NationStates Jolt Archive

This thread is directed at atheists and agnostics, who at some point in their life were strong beleivers in a certain faith. Three questions.

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.

Please specify, what faith exactly you used to follow, and how strongly commited you were to that faith.

As, for me. Former Muslim. Strength of my faith often fluctuated but waned as I grew older and read more into the texts. I left Islam because I preffered evolutionary explanations over the creation story, becasue of some of the agrresive and occasionaly sexist overtones in the Quran. I contemplated becoming Christian for a while (as I understood at the time I thought most Christians thought the creation story as symbolic, which was not a possibile way of thinking in Islam, as Adham was an accepted prophet) but I didnt like what I saw in the old testemant either and settled for the reality that there really was no evidence for a God.

I did initially have a huge dislike for Islam after I had left it, and I still am not comfortable with many of it's aspects, especially the prophets conduct. I beleive that he was probably a good man trying to better his culture but was flawed in some of his sexist impulses, and later all his good intentions became replaced by a desire for power and expanding his control. Some of the other elements of Islam that I dislike have their origin in Christianity, the death penalty for apsotasy was incorporated by Muhammad into Islam via Old Testament. I find the story of Abraham to be repulsive. I find it highly disgusting that a man who would contemplate sacraficing his own son (Ishmael in Islam, and Isaac in Christianity...could some one explain to me why the difference?) for the sake of faith, should serve as a role model and an ambassador of Gods message.

But I do like Islam, in the sense that it discourages slavery, makes no distinction between race. And despite it's sexism in contrast to the 21 century paradigms of Gender equality, the boundaries set by Islam as to how men could treat women were helpful in improving their situation at the time. Many of the draconian punishments of Islam were an improvement from the old testament (i.e in Islam a thiefs hand is to be cut off, in the old testament however stealing meant death). Islam also unified Arabia by one common cause, and helped spawn in my view, one of the richest empires that ever existed. Though I will agree that the intial and rapid spread of Islam relied heavily on the sword.

So basically, I left my faith because of a combination of dislike for some of it's aspects as well as for logical/evolutinary reasons. I very briefly considered taking up another faith but reconsidred. Quite, honestly, I do dislike Islam and thoroughly despise what Muhammad eventually became (although when he first started preaching in Mecca was an enlightening figure for his time) but I am willing to accept many of it's redeeming qualities.

I was a strong believer when I was 5 or 6, then I grew up.

"I was Catholic until the age of reason."

Cool thread. I wish I could respond, but I've never been a strong believer in any faith.

I don't have a "former" religion. :rolleyes:

"I was Catholic until the age of reason."

I was a strong believer when I was 5 or 6, then I grew up.

This kind of rudeness is one of the reasons I stopped being an atheist.

Yes. I have a lot of problems with Hinduism's history and the way it is still practiced today. There is a healthy dose of elitism and bigotry to be found in the higher castes.

Also because I realized at some point in my teens that I was really only paying lip service to the religion because it was the socially acceptable thing to do at the time. Then I grew up and realized I had other options, and I discarded my faith, or what was left of it.

I don't have a "former" religion. :rolleyes:

Hence why I stated:

directed at atheists and agnostics, who at some point in their life were strong beleivers in a certain faith.

:rolleyes:

This kind of rudeness is one of the reasons I stopped being an atheist.Huh?
Oh, perhaps, it'd have been better to say "grew out of it". It was just a gradual exodus of faith, really. It simply waned and withered.

This kind of rudeness is one of the reasons I stopped being an atheist.

Because the faiths are so warm and fuzzy. When they're not burning us at the stake.

It was a quote, I was never actually catholic.

I consider myself to be a former Theravada buddhist. I was raised as a catholic, including going to church every sunday and having formal religious edumication.

But when I was about 13 I just quit it and became an atheist. I did hate christianity by them. Well, I cant say if its because I was a teenager (and my parents were really religious) or because it went into direct conflict with my rational ways about the world.

I spent about 6 to 7 years trying to prove christianity was wrong, until I figured out that christianity wasnt that important, and was just one of other dozens religions. So I started researching into them, like reading books and going to temples, until I found Theravada Buddhism and started learning about it.

I found a local temple and went there for guidance. Studied it, and it worked wonderfully. It was perfect for my rational view of the world, and it was logical and independent from any kind of god. It improved me, made me more wiser, more powerfull in one way (because I had more control over myself). Offered a more healthy view about the world.

But as I kept researching into it, one day I went into a direct contradiction. Every single theravada teaching makes sense, but one thing doesnt (at least for me). And that is rebirth. You see, buddhism started as a way for humans to end the circle of Karma. I do believe in Karma (at least in a rational way), but I dont believe in rebirth. And that is the foundation of the entire buddhist philosophy.

So, I just couldnt be a buddhist anymore. It didnt made sense because of a detail, but it was a detail that was the origin of the whole religion.

After that, about 2 years ago, I figured out that following buddhism was not the real answer. So now I´m a nihilist, if one can say so, meaning I dont believe in higher spirituality, because I´ve tried searching every possible way, and I cant believe in none. So I just believe in science and wisdom, unrelated to religion. Carpe diem because there is nothing more. The only imortality you can achieve is through your work and legacy. Everything else is blood and ashes.

Because the faiths are so warm and fuzzy. When they're not burning us at the stake.

It was a quote, I was never actually catholic.

I'm not religious.

no i have no particular problem with the catholic faith. i consider its ritual to be quite beautiful.

not that i consider myself a former catholic. even though ive only set foot in church a handful of times in the past 25 years, im one confession away from being member in good standing. my atheism keeps me from bothering.

"Ishmael in Islam, and Isaac in Christianity...could some one explain to me why the difference?"

It sounds like you think there's one person, but with two names. That's not the case. Isaac and Ishmael were brothers, in both Islam and Christianity (and Judaism). Abraham and his wife, Sarah, were under the impression she was barren, so Sarah allowed her servant, Hagar, to serve as a surrogate. Abraham had Ishmael with her (Hagar), and then years later had Isaac with Sarah, who, it turned out, wasn't barren after all.

As for the main question, I was brought up as a Protestant, but around college-age I turned away from all of it. As the years passed, I really really disliked Christianity (and just about everything else). About ten years later, though, I slowly found my way back to Christianity in general, Catholicism specifically. I never thought I'd be here. Half of my family is made up of lapsed Catholics who left the Church decades ago. But after years of wandering, this is where I very happily call home.

Because the faiths are so warm and fuzzy. When they're not burning us at the stake.

It was a quote, I was never actually catholic.

Oh and I find it funny when Athiests make it seem that they were the only ones who got persecuted.

This kind of rudeness is one of the reasons I stopped being an atheist.

No disrespect but I feel that's really a weak reason. How other atheists act should have no influence or bearing on your own conduct, and more importantly has absoutelt no bearing on wether or not God actually exists. I was still Muslim when Bin Ladens henchmen slammed the planes into the two towers, and I new a lot of bigoted Muslims back then who actually celebrated the attacks. But they didn't alter my faith in the slightes because I knew that theyr weren't representatives of the whole Muslim community. I feel you should have much, much better reasons than the one you just stated for shifting your whole worldview.

This thread is directed at atheists and agnostics, who at some point in their life were strong beleivers in a certain faith. Three questions.

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.

1) I was a Christian until, sometime in my teens, I realized I went to church for the socializing, not for any religious reason. Before, almost all of my social life was taken up with youth group, choir, and a few other Christian organizations, but not with contemplation of my faith. Reexamination of my personal feelings and faith revealed I had more doubts then convictions, so I left and haven't been back since.

2) I did try searching for an alternative, but my search simply led me to rejecting most of the alternatives. Somewhere along the way, I realized that religion wasn't necessary for me, so I stopped that search and learned to find contentment in my life as it is now.

3) I don't dislike my old religion, although I do get tired of the way people react when I say I'm not Christian anymore. It wasn't some sort of grudge that drove me away in the first place, so I'll still go to church with the family and be there for important events, I just make it clear I do it for them, not out religious conviction.

No disrespect but I feel that's really a weak reason. How other atheists act should have no influence or bearing on your own conduct, and more importantly has absoutelt no bearing on wether or not God actually exists. I was still Muslim when Bin Ladens henchmen slammed the planes into the two towers, and I new a lot of bigoted Muslims back then who actually celebrated the attacks. But they didn't alter my faith in the slightes because I knew that theyr weren't representatives of the whole Muslim community. I feel you should have much, much better reasons than the one you just stated for shifting your whole worldview.

