Recently I was asked how I lost my fear of hell; how I came to be ambivalent about the topic. Obviously there is no one-size-fits-all solution to this problem—I can only relate what happened to me. Repetition. Repeated inability to maintain belief in the supernatural consequently causing me to apply the same method to the afterlife and realizing there isn’t one.
I was raised Calvinist where the oft-heard phrase was “Once saved; always saved.” Once you became a Christian, no matter what you did, no matter what happened—your salvation was assured. BUT (and this was a huge asterisk to the whole doctrine) there were people who seemed to have converted, but subsequently did not live like Christians. We wrote those people off to “not being saved in the first place.”
Meaning you are assured of your salvation, unless you aren’t. Real helpful, right? Since one was never quite certain the original salvation took hold. (Worse, there were testimonies from people who claimed they made a salvation prayer as a child, but later realized it was insufficient, and became Christians later in life. Here was irrefutable proof, just because you said the right thing, you may not have made it in yet!)
Having now deconverted--I hear the same accusation made by Calvinists acquaintances; informing me I wasn’t saved in the first place. Looks like my childhood worry was well-placed, eh?!
Further, we believed in the Rapture, so a great test of one’s salvation would be the day where 100’s of millions of people (including everyone I knew) disappeared. If you were left standing here…well…there you go! Not-saved. I can still recall moments in stores, being separated from my mother for longer than expected, and thinking, “The Rapture happened, and I was Left Behind*”
*Yes, those where the exact words we thought, and yes, they were always capitalized. There was always a doctrinal question whether a person who thought they were saved could get another chance after the Rapture…it was heavily intoned one could not. One would live (at best) another 7 years and be doomed to hell, knowing all 7 years that hell was coming.
Or I would come home from school, and unexpectedly no one was home. I remember calling friends and their parents, figuring if no one answered, I was Left Behind.
How do you talk someone out of fear? You can tell me all day long about the safety of parachutes and sky diving and statistics regarding incidents, and procedures and anything you want. I would be scared and staining my shorts jumping from a plane. You don’t “talk” someone out of fear.
I recall my first jury trial. I was nervous, sweating, scared. How do I present my case to a jury? How do I object? What do I wear; where do I stand; how loud do I speak? Now, I look forward to jury trials.
Why? What is the difference? Simple—repetition. After doing them over and over, I have learned the answers to those questions. I know what to expect. Are there still surprises and new experiences? Sure…but having had other surprises and new experiences, one learns how to adapt.
I imagine if I jumped out of a plane a coupla hundred times, I won’t have the fear. Maybe…
But how does one “repeat” the opposite of an in-grained belief? I was raised in a Christian home, I said the right prayer, I lived a Christian life. And each Sunday I was assured I was saved…”BUT”…and each Sunday it was reiterated there were those who were not. And while debates may rage as to who was in heaven; Hell’s citizenship was certain: Hitler, Nietzsche, Darwin and atheists.
Upon initial deconversion, I was still fearful of Hell. Actually, that is not quite accurate. I was more fearful I had lost Heaven. We had been taught there was this sublime place where one can eat and not get fat. More importantly, one can see those who had passed on before—grandparents, parents, siblings, children and friends. Even more importantly, justice would be dispensed—wrongs righted; rewards delivered. And most important of all (to me) knowledge would be provided. We would finally get theology correct.
And now Heaven…didn’t…….exist. The more I lost belief in Heaven (it really is a fantasy if you think about it), the same I lost belief in Hell. One does not exist without the other.
I enjoy life just as much—even more—without the worry about getting the afterlife correct. I have my hands full getting this one right. Sure there are moments where I find a twinge of regret we only have a few years. The idea of Heaven is a fun fantasy. But then I shake my head and deal with the reality we have. A world desperately in need of human compassion without the easy relinquishing of responsibility by claiming some god will swoop in and solve all our problems.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Ah, Hell. Is Christianity truly so impotent that it must resort to threats to keep the pews warm? Hell has power only over those who believe in it, thus only the faithful have any reason to fear. Realizing this was, for me, the final straw. I'm only embarrassed that it took so long.
ReplyDeleteWhen I prayed to receive Jesus Christ as my personal savior at the age of seventeen, a big part of the attraction was having certainty. I could know that my sins were forgiven. I could know that I was going to heaven. I could know God's plan for my life. I could know that I was once saved, always saved. I was tired of confusion.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I was never saved, but I sure as hell thought that I was. I talked to older wiser Christians who told me that I had jumped through the right hoops. If I wasn't saved, then clearly the whole certainty thing was a big lie.
