to know the Christian God then the whole structure of salvation is grossly unfair and immoral. Which means that the Christian God is grossly unfair and immoral.
As for religious experience in general, it does exist. However exactly what it means and what it’s source is is up to debate. I believe that all of these people – the Muslim, the Buddhist, the Hindu, the Jew, the Christian, and others – have very similar experiences. In fact I would say that even atheists can and do have religious experiences. Where they differ is in how they interpret these experiences.
Given this I came to the reluctant conclusion that having a religious experience is not a proof of God. It was at this point that I really started to seriously lean to atheism.
Leave a comment