Of course that isn't the actual reason I stopped being an Atheist.

Oh and I find it funny when Athiests make it seem that they were the only ones who got persecuted.Yes, heretics had it much worse. Most Christian faiths throughout history had no bigger hatred than for other Christians that differed in opinion on one small detail.

Makes the actual Roman persecution of Christians seem like a child's birthday party. (Really, it is vastly exagerated)

"Ishmael in Islam, and Isaac in Christianity...could some one explain to me why the difference?"

It sounds like you think there's one person, but with two names. That's not the case. Isaac and Ishmael were brothers, in both Islam and Christianity (and Judaism). Abraham and his wife, Sarah, were under the impression she was barren, so Sarah allowed her servant, Hagar, to serve as a surrogate. Abraham had Ishmael with her (Hagar), and then years later had Isaac with Sarah, who, it turned out, wasn't barren after all.

As for the main question, I was brought up as a Protestant, but around college-age I turned away from all of it. As the years passed, I really really disliked Christianity (and just about everything else). About ten years later, though, I slowly found my way back to Christianity in general, Catholicism specifically. I never thought I'd be here. Half of my family is made up of lapsed Catholics who left the Church decades ago. But after years of wandering, this is where I very happily call home.

i always wonder how a former protestant deals with the rituals of catholicism. do you love all the mysticism, rituals and statuary or do you tolerate them for the better theology?

Yes, heretics had it much worse. Most Christian faiths throughout history had no bigger hatred than for other Christians that differed in opinion on one small detail.

Makes the actual Roman persecution of Christians seem like a child's birthday party. (Really, it is vastly exagerated)

But of course we arn't just talking about Christians. I think it is safe to say that throughout history the Jews have had it much much worse then atheists or any religion. Tribal religions have suffered terribly, Islam has had it quite bad in the west. Christianity has had it very bad in the east.

But of course we arn't just talking about Christians. I think it is safe to say that throughout history the Jews have had it much much worse then atheists or any religion. Tribal religions have suffered terribly, Islam has had it quite bad in the west. Christianity has had it very bad in the east.

Can't disagree with you there.

Oh and I find it funny when Athiests make it seem that they were the only ones who got persecuted.

Yeah, GAY, do tell me about persecution. I'm all ears.

Yeah, GAY, do tell me about persecution. I'm all ears.

For some reason, I never imagined you as an atheist.

But of course we arn't just talking about Christians. I think it is safe to say that throughout history the Jews have had it much much worse then atheists or any religion. Tribal religions have suffered terribly, Islam has had it quite bad in the west. Christianity has had it very bad in the east.
I think it's stupid to play that game in the first place.

There are times and places where Jews have had it worst. There are times and places when atheists have had it worst. Pick a demographic group, and I'm sure we can find a time and place when they were treated like ass. Trying to play the "who's the most oppressed" game is a waste of time.

it sounds like you think there's one person, but with two names.

No no, I'm perfectly aware that they were two brothers. But in Christianity it is Isaac that is taken to be sacraficed but according to Islam, Ishmael is the one that is taken to be sacraficed. I was just wondering if there was a particular reason for this difference.

Yeah, GAY, do tell me about persecution. I'm all ears.

Same thing still applies. You still arn't the only ones to get persecuted, and havn't had it nearly as bad compared to some people.

For some reason, I never imagined you as an atheist.

Atheist Buddhist actually. As it happens I had several conversations with a Canadian lass who was originally from Japan who got me reading on the subject.

I think it's stupid to play that game in the first place.

There are times and places where Jews have had it worst. There are times and places when atheists have had it worst. Pick a demographic group, and I'm sure we can find a time and place when they were treated like ass. Trying to play the "who's the most oppressed" game is a waste of time.

Yeah you're right.

That was the point I was trying to get at.

I think it is safe to say that throughout history the Jews have had it much much worse then atheists or any religion.Quite probably true; I'm not certain how much of it can be blamed squarely on religion in their case though. A lot of their persecutions also had other grounds. Whenever a scape-goat was needed to burn at the stake, an 'outsider' (even if they'd lived there for generations), was an easy target.

Atheist Buddhist actually. As it happens I had several conversations with a Canadian lass who was originally from Japan who got me reading on the subject.

Nifty. Wait, so you're a gay Buddhist? If you don't mind my asking, what is Buddhism's stance on homosexuality?

No no, I'm perfectly aware that they were two brothers. But in Christianity it is Isaac that is taken to be sacraficed but according to Islam, Ishmael is the one that is taken to be sacraficed. I was just wondering if there was a particular reason for this difference.Well, Ishmael is the father of the Arabs, so it makes sense he'd play a more important role in their version of events.

1) I believed until somewhere in the beginning of the teens when I realized that god was total illogical and that "faith" went against almoust all scientific theories. I was Chatolic btw but I never went to church.

2) Just quit.

3) I don't like it because of it's war on science and it's views on abortion and homosexuality. Compared to other religions Christianity is probably one of the worst religions in the world because of it's power in politics and among people.

Nifty. Wait, so you're a gay Buddhist? If you don't mind my asking, what is Buddhism's stance on homosexuality?

I think it differs by sect. Though a lot of sects frown on sex in general.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Buddhism

Nifty. Wait, so you're a gay Buddhist? If you don't mind my asking, what is Buddhism's stance on homosexuality?

Buddhism says nothing on this matter, but I am even more surprised to learn that Khadgar is gay.

Yeah you're right.

That was the point I was trying to get at.
The common thread that I think people try to get at in many discussions is, who is DOING the oppressing more often than not?

When religious believers are persecuted these days--and I mean REALLY persecuted, not just expected to follow the same secular laws as everybody else--9 times out of 10 they are being persecuted by other religious believers. Sometimes it's another religious group persecuting them, and sometimes it's even another sect of their own religion persecuting them.

Now, a big reason behind this could be that there simply are more believers than non-believers. There just ain't enough atheists in the world to oppress all the religious believers, but there are more than enough believers in the world to oppress the living fuck out of each other. I don't think that religious belief, in and of itself, makes anybody more or less likely to oppress others. I just think it's a tribalism thing, and religious belief is one way of defining tribal alignment.

No no, I'm perfectly aware that they were two brothers. But in Christianity it is Isaac that is taken to be sacraficed but according to Islam, Ishmael is the one that is taken to be sacraficed. I was just wondering if there was a particular reason for this difference.

the old testament version vastly predates the islamic version. i guess youd have to ask mohammed why he made the change.

so in the koran, the son who is not a miracle gets the sacrifice treatment and the incredibly unlikely son born to abrahams wife isnt involved at all? what happens to ishmael after they come down from the mountain?

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?
I dunno. I was a fierce, Crusader-like Catholic until the age of, say, 12, when I moved from a Catholic school to a non-religious one, and got in-touch with atheists and jews. Then I saw my path wasn't the only one (Argentina is well under-developed in terms of religious freedoms) and my faith slowly vanished.

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?
Yes! I drifted 7 years, just like Northern Borders. Then I went to Buddhism, and found the serenity and carelessness I needed.

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.
I'm not very comfortable with the concept of Anattā, that denies the existence of the self-essence; instead it is a complex of body and mind.
And, in comparison, I find it very flexible, very peaceful and devoid of violence. Which is, for me, a good thing.

I dont get why people are competing to say that their own group was the most victimised, it seems like rather a ridiculous title to chase after and you can hardly hold it against present day Christians/Muslims that many of their ancestors were A-holes. However, I live in Malaiysia, and there actually is a sort of discrimination against apostates. The state refuses to recognise the right of a Muslim to convert to another religion. And in my home country, the Maldives (I'm guessing most of you don't know the place:p ) which is 100% Islamic (By law anyway, there is a tiny minority of non Muslims me included of course) it is possible to get a jail sentence for apostasy. It's probably the most sensitive issue within Islamic cultures and one I feel really needs to be adressed.

Buddhism doesnt believe in sins or miracles. It believes in karma.

Basicaly, karma means that every action has a consequence. A positive action may have a positive consequence, and a negative action may have a negative consequence. Its easy to understand: you smile to someone, he/she smiles back. You punch someone in the face, he punches you back. Action-consequence work in a cycle.