I think it would be nice if there is a heaven. I like to think of my Mom and Dad enjoying each other's company. What pisses me off is the idea that there lives were meaningless if there isn't one. What they gave to each other and their nine children doesn't matter at all if they didn't guess right about which religion is true.
It's not about guessing the right one. It's about searching the truth, demanding it until you find it. Not giving up or dismissing it all because of what simple minded humans have done or said to perhaps make you turn away. Just because we haven't found a cure for cancer doesn't mean there isn't one. You keep going until you've found it, exhausting all resources along the way.
DeleteAnon,
DeleteThe problem is knowing the truth when I find it. Since my mind is incapable of comprehending an infinite God, the only way I am going to understand His truth is if he chooses to communicate it to me and unless he communicates it to me directly, I am going to have to rely on some simple minded human who claims that God communicated it to him. However, since I have no criteria by which to determine God's truth, I have no criteria by which to determine who has received His revelation. That means I have to guess.
You don't have to guess. What happened from the time of you being 17 and knowing without a doubt who God was, to saying there is no possible way to know of a specific God. I see it as if there is a God, he WOULD make himself known. Which I personally believe he has. Just for an example, Christ is mentioned throughout the entire Old Testament hundreds of years before he ever lived and to see how the same story weaves itself throughout scripture, it's hard to believe That so many different people over thousands of years could continue a story that man even has a hard time grasping. And the theme is of Gods unfailing love, not his wrath or judgment or demand for perfection from humans or for them to guess right or to be lucky enough to choose right. God woes us, we don't desire him. But I do know for a fact is if you ask God to reveal himself, he will. But that's where faith comes in, nothing that evidence or persuasion could ever do. And then of course, many don't even want to go there. All I can do is share what I've experienced.
DeleteI see it as if there is a God, he WOULD make himself known.
DeleteI see Christians make this assertion fairly often, and the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that it is nothing but naive wishful thinking. You might want Him to make Himself known to you. You might think that it would be convenient if He did. But you cannot claim to understand an infinite God's ways and purposes sufficiently to know what He would do. Moreover, you cannot know that He would do so by speaking words in a human language that you can understand. You cannot know that He would make Himself known to any extent beyond the application of the reason He gave us to the world in which He placed us.
What happened to me in my late teens was that God didn't make Himself known to me in the ways that I was told to expect, and I didn't find the peace and the joy that I was told to expect, and I didn't find the persuasive evidence that I was told to expect. Much as I liked the people and the feeling of belonging, I couldn't convince myself that something was real or true when reason told me that it wasn't.
It's not about guessing the right one. It's about searching the truth, demanding it until you find it. Not giving up or dismissing it all because of what simple minded humans have done or said to perhaps make you turn away.
DeleteThis is at best a statement of the obvious; at worst, it is condescending and dismissive: it could be read as, "Because you don't believe what I believe, you must have conducted a superficial search."
Just because we haven't found a cure for cancer doesn't mean there isn't one. You keep going until you've found it, exhausting all resources along the way.
It's hard to understand precisely what you refer to by "it" in the second sentence. On the one hand, you might refer to truth, or, more precisely, knowledge. The problem is that knowledge of anything can never be certain, so when do you really stop? On the other hand, you might refer to a god, but that would "bake in" an obvious confirmation bias, compromising your methodology so fatally I don't think you could call yourself an honest seeker after the truth, especially if the truth were that there were no god.
I see it as if there is a God, he WOULD make himself known.
DeleteUnlike Vinny, I find this statement relatively plausible, especially if we mean by "god" the sort of (hypothetical) being Christians usually apply the label to. Indeed, just that no such god has actually made itself known then becomes a good reason to disbelieve the existence of such a god.
Which I personally believe he has.
You "personally believe" so? Yay. Do you know so? Let's look at your evidence.
Just for an example, Christ is mentioned throughout the entire Old Testament hundreds of years before he ever lived and to see how the same story weaves itself throughout scripture, it's hard to believe That so many different people over thousands of years could continue a story that man even has a hard time grasping.
That's your evidence? With all due respect, introducing evidence of this abysmally low quality -- akin to saying that you know that Sugar Bombs breakfast cereal is part of a healthy breakfast because you saw it on an ad -- almost completely undermines your credibility. This argument has been addressed extremely thoroughly in counter-apologetic literature; you do not seem to have performed even the most basic scholarship. But it could be worse; you at least didn't quote scripture.
If you are not willing to do basic research and scholarship, why should we take you as an honest seeker after the truth?
And the theme is of Gods unfailing love, not his wrath or judgment or demand for perfection from humans or for them to guess right or to be lucky enough to choose right.
Have you even performed basic scholarship on your own position? You are not improving your credibility here.