Now, if homossexualism is good or bad, its meaningless. If its positive or negative, its meaningless. But karma says that for every choice you make, you will have to deal with the outcome. And that means that if someone says he is an homossexual, he will have to deal with prejudice, scorn, lack of options, hate etc.

You see, the buddhist religion doesnt control shit. Its just a way to explain the world, which works in a completely independent way related to us. Its useless if one says homossexualism is good or bad. The world doesnt care about it. But the humans do. And that is why someone who chooses to become an homossexual will have to deal with bad karma that others may direct towards him. Its all about choices and its consequences. There are no sins.

Now, the buddhism has "commendments", like you shouldnt eat meat or kill? Of course. But those are just guidelines to tell you that doing these things collect "bad karma", and that you will have to deal with the consequences, in this life or others. And these consequences will probabily hinder your chances of achieving nirvana.

This thread is directed at atheists and agnostics, who at some point in their life were strong beleivers in a certain faith. Three questions.

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

Reason, mostly. Even when I still thought I believe I could not get myself to believe in the obvious contradictions. I just chose not to address them.
After a while, I didn't see the point in pretending any more.


2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?

No. I figured if one was wrong, they most likely all are.


3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.

I don't dislike it any more than I dislike Grimm's fairy tales. It's a nice story, with some highly interesting background that still has a lot of research open. Fascinating.

I do dislike people who still cling to that religion, though. There seem to be two types:


The ones who, like me, see the contradictions in the original story and ignore them for the sake of going on believing in the good bits. I pity them a bit, as they still seem to feel the need to have religion as some sort of fixed item to cling to, without being able to let go and get rid of the restrictions.
The ones like my grandfather, who are very well aware of the contradictions but refuse to aknowledge them. They'll be the ones arguing that mankind wasn't meant to understand certain things, that you only ask those questions cause you're lacking in faith (well, d'oh!), that the contradictions are no contradictions at all and it's just your insufficient understanding of scripture that lets you believe that there are contradictions, etc. etc.

so in the koran, the son who is not a miracle gets the sacrifice treatment and the incredibly unlikely son born to abrahams wife isnt involved at all? what happens to ishmael after they come down from the mountain?

Well he isn't mentioned much thereafter, in much of the Quran Muhammad briefly summarises many of the biblical stories, I guess he felt that the bedouins at the time were already familiar with them. He does help Abraham/Ibrahim build the Ka'ba so that elevates him to a pretty high position within Islam.


Well, Ishmael is the father of the Arabs, so it makes sense he'd play a more important role in their version of events.

Thanks for that. I actually remember knowing that at one point, and to be reminded by someone who was never Muslim is pretty inexusable on my part lol.:p

I was raised Catholic, became uninvolved, uncaring about religion and then converted to Baha'i. It filled a void and answered my questions about many parts of Chrisitianty that seemed rather odd and unbelievable to me.

I was raised Catholic, became uninvolved, uncaring about religion and then converted to Baha'i. It filled a void and answered my questions about many parts of Chrisitianty that seemed rather odd and unbelievable to me.Which questions?

I think it's stupid to play that game in the first place.
There are times and places where Jews have had it worst. There are times and places when atheists have had it worst. Pick a demographic group, and I'm sure we can find a time and place when they were treated like ass. Trying to play the "who's the most oppressed" game is a waste of time.And what about the game of "who's bragging most about having been oppressed" ?

No no, I'm perfectly aware that they were two brothers. But in Christianity it is Isaac that is taken to be sacraficed but according to Islam, Ishmael is the one that is taken to be sacraficed. I was just wondering if there was a particular reason for this difference.Oh, I wasn't aware of that difference. What is the Islamic version based on?

No, there's still a number of things that I like about the Unitarians. I just felt constricted by their excessive tolerance for the douchebags of this world.

no finer point to start on then this one.

I : i grew up in a Catholic family (my father, a Lutheran, married into it) and took a very devoted stance on everything i was told (most children naturally do); except over the matter of eternal life after death. it just didn't make any sense to me. still, i didn't want my parents to hate me, so i continued to be quiet about it and continue ignoring the growing concern that something wasn't right about what i was hearing. i went to church every sunday, prayed every night (until i turned eleven), prayed at every meal with the family (that ended [respectfully] soon enough), and went under the unsettled precept that an invisible man in the clouds made everything while his angels kept lists of all wrongful deeds (it wasn't difficult for me to connect the similarities between god and Santa Claus).

perhaps what set me of specifically was a sermon about how misled the other strands of Christendom were from the "true faith" of Catholicism. by this point i knew my father's faith, and when i heard that priest state how mistaken Lutherans were, the expression on my father's face finalized my break from the pompous arrogance of the Catholic faith.

i quietly educated myself on other religions (shortly taking on Buddhism), philosophies, and history. in short order i became a cemented atheist in my late teens. if i had to say what specifically lef me into atheism, i would have to say both emotional triggers and the want for proper understanding.

II : as already put, i took to Buddhism, but also moved on to dabble in Paganism. as my only support came from my Pagan cousins, it was a natural little step towards something a little more fulfilling. if not, at the time, still deluded.

III : i heavily dislike the arrogance held within Christian belief, and the open hostility within the three Monotheisms, a bit that their followers largely pretend doesn't exist. i will always hold them to be the grandest of cults of the modern age, inhibitors of what humanity could be capable of.

Originally Posted by Cabra West:

I do dislike people who still cling to that religion, though. There seem to be two types:

* The ones who, like me, see the contradictions in the original story and ignore them for the sake of going on believing in the good bits. I pity them a bit, as they still seem to feel the need to have religion as some sort of fixed item to cling to, without being able to let go and get rid of the restrictions.
* The ones like my grandfather, who are very well aware of the contradictions but refuse to aknowledge them. They'll be the ones arguing that mankind wasn't meant to understand certain things, that you only ask those questions cause you're lacking in faith (well, d'oh!), that the contradictions are no contradictions at all and it's just your insufficient understanding of scripture that lets you believe that there are contradictions, etc. etc.

Well, my family doesn't fit into one of those two categories. They are actually the type that only have a rudimentary understanding of the texts, partly because they've only read the Q'uran in Arabic, which is a language that they can read but not really understand. After I left my faith I tried to justify my stance by pointing out some of the nasty bits in the Quran, using a translated version of course. They simply denied they existed at all. I pointed out the hadiths (the second holiest text to Sunnis) which were even more nasty but they simply claimed them to be false despite them being categorised as authentic by a consensus of scholars. People who deny the nasty bits and obvious contradictions, scientific or otherwise are the group that baffles me and irritates me the most.

Obviously I dislike it or I wouldn't have given it up.

This thread is directed at atheists and agnostics, who at some point in their life were strong beleivers in a certain faith. Three questions.

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.

Please specify, what faith exactly you used to follow, and how strongly commited you were to that faith.

I was never born into a faith. My parents never told me of a god. So I didn't believe. One day, I looked up atheist in a dictionary. Then, I decided I was one. I have thought about living as a Buddhist, but I'm not selfless or noble enough. I have no former religion, but I dislike the dogmatic, extremist, intolerant aspects of all religions.

Well, my family doesn't fit into one of those two categories. They are actually the type that only have a rudimentary understanding of the texts, partly because they've only read the Q'uran in Arabic, which is a language that they can read but not really understand. After I left my faith I tried to justify my stance by pointing out some of the nasty bits in the Quran, using a translated version of course. They simply denied they existed at all. I pointed out the hadiths (the second holiest text to Sunnis) which were even more nasty but they simply claimed them to be false despite them being categorised as authentic by a consensus of scholars. People who deny the nasty bits and obvious contradictions, scientific or otherwise are the group that baffles me and irritates me the most.

Well, you don't get that group a lot with Christians, since all the texts have been translated, numerous times in fact. But you'd still come across an awful lot who aren't really aware what nasty bits there are in the bible...
I guess I'll have to add another category to the ones I described.

The only thing I do not understand is that most atheists cannot prove that God doesn't exist. We (Christians) can't prove that he does, but many many atheists say with total conviction that he does not. What makes you so sure?

When I asked myself how I knew God existed the only reasonable answer was, "I don't".

When I asked myself how I knew God existed the only reasonable answer was, "I don't".

Yes, but you also don't know that he doesn't exist.

Yes, but you also don't know that he doesn't exist.

Nope. Don't know either way.

Nope. Don't know either way.

That's why I don't understand some Atheists who are completly convinced that God doesn't exist. Many people point to science. Well, of all our knowledge, know probably less than 1% of all knowledge in the universe. How do they know that they isn't some piece of science that proves God exists?

That's why I don't understand some Atheists who are completly convinced that God doesn't exist. Many people point to science. Well, of all our knowledge, know probably less than 1% of all knowledge in the universe. How do they know that they isn't some piece of science that proves God exists?

It's probably the same reason that theists are convinced he does.

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

Both times I've lost faith, it was philosophically motivated.

The first, simply by realizing that there was no real reason to believe in God.

The second, because the philosophical problems prevented the exertion of will required to continue to believe.

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith,

No. My attitude was always, either I believe Judaism or I'm an atheist.

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects.

I dislike organized religion in general, but politically, not philosophically.

I don't really have anything against Judaism in particular.

And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.

No better or worse than the others, really.

how strongly commited you were to that faith.

First time, I wasn't very committed at all - I believed because everyone around me did.

Second time, very much so - though in a liberal (and explicitly leftist) fashion.

The only thing I do not understand is that most atheists cannot prove that God doesn't exist. We (Christians) can't prove that he does, but many many atheists say with total conviction that he does not. What makes you so sure?

Well it is technically impossible to disprove a negative. It's not so much that I am convinced that there is no God, it's more the case that I'm convinced that there is absolouetely no reasonable evidence to indicate his existence. Much in the same way I cannot disprove the monotheistice God, neither can I disprove Santa Claus, Thor, Odin, Zeus etc, but it is still unreasonable to beleive in these things without substantial evidnece. Summarily, Atheism doens't necessarily constitute a positive denial of God, but rather a lack of beleif.

Btw, what makes you so sure he does exist?

Well it is technically impossible to disprove a negative. It's not so much that I am convinced that there is no God, it's more the case that I'm convinced that there is absolouetely no reasonable evidence to indicate his existence. Much in the same way I cannot disprove the monotheistice God, neither can I disprove Santa Claus, Thor, Odin, Zeus etc, but it is still unreasonable to beleive in these things without substantial evidnece. Summarily, Atheism doens't necessarily constitute a positive denial of God, but rather a lack of beleif.

Btw, what makes you so sure he does exist?

Nothing. The simple belief that he does. Do I believe everything in the Bible? No. I guess its the same for Atheists then. Also, you cannot say religion is a bad thing. I have known people who have gone from the brink of nothing when they have found God. Take my friend, who was thinking about suicide., or take my father, who was had a drinking problem.

Nothing. The simple belief that he does. Do I believe everything in the Bible? No. I guess its the same for Atheists then. Also, you cannot say religion is a bad thing. I have known people who have gone from the brink of nothing when they have found God. Take my friend, who was thinking about suicide., or take my father, who was had a drinking problem.

Nor can you say that religion is a good thing, what with the Crusades and Inquisition and various religious wars throughout time.

Nor can you say that religion is a good thing, what with the Crusades and Inquisition and various religious wars throughout time.

Yes, but you must admit that it has improved since the 1700's.

Yes, but you must admit that it has improved since the 1700's.

In some ways.

This kind of rudeness is one of the reasons I stopped being an atheist.

Hear Hear! Honestly! The nerve of some people!

Originally posted by Peoples Freedom

]Nothing. The simple belief that he does.

Fair enough, though I don't feel thats a very good reason.

Do I believe everything in the Bible? No.


But on what basis do you come to a decision as to which bits to beleive and which bits you don't?

I guess its the same for Atheists then.

Well faith requires a positive beleif, atheism is a lack of beleif so it really isn;t the same thing. Nor is a lack of beleif a beleif in and of itself, thats far too common of a misconception on the part of the religious.

Also, you cannot say religion is a bad thing.

Well, yes I can. But I'd also argue that religion has some redeeming quailities, (how it helped your fiiend and your Dad in this instance....I hope they are doing well now). I suppose it's a debate on whether it is the good or the bad that out weighs the other, at least in my mind.

Hear Hear! Honestly! The nerve of some people!

The "rudeness" he was referring to was pretty tame and I'm sure you'd find some sort of hubris withing members of any demographic. Besides, I think people need to be thicker skinned to comments like that, I have no problem with people taking the piss out of atheists despite being one myself.

I believe in Jesus Christ, that your sins will be forgiven if you repent. That's what I think. Even If Christianity is not real, I wont regret living its lifestyle.

This thread is directed at atheists and agnostics, who at some point in their life were strong beleivers in a certain faith. Three questions.

Well, I'm not exactly an atheist or an agnostic, nor was I exactly a strong believer in my former faith, but I'm going to cheat and answer your questions anyway. :)

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

Some of both, and somewhere in between as well. I was raised Catholic, went to Catholic school, and regarded myself as a Catholic mostly by default, but I considered it a fairly important part of my identity nonetheless. From a very young age, though, I had my doubts. I decided not to take communion at age eight, when all my little classmates did, because even then I regarded it as making a promise I wasn't sure I could keep. Over the next decade or so, I spent a lot of time trying to figure out exactly how I felt about my faith. I knew that I disagreed with many of the current political stances of the Church, but I didn't really have a problem thinking of myself as a progressive Catholic, as I believed (and still believe) that the Church will see the error of its ways regarding such issues as homosexuality and birth control in time. (It's hard for an organization run by elderly men to be too very forward-thinking or concerned with feminist issues, sadly.) Where I ran into trouble, and what finally convinced me, in college, to stop thinking of myself as a Catholic, was the simple fact that I do not and cannot believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God (or, at least, the son of God to any greater extent than everyone being metaphorically a "child of God"). It doesn't work for me. Given how fundamental that belief is to Christianity, I stopped calling myself a Catholic and started calling myself something like a "non-denominational semi-agnostic rational theist." It doesn't really roll off the tongue, but it describes my beliefs a heck of a lot better than "Catholic" ever did.

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?

I very seriously contemplated conversion; at one point, I was very close indeed to becoming Jewish, and I've investigated pretty much every other faith I've ever heard of. The thing is, though, I'm not really capable of altering my beliefs to match what someone else tells me to believe. Until I can find a faith that believes exactly what I already do, I think I'm stuck being a congregation of one.

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.

I don't exactly "dislike" Catholicism. There are certainly aspects of Catholic belief that I find utterly idiotic - the ingrained sexism that comes with any patriarchal religion, for example, or the aforementioned stupid positions regarding homosexuality and birth control. At the same time, there are plenty of aspects of Catholicism I respect: I vastly prefer the "works" side of the faith and works debate, and I love that the Church has enough common sense to recognize that some bits of the Bible are (gasp! shock!) not meant to be taken literally. And, hey, as a musician, I have to have at least some fondness for Catholicism, given the piles and piles of gorgeous music it's spawned (not to mention art and architecture as well). I suspect I'm also swayed a little by the fact that my very, very devoutly Catholic grandmother, who passed away about a year and a half ago, is one of my major role models. I can't find the religion she practiced too very evil, because it shaped and influenced her, and she was a rather amazingly good person.

And that is why someone who chooses to become an homossexual will have to deal with bad karma that others may direct towards him.

Presumably, though, he will also have to deal with good karma in the form of hawt buttsex. ;)

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

I used to be a Christian (Presbyterian, I guess, but I left the faith when I was like 10, so I wasn't too specific). It's tough to explain why, exactly, but I'll give it a shot: after I learned a few things about how the universe worked, and was introduced to the theory of evolution and the Big Bang, I realized (not really on a conscious level, I guess it was something that just built up subtly) that I no longer had any compelling reasons for believing in a god. There was no logical necessity for one, and I never really was one of those people who "felt the divine presence" or whatever, so I just dismissed the concept. Since I got rid of the intellectual necessity for it, religion and especially theism have just seemed like alien concepts to me. I don't really "get" it. It's just such a bizarre idea...in a universe that operates on fully comprehensible natural laws, why posit this whole other layer of stuff that leaves no evidence? The concept of God seems to me a lot like Russell's Teapot or the Invisible Pink Unicorn...I guess you can justify it, but why even bother?

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?

I never even thought about an alternative faith. Again, the whole religious concept is very strange to me, and I don't feel any compulsion towards it at all.

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.

I do feel a little bit of animosity towards Christianity (not so much with liberal/moderate Christians, but definitely fundamentalists). I have this feeling towards religion in general, but I grew up with Christianity and I live in the US, so that's what's around. People of strong religious convictions just seem to operate very very differently than I do, and in certain circumstances it makes me a little uneasy. I only really have a problem with religion when it makes a move to insert itself into my life or the public sphere (i.e. people trying to convert me, creationism in schools, etc.). Creationism I actually have a deep emotional problem with: creationists/IDers live in a world with all this evidence against their beliefs, and they just seem to ignore it. This willful ignorance or denial of the reality around them bothers me; I've always been of the position that it's better to know something than to cling to a belief that reality contradicts, and especially that we should strive to learn as much as possible about the world. Creationism contradicts these, especially the second one (we don't need to understand the Universe if we just assume that "God did it" is always the answer). This frustrates and angers me to no end. Beyond that, I'm more than happy to let Christians and other believers live their lives believing whatever they want.

This thread is directed at atheists and agnostics, who at some point in their life were strong beleivers in a certain faith. Three questions.

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?
Probably the biggest factor for me in leaving my church was going to college. I was a Jehovah's Witness and had been all my life. I was married, had a family, and had a shit job that was going nowhere. When I got to college and discovered that a lot of the stuff I believed about the natural world was just flat out wrong, I felt a bit betrayed. When my marriage broke up at about the same time, I just decided to restart my life completely. I wasn't an atheist at first--that came later.

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?
I never really considered joining any other church. I read around a bit about eastern religions, but really I just dropped away from that side of myself for a while. It wasn't until I started writing and studying poetry again that I was even curious about the transcendent.

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.
I have a very love/hate relationship with the Witnesses, largely because of the damage that's been done to my relationship with my parents. I'd left the church voluntarily--didn't claim to be a member, didn't go into the church, etc.--but the Witnesses have this policy of kicking people they consider unrepentant sinners out of the church, and when they do that, even parents are supposed to shun their children. The local congregation hunted me down, in essence, and kicked me out three years after I'd left on my own. My parents have barely spoken to me since. That was 12 years ago.

There are practices of theirs I admire. I've never known a less racist group of people. They are scrupulously honest for the most part. They're politically neutral even when it causes them physical harm, even to death. They suffered in the Nazi Death Camps even when all they had to do was renounce their faith. I respect that. But they're also highly homophobic, fairly misogynist (though not abusive), and absolutist on the inerrancy of the Bible, which means they teach their kids lies about things like evolution. And of course, there's the whole division of my family thing.

Which questions?

Well let's see here, original sin, turning wine into blood, the physical reseruction to name three off the top of my head. I tried to answer this earlier but in puter went all weird on me.

There were always holes in my "unshakable" faith in Christianity. I accepted Genesis as fact, but I also accepted the earth being 4 billion years old as fact because of all the science that proved it (I was always into he dinosaur/neanderthal thing). Looking back on it today, I find it odd that I never saw those two views as conflicting.

I completely shook off Christianity at 14 or 15 (I am almost 16 now). Everything that happens in the world, science, and logic just goes against religion.

After I shook off religion the stupidity of some of the political views slowly went with it. Blind support of the US conservative party, gay hating, abortion hating, distrust of anyone not christian etc. etc.

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?
It was mostly logic-based, I guess. I was disappointed of not being able to find an answer in the church despite of hard trying.

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?
...but I stiiiill haven't found what I'm looking for...

I tried to understand Theraveda Buddhism, Jainism and shintoism because they seemed fascinating. I however always saaw some dogma which made me feel very uncomfortable.

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.
I dislike its organisation, but not necessary the religion. It just makes no sense to me and despite having tried to find answers it and people eho followed it sometimes appear rather alien to me.

Oh and I was catholic Christian

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.

1) i actually woke up one morning thinking about god and stuff and my conclusion lying there half awake was that it was all a load of guff. this conviction has only got stronger as i've grown older although i have become less adverse to the whole ritual and ceremony thing. that really bored me when i was a kid but now there is a certain comfort to it even if i don't participate.

2) i've never seriously considered another religion for myself although i have been interested in most of the major ones and their precursors and various animist religions as part of my academic studies.

3) i used to hate christianity, it just made me sick that people would devote their lives to something that i saw as a complete waste. now i'm apathetic, i don't give a fuck that individuals are wasting their lives on a futile dream although i am interested in why people do it. this change of attitude was probably brought about by one of my friends converting to christianity and changing from a fun-loving hedonist to a one dimensional dogmatic patronising automaton. i still want to be her friend, so i can't hate her religion, i just want to understand. i don't believe i ever will but the effort of trying will enable our friendship to continue, unless she tries to convert me. then it's over.

There were always holes in my "unshakable" faith in Christianity. I accepted Genesis as fact, but I also accepted the earth being 4 billion years old as fact because of all the science that proved it (I was always into he dinosaur/neanderthal thing). Looking back on it today, I find it odd that I never saw those two views as conflicting.


I think that science and religion do not really have conflicts except where humans make assumptions ( probably false) about what religions writings have to say about science. Much of what we have been told about religious views of science have come from those who had an agenda to keep people under their influence. No reasonable person can expect the story of Genesis first told so long ago to be a strict scientific portrayal of the beginning of life. The purpose of the story of to begin the process of understanding the beginnings of life on earth. The fact that it is not scientifically correct in all of it's minor and major details is not a reason to condemn religion and science to an eternal battle for the minds and intellect of humans.

Early scientist also did not understand the beginning of life on earth. In fact if a fair appraisal was to be done on the earliest "scientific" writings and the Genesis story the Genesis story might well be more accurate. The Genesis story speaks of "ages" or days of creation. If you read the different days of creation to be the ages of evolution then the Genesis story spoke of evolutionary time before scientific minds made this discovery.

Early scientist also did not understand the beginning of life on earth. In fact if a fair appraisal was to be done on the earliest "scientific" writings and the Genesis story the Genesis story might well be more accurate. The Genesis story speaks of "ages" or days of creation. If you read the different days of creation to be the ages of evolution then the Genesis story spoke of evolutionary time before scientific minds made this discovery.
Are you aware of the order that Genesis goes in? If days are the equivalent of ages, it still doesn't add up, it actually makes less sense.

Your argument is a typical one from the slightly more logical religious people, but once you say one part of your holy book is more of an analogy (or something like that), can you take anything else seriously?

Are you aware of the order that Genesis goes in? If days are the equivalent of ages, it still doesn't add up, it actually makes less sense.

Your argument is a typical one from the slightly more logical religious people, but once you say one part of your holy book is more of an analogy (or something like that), can you take anything else seriously?

Take it seriously? Yes.

Treat it all as a parable as opposed to incontrovertible historical fact? Please do.

Take it seriously? Yes.

Treat it all as a parable as opposed to incontrovertible historical fact? Please do.
Which part? Just the creation part, or the whole thing? If you mean the whole thing, why make it into a religion? Its just philosophy.

Are you aware of the order that Genesis goes in? If days are the equivalent of ages, it still doesn't add up, it actually makes less sense.

Your argument is a typical one from the slightly more logical religious people, but once you say one part of your holy book is more of an analogy (or something like that), can you take anything else seriously?

The point is that Genesis was not intended to be scientic fact. Only those who had another agenda have given it that classification. Isn't it also true if one so called scientfic fact is proven to be false then all science is false? The Holy Books of all religions are meant to deal with spiritual principles, to insist that they must also explain all science is unfair at best. Even the best scientfic minds of the time that Genesis was written could not explain the "science" of the day better than an average high school student of today.

The point is that Genesis was not intended to be scientic fact. Only those who had another agenda have given it that classification.
The bible says that itself is right.

Isn't it also true if one so called scientfic fact is proven to be false then all science is false?
Science isn't held together by saying "What we have now and what we say is the absolute truth", so no.

The Holy Books of all religions are meant to deal with spiritual principles, to insist that they must also explain all science is unfair at best.
When a book trys to explain how things came to be, then cites itself as a source of legitimacy and says that everything written in it is true, it becomes fair to hold it accountable for being wrong on even one thing.

Even the best scientfic minds of the time that Genesis was written could not explain the "science" of the day better than an average high school student of today.
Again, the bible says whatever is written in it is right because its the word of God.

Which part? Just the creation part, or the whole thing? If you mean the whole thing, why make it into a religion? Its just philosophy.

Exactly.

That's the take Hinduism has on it. Sure we've got all the gods (who are all one god) but despite elements of the divine it's all held to be a parable, the underlying morality of which is held separate from the divine portions of it.

Exactly.

That's the take Hinduism has on it. Sure we've got all the gods (who are all one god) but despite elements of the divine it's all held to be a parable, the underlying morality of which is held separate from the divine portions of it.
If the God in any given religion is still real, where is the parable in saying that if you don't follow this religion, you will go to hell? Is the lesson to follow whatever you fear more?

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.

1-I first began questioning my beliefs at the age of 15, when I started seminary in High School. In Utah, this means taking a class a trimester(yes, I said trimester as in 3 per year, and that leaves very little time for other classes I wish I could have taken, such as AP Physics, French 3 and 4, more time in the automotive shop and the multimedia lab...but that's a failing of the school board in my region) that teaches more in depth knowledge of the LDS faith.

Yes, I said it, I'm a reforming Mormon. Now, I feel an obligation to inform you about the practice of repentance in the Mormon culture as opposed to many views on the matter. Most "sins" you pray and fast and study until you feel better, i.e. you have been forgiven your sins. This is then washed away the next time to partake in the Sacrament, the Mormon version of Communion. Baptism in the LDS faith is essentially a remission of all sins committed previously, and the Sacrament is another form of this remission, which means that each week instead of confession, you take the Sacrament and that wipes your slate clean with God. However, in the case of so-called "serious" transgressions, you much seek the counsel of the Bishop of your ward. The Bishop acts in some ways as a Pastor does, but also acts as the father of the ward(ward is a Mormon term for congregation). His counsel is what gets you forgiven for the "major" sins, and for the sake of this answer, I'm going to list a few. Consuming alcohol, or using tobacco, using illegal drugs of any kind, having premarital sex (yes, this includes masturbation, mutual masturbation, 1st base, 2nd base, and 3rd base, homosexual acts of any nature), and extra-marital sex(including all the sub-types i listed above).

So, with this pretext, I can now elaborate on the initial emotional trigger for separating from my faith. I remember quite a lot of the actual day I separated, so much, in fact, that it has given me reference to the various states of belief in my own life. I was 16, and regularly attended church, studied the scriptures--including the Book of Mormon, and various works by Prophets in the church's history. On Sunday, after several hours of lessons on various doctrines, and taking part in the Sacrament ceremony, I felt I needed to see the Bishop for counseling in my "sins" of the premarital sex variety. They were almost all inclusive, except for the acts of a homosexual nature. After disclosing my guilt and the need for forgiveness, I was met with several statements that even now make me angry.

Note: All my sexual discoveries had taken place the week prior, after a particularly successful date with a girl from my high school.

He said that he knew that I had trangressions of this nature, that he had felt it as soon as I was raised to the rank of Teacher(in the Mormon faith there are several levels in the Priesthood, the first being Deacon which is achieved at the age of 12, the second Teacher at the age of 14, third being Priest (16), Elder (18), and High Priest(usually beyond the age of 25)), and had been waiting for 2 years for me to confess these sins. He went on to say that masturbation leads to homosexuality. In all seriousness. I was astonished. He claimed to have known about my sins for 2 years before they even occurred! Had I been less doubtful of my faith, meaning had I not questioned the tenets of its beliefs, I probably would have taken this to mean he was receiving some sort of revelation on behalf of his congregation, but as I wasn't too sure about it to begin with, I walked out. For the next hour and a half I studied my intense emotional and spiritual spectrum, and came to thought that I had been duped by my parents, my bishop, my neighbors, everything in my life was a farce.

As I stated before, this experience was a major turning point in my life, which lead to my parents turning me out, my hometown turning its back on my existence, and my life basically being turned upside down.

There is a positive note to this story, though. After 3 years or so of being cut off from my parents, my brothers, and my sister, I was welcomed back and have renewed my relationships, although we're still very distant.

2-I never contemplated another faith, as I figured something like this would happen again and again. Although, had this experience not occurred, I would have served a mission for 2 years, attempting to convert all those in my path, and probably would have stayed true to the faith. I was a very faithful follower, and now, I feel somewhat like the realization of Nietzsche's supposed "Most Dangerous Follower", I was both intelligent and capable, and most of all, unquestioning. However, that event did occur, and it shook my beliefs, my morality, even my sense of self to the depths of my core.

3-I abhor the Mormon faith, and the culture that it breeds in. I consider it dangerous, repugnant, and divisive. In short, just thinking about it's tenets is enough to send me into a frenzy. Or was, I came to grips with my anger and my hatred, and now it doesn't send me into a frenzy.

This thread is directed at atheists and agnostics, who at some point in their life were strong beleivers in a certain faith. Three questions.

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.
1. It was a really slow process. Ironically, it first started when I decided to take my faith seriously if I was going to believe in it. I started to research Christian denominations, and ultimately I decided there weren't any I liked enough to believe in. Then it was just a matter of more research to go from my original position (Catholic) to deist, to agnostic, to atheist.

2. When I was an agnostic, I contemplated being Buddhist, but never got into it. I also considered trying some religions just to see what they'd be like, but I decided it wasn't worth bothering.

3. I have a general disdain for any dogmatic religion. The major complaint I have is the reliance on the supernatural (rather than the individual and society in general) that so many religions promote. As far as other religions go, I wouldn't say that Catholicism stands out any more than other Western religions, but I tend to find Eastern religions more compatable with my opinions.

I'm also going to mention agnosticism here, as it's really the only "religion" I took seriously and had any justification for. I tend to hold agnostics in the same regard as atheists, as both are practically speaking the same, differing only on a matter of epistemology. The only real difference I've personally had is that I began to care about philosophical matters once I became an atheist.

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?I tried to defend my faith and couldn't. When I saw that I decided to drop it, because in trying to defend it I found I couldn't even justify it to myself.

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?I looked, but the aspects of my religion that made me quit are the same as every other religion I know of has.

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.I don't dislike it, per se. I just decided that it didn't make enough sense to me to justify belief. I know a lot of really good people who are religious. I might get annoyed at people using arguments based on that faith, however, because such are totally meaningless to me. I like Catholicism for its stance on science, much better than the normal hate-fare that the fundies throw around. Ironically that reasonable stance might be part of the reason I decided to go - the clash between faith and rationalism was too strong.

Catholic, pretty traditional. My parents are still quite into it, as well as all of my immediate family. My break with their religion hasn't been much of a problem for our relationship.

There were always holes in my "unshakable" faith in Christianity. I accepted Genesis as fact, but I also accepted the earth being 4 billion years old as fact because of all the science that proved it (I was always into he dinosaur/neanderthal thing). Looking back on it today, I find it odd that I never saw those two views as conflicting.

Honestly, I know what you mean. This sort of doublethink is one of the more dangerous parts of religion, really.

Now, for my personal story.

I'd been raised fairly protestant Christian. I went to church sometimes, and I, while younger, really believed it. But then, as I started going through middle school, I encountered evolution and science. This, at first, didn't really have any effect on me, I just never thought about how evolution applied to faith until I heard about the debate. (Oddly enough, I'd managed to figure out the descrepancy between the dinosaur stuff and religion from a very young age. I asked "why aren't dinosaurs in the bible, and how could they have existed millions of years before us if we were created on the sixth day?" to myself, but didn't think that much of it after that. Though I was really into dinosaurs)

Around my sophomore/junior year, I found that, depsite overall becoming a lot more confident and outgoing, I regressed in that matter in one area: my faith. I often felt a bit embarassed about my religion, having to say "well, I believe in Jesus and all, but... the Bible wasn't really literal, or something." Having read a fair amount of the Bible, I came across a good few things that bothered me. Specifically, the allowance of slavery. The anti-abortion and anti-homosexuality, deep down, did cause me some problems, but I ignored those and, I am ashamed to admit, allowed that to shape my political opinion. I was, at the time, pro-life. Though I ended that silliness some time before losing my faith. The anti-homosexuality, to me, at first caused fewer problems, through most of middle school, and into early high school, I was fairly... anti-homosexuality, but then I quickly realized how stupid that idea was, and abandoned it. I just disregarded the parts of the Bible that condemned such things, and argued that "Well, God sent Jesus to Earth to be our savior. Even if it's a sin, he forgives that, right?"

As I progressed, I questioned my faith more and more, but I still considered myself Christian, because I didn't think I could be an atheist. Saying "I don't believe in God" is such a huge step; I was afraid to make it. Admittedly, a big part of it was that I was afraid of Hell, and that I'd identified myself as a Christian so long, I just didn't realize that I could be anything else. I even prayed every night, saying the Lord's Prayer, and occasionally the Apostle's Creed. I managed, for some time, to convince myself of my faith.

I even went to Church on special occasions, and occasionally for other reasons. I went to my Church's graduation lunch at the end of my Senior year, and was completely social. Even at that point, I had very strong doubts, and I knew it. I just didn't voice it.

It was last semester, actually, my first semester of college, that I finally admitted what had been true for some time: I don't believe. It happened after the death of my roommate in a fatal car accident, but it wasn't the stereotypical "how could a benevolent God do this?! GAH I RENOUNCE MY FAITH." Instead, certain comments of the "If there is a God, he's an ass" nature made me think "Well, I'm past the point of no return. I imagine even if there was a God, he'd be pretty pissed at me now. Why not admit what I've thought for some time?"

That, combined with coming across Pastafarianism, which, having pirates as the holiest of people, I thought was pretty cool, led me to admit that I just didn't believe in that sky-fairy. I thought "Well, I wanna join this Church of the FSM, I suppose I should leave my old one."

Alternative faiths? Well, I did "convert" to FSMism, but that's mostly a parody, of course. I looked a bit into Buddhism, but it didn't quite... fit.

Now, how do I feel about my old faith?
Well, for the most part, I don't much like it. I don't like most religion, because it's too often used for hate. Anti-homosexual bigotry is the norm amoung Christian Americans (though many don't admit that they, personally are bigoted. They just want to deny the rights of marriage and adoption, I feel that you'd only argue to deny somebody rights on something so trivial if you were bigoted against them.), rather than the exception. (Though it might only seem that way to me, admittedly, be because I live in Georgia.) I still rather like the pastors back at the Church I went to, because they were very much representative of the philosophies that Jesus preached that I did like. Love thy neighbor and such. They were really kind and everything, and they seemed to have a genuine connection to each person. You'd walk in, and they'd know you, ask questions about your life (fairly knowledgable and specific ones, too), even with a congregation of several hundreds. Even though I probably went once every other month, AT MOST. (Though there were very occasional stretches where I went every week, and I did do confirmation classes for quite a while.)
But I just can't get over the anti-science, anti-gay, pro-slavery, and generally shitty ideas that any sensible interpretation of the Bible, if it is truly divnely inspired, logically produces. As a work of man, though, it makes sense, and fits into the changing values of the times, and for that, I can respect it a bit more. Especially that Jesus dude. I think the Christians should put some of his ideas into their beliefs.

There were always holes in my "unshakable" faith in Christianity. I accepted Genesis as fact, but I also accepted the earth being 4 billion years old as fact because of all the science that proved it (I was always into he dinosaur/neanderthal thing). Looking back on it today, I find it odd that I never saw those two views as conflicting.

I completely shook off Christianity at 14 or 15 (I am almost 16 now). Everything that happens in the world, science, and logic just goes against religion.

After I shook off religion the stupidity of some of the political views slowly went with it. Blind support of the US conservative party, gay hating, abortion hating, distrust of anyone not christian etc. etc.Excellent :D

Are you aware of the order that Genesis goes in? If days are the equivalent of ages, it still doesn't add up, it actually makes less sense.

Your argument is a typical one from the slightly more logical religious people, but once you say one part of your holy book is more of an analogy (or something like that), can you take anything else seriously?Where does Genesis speak of ages as days of creation? And how would you decide which parts of the book need to be seen as 'analogy' (or something like that) ?

Treat it all as a parable as opposed to incontrovertible historical fact? Please do.Why?

The point is that Genesis was not intended to be scientic fact. Are you sure? The earliest Sumerian creation stories go pretty much along the setup of the world in the Genesis story, or rather the Genesis story is basically of Sumerian origin. How would anyone in the time when the bible was written know what was before? There was no scientific way to find out, so they had to rely on the earliest (written) traditions, and those came from Mesopotamia.

The bible says that itself is right.


Science isn't held together by saying "What we have now and what we say is the absolute truth", so no.


When a book trys to explain how things came to be, then cites itself as a source of legitimacy and says that everything written in it is true, it becomes fair to hold it accountable for being wrong on even one thing.


Again, the bible says whatever is written in it is right because its the word of God.

Let me just say that religious truth is progesive just as scientfic truth is progressive. You are asking a Book that is well over 2 thousand years old to be up to date on all sceinftic knowledge. It ain't gonna happen. The following quote explains it much better than I, with my limited abilities, possibily could.


"Religion is the outer expression of the divine reality. Therefore it must be living, vitalized, moving and progressive. If it be without motion and non-progressive it is without the divine life; it is dead. The divine institutes are continuously active and evolutionary; therefore the revelation of them must be progressive and continuous. All things are subject to re-formation. This is a century of life and renewal. Sciences and arts, industry and invention have been reformed. Law and ethics have been reconstituted, reorganized. The world of thought has been regenerated. Sciences of former ages and philosophies of the past are useless today. Present exigencies demand new methods of solution; world problems are without precedent. Old ideas and modes of thought are fast becoming obsolete. Ancient laws and archaic ethical systems will not meet the requirements of modern conditions, for this is clearly the century of a new life, the century of the revelation of the reality and therefore the greatest of all centuries. Consider how the scientific developments of fifty years have surpassed and eclipsed the knowledge and achievements of all the former ages combined. Would the announcements and theories of ancient astronomers explain our present knowledge of the sun-worlds and planetary systems?"

(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 224)

Science isn't held together by saying "What we have now and what we say is the absolute truth", so no.

There are too many examples of science saying that we are right and this can not be wrong for me to even begin a list. The whole history of science is one of science being proven wrong after a long battle by new scientific fact. Go read the book the "Mismeasure of Man" by Stephen Gould.

You are asking a Book that is well over 2 thousand years old to be up to date on all sceinftic knowledge. It ain't gonna happen. If it is indeed divinely inspired that's exactly what to expect. After all, the omniscient biblical god is supposed to know about the secrets of nature, or what? Otherwise the book is rubbish (in that aspect).

I was brought up Catholic but remember thinking "but that doesn't make sense" about lots of aspects from a very young age. I never understood why this Jesus fellow had to die - what did that achieve? If there really is a god-person up there, why make it so difficult to believe? why not appear now and again? what kind of "loving father" marks my eternal soul with every single slip I make? and why are there so many petty rules? why is it a sin to sing a proddy hymn?

I couldn't get my head around the idea of heaven either; I can't understand a place that is supposed to be simultaneously perfect for everybody in it - I can only assume that each person has their own heaven populated with delusions...

so basically, it didn't add up. I carried on going to church every Sunday with my family until I was 18, and to Catholic schools until I was 16, because it would have caused a lot of upset for my folks if I didn't. I stopped having any rational belief in a god by about 10 years old, but the guilt and niggling fear that our all-merciful lord was going to strike me down stayed with me for about another decade.

I am interested in religions, simply because the idea of a supernatural omnipotent being creating this world and taking an interest in our lives seems so far-fetched. Its fascinating that so many people believe so strongly, fiercely in it. It can make me wonder if i missed something, but I can't make myself believe, or feel a need to believe, whichever way i look at it.

I can see that some people get a lot from religion, including Catholicism, but I have a real problem with how controlling organised religion is.

I’m a little late in the discussion, but in response to the original post:
I was raised a Methodist in a family that attended church regularly once a week. At about age nine I began to question why Christianity was correct when so many other people just as fervently believed in their particular religion. It occurred to me that most people believed in the religion that they were raised with, an insufficient reason. Thus I began questioning the faith of my parents. By the age of ten I’d dismissed the idea of monotheism and haven’t taken it seriously since.
Through my teens I dabbled in the eastern philosophies and I still find some of those concepts attractive. By my early twenties I was an atheist. I no longer find the concept of a powerful intellect creating, guiding and taking a personal interest in the universe worthy of serious consideration.
I dislike any religion that places restrictions on peoples’ freedom based on some imaginary being or beings. I do understand the need for restrictions however. I extremely dislike religions that want to impose their beliefs through government. I hate religions that validate enslavement and torture. I hate religions that justify conquest as a means to impose their dogma.

And of course, there's the whole division of my family thing.

Charting your own course is more difficult, but ultimately more rewarding than subscribing to an off-the-shelf variety of mass-appeal spirituality.

1-I first began questioning my beliefs at the age of 15, when I started seminary in High School. In Utah, this means taking a class a trimester(yes, I said trimester as in 3 per year, and that leaves very little time for other classes I wish I could have taken, such as AP Physics, French 3 and 4, more time in the automotive shop and the multimedia lab...but that's a failing of the school board in my region) that teaches more in depth knowledge of the LDS faith.

Yes, I said it, I'm a reforming Mormon. Now, I feel an obligation to inform you about the practice of repentance in the Mormon culture as opposed to many views on the matter. Most "sins" you pray and fast and study until you feel better, i.e. you have been forgiven your sins. This is then washed away the next time to partake in the Sacrament, the Mormon version of Communion. Baptism in the LDS faith is essentially a remission of all sins committed previously, and the Sacrament is another form of this remission, which means that each week instead of confession, you take the Sacrament and that wipes your slate clean with God. However, in the case of so-called "serious" transgressions, you much seek the counsel of the Bishop of your ward. The Bishop acts in some ways as a Pastor does, but also acts as the father of the ward(ward is a Mormon term for congregation). His counsel is what gets you forgiven for the "major" sins, and for the sake of this answer, I'm going to list a few. Consuming alcohol, or using tobacco, using illegal drugs of any kind, having premarital sex (yes, this includes masturbation, mutual masturbation, 1st base, 2nd base, and 3rd base, homosexual acts of any nature), and extra-marital sex(including all the sub-types i listed above).

So, with this pretext, I can now elaborate on the initial emotional trigger for separating from my faith. I remember quite a lot of the actual day I separated, so much, in fact, that it has given me reference to the various states of belief in my own life. I was 16, and regularly attended church, studied the scriptures--including the Book of Mormon, and various works by Prophets in the church's history. On Sunday, after several hours of lessons on various doctrines, and taking part in the Sacrament ceremony, I felt I needed to see the Bishop for counseling in my "sins" of the premarital sex variety. They were almost all inclusive, except for the acts of a homosexual nature. After disclosing my guilt and the need for forgiveness, I was met with several statements that even now make me angry.

Note: All my sexual discoveries had taken place the week prior, after a particularly successful date with a girl from my high school.

He said that he knew that I had trangressions of this nature, that he had felt it as soon as I was raised to the rank of Teacher(in the Mormon faith there are several levels in the Priesthood, the first being Deacon which is achieved at the age of 12, the second Teacher at the age of 14, third being Priest (16), Elder (18), and High Priest(usually beyond the age of 25)), and had been waiting for 2 years for me to confess these sins. He went on to say that masturbation leads to homosexuality. In all seriousness. I was astonished. He claimed to have known about my sins for 2 years before they even occurred! Had I been less doubtful of my faith, meaning had I not questioned the tenets of its beliefs, I probably would have taken this to mean he was receiving some sort of revelation on behalf of his congregation, but as I wasn't too sure about it to begin with, I walked out. For the next hour and a half I studied my intense emotional and spiritual spectrum, and came to thought that I had been duped by my parents, my bishop, my neighbors, everything in my life was a farce.

As I stated before, this experience was a major turning point in my life, which lead to my parents turning me out, my hometown turning its back on my existence, and my life basically being turned upside down.

There is a positive note to this story, though. After 3 years or so of being cut off from my parents, my brothers, and my sister, I was welcomed back and have renewed my relationships, although we're still very distant.

2-I never contemplated another faith, as I figured something like this would happen again and again. Although, had this experience not occurred, I would have served a mission for 2 years, attempting to convert all those in my path, and probably would have stayed true to the faith. I was a very faithful follower, and now, I feel somewhat like the realization of Nietzsche's supposed "Most Dangerous Follower", I was both intelligent and capable, and most of all, unquestioning. However, that event did occur, and it shook my beliefs, my morality, even my sense of self to the depths of my core.

3-I abhor the Mormon faith, and the culture that it breeds in. I consider it dangerous, repugnant, and divisive. In short, just thinking about it's tenets is enough to send me into a frenzy. Or was, I came to grips with my anger and my hatred, and now it doesn't send me into a frenzy.

thank you for sharing this rather personal and intense part of your life. it was very interesting and enlightening.

1) Were your reasons for leaving faith based on emotional triggers, or was it more logic based, such as you simply decided there was a lack of evidence for God etc. Or was it a combination of all these things?

2) Did you contemplate converting to any alternative faith, did you just decide to quit religion in the cold turkey sense?

3) Do you dislike your former religion, or at least some of its aspects. How strongly? And how do you feel that your former religion compares to other faiths.

Please specify, what faith exactly you used to follow, and how strongly commited you were to that faith.

1)I used to be Jewish. Judaism has a whole lot of laws that you have to take on faith (like no shrimp). (It also doesn't have the concept that God is omnibenevolent.) Eventually, I realized that doing something because God says so isn't a good idea. Then I realized that it's really hard to believe in God when you don't think he's good, and I was also figuring out the philosophical arguments against God, so I went to agnosticism, then heard about Russel's teapot, then became an atheist.

2)I researched Buddhism and Shinto a while ago, but I didn't like Buddhism because of the rebirth thing(which requires faith, which I didn't and still don't have) and I didn't like Shinto because having a pantheon of Gods create your nation specifically is a big clue your religion is false. I'd like the concept of kami if I could bring myself to actually believe in them.

3)I don't really like Judaism any more. The OT is right out barbaric. The rabbis mostly make up for that, but they've got their own problems. For one, they don't seem to mind the barbarism God has already done much(Oh, he killed over 10,000 people for complaining? They deserved it.), they just prevent future barbarism. It also has trouble living in the present, and it's got huge amounts of laws detailing how you do everything (Did you know you're supposed to put on your right shoe first, but tie your left shoe first? Not kidding, that is actually part of Judaism. I'd find a source, but I'm too lazy. I can find a source for this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shomer_negiah), though.)
On the other hand, considering it's based on the OT, it's probably the best possible religion that could be based on it.
EDIT: I just realized that this post sounds like it was written by a chipmunk on weed. I'm also too lazy to rewrite the whole thing, so it's gonna have to keep sounding like a chipmunk on weed.

*snip*

Wow. You sound almost exactly like me, except I'm slightly more inclined to believe in some form of "supernatural" (not really the right word, but meh) force.

I was a small time Christian at age... sixish, but at age eight or so I just thought

"Wait, so all these religions say they're true with very little or no evidence and if I pick the wrong one I'm going to burn in hell?"

From then on I decided it was better to hope whichever (if any) deity(s) are real know that I would worship them if I knew just which ones they were :p

I wouldn't risk my money on a 1 in 100 chance, let alone my eternal soul :D

I still have mixed respect for the Church as a social institution. It takes some unsavory and immoral positions, (say, on birth control) but it has a cathartic function and is a pillar of many communities.

Also, at least in my experience here in the US, catholics are not the kind of know-nothing maniac trash that 'evangelicals' &c. are. I deeply dislike that sort, but it is not my former religion.

I was more or less raised in a not too religious household. My father would sit there and say, "If God is all knowing and all seeing you'd think he could come up with a better way than having to kill to survive. Maybe something's there, maybe something isn't there, but either way I'm not going to follow something that makes us destroy to live."

I grew up in the deep south, the bible belt, so I had my share of religiosity thrown at me and I never understood why people couldn't be good moral people because that's what you do, because that's the proper nice thing to do.

If it is indeed divinely inspired that's exactly what to expect. After all, the omniscient biblical god is supposed to know about the secrets of nature, or what? Otherwise the book is rubbish (in that aspect).

If God had revealed all of that knowledge through His Phophets 3 thousand years ago no living person would have understood one small fraction of what was revealed, and we would have no scienctific inquiring minds. What a BORING world that would be.

Why wouldn't we have scientific minds? Man has asked questions for a very long time, and it's not because he had the Bible, that's a recent development, and certainly not the last of any consequence in our complete history.

Why wouldn't we have scientific minds? Man has asked questions for a very long time, and it's not because he had the Bible, that's a recent development, and certainly not the last of any consequence in our complete history.

My reply was to someone who said the the Bible is false becasue it is scientificly incorrect. My response was that if God had given all scientfic knowledge to people in the Bible the recepients of that knowledge would not understand it anyway.

I agree with you that it is the nature of human activity to ask questions, to not accept answers that don't satisfy humans both in intellect and spirit. Religion, by it's true nature does not interfer with that need. In fact true religion encourages questions. You can see this in the early stages of all the major religions as the culture they encouraged flourished and reached great heights.