But I do know for a fact is if you ask God to reveal himself, he will.
Now you are simply demonstrating incompetence with the English language, further eroding your intellectual credibility. Grammatically, the subordinate conjunction "if" introduces a counterfactual or non-factual assertion: you assume that the reader has not yet in fact asked god to reveal himself. You are literally saying that something both is and is not a fact, which is an incompetent use of grammar.
There is a more charitable interpretation, of course, (i.e. you really mean, "It is true that if you ask God..."; counterfactuals can still be true), but that doesn't help your case. You are at best merely rephrasing your original assertion in a fallacy of circular reasoning; at worst you contradict your original assertion:
(1) If a god existed, it would not make itself known if not asked
contradicts
(2) If a god existed, it would make itself known.
But that's where faith comes in, nothing that evidence or persuasion could ever do.
Oh, so you're not an honest seeker after the truth. You have faith entirely immune to the tools of truth-seeking: evidence and persuasion.
All I can do is share what I've experienced.
You understand that anonymously "sharing your experiences" with strangers without an invitation to do so is extremely rude and insulting. How would you feel if a stranger cornered you on a bus and started discussing his morning bowel movement in vivid detail?
You are rude, insulting, illogical, lacking even the minimal understanding of basic scholarship. In short, a fairly typical Christian.
Larry, there is a reason I never responseD to any of your comments as you are an abrasive and rude person. Unlike Vinny, you do not accept any dialogue that does not agree with your type of thinking. Unfortunately, your way of counter apologetics is to insult the person, not the argument. The reason for anonymously leaving a comment was because I stumbled across this blog by chance yesterday. Now, I'm even more convinced I dont need to reveal my identity here. If I wanted to write a thesis here, I would. Instead, I quickly and briefly wrote what came to my mind in response to Vinny who at least seems approachable. I enjoy dialogue with people of other faiths/ no faith who are OPEN and not with a chip on their shoulder. So continue are your barefoot road condemning, judging and attacking people who hold to a particular faith. It's very sad we live in a world where people cannot go deeper to discuss suc things without hatred getting in the way. And as for Vinny, thank you for sharing your thoughts/experiences with me, I appreciate vulnerability and honesty.
DeleteAnd as for cornering someone on a bus, no one goes up to random people "preaching" unless they are a little off. This is a blog concerning religion, thoughts, ideas, the appropriate place for such discussions. And when a person truly believes in salvation they would want to talk about it, hardly similar to your vile relation to defacation. I wonder of you talk like this to people in real life or iIf t's because you can hide behind your computer screen. Anyway, it's been real, no need to comment back.
DeleteApparently my first response did not post. But basically I was saying that it's nice to chat with people like Vinny who are open and honest who do not feel like need to attack the person for their response/beliefs. It's is funny how so many non believers pride themselves on being open/ nonjudgmental/free, etc. However people like Larry barefoot are a prime example that this is not always the case. Instead of a proper rebuttal, personal attacks are felt needed. I am thankful that to be a Christian, there is no requirement of ring a scholar. I'm never offended by anyone sharing their experiences, sounds like an extremely over sensitive person to be offended by what I said. I said nothing to belittle Vinny and it's obvious as he replied with an open response without attack. As for barefoot bum, your rebuttal actually holds no value. Prove that there is no mention of Jesus in the OT written centuries before he lived. But that is just a point. Instead of actually taking the "scholarly" time to respond to my quick and " unscholarly" response to Vinny, you basically attacked the person and really said nothing at all. So what if I misused grammar? Does that really invalidate my point? Do what If I said "if", I was actually trying to respect Vinnys beliefs as opposed to being so "right about my beliefs" as we are often blamed of doing. You can pick and pick all you want but tue reality is, I don't need to write a thesis or take apologetics to know the reason I have breath in my lungs. I will accept responses from people like Vinny who are open to fun discussions like this, not personal attacks.
DeleteI never liked the idea of heaven as much as I thought I should. I've always been pretty happy with the here and now. The first time I actually felt good about heaven was when my dad died. It made me more comfortable thinking about going there into the great unknown if he was there too. Both heaven and hell feel contrived to me now, though I have been interested recently in hearing about near death experiences.
ReplyDeleteVinny,
Yes, I wanted certainty too when I was saved, but I never felt it. Getting saved doesn't seem to be so simple after all.
There is a fantastic fantasy trilogy, Werwolves of London, written by Brian Stableford. In one series of scenes, the transdimensional entities which are the deus ex machina for the novel "create" all the different concepts of heaven which the protagonsists, good and bad, can imagine. All of these heavens are horrbly inadequate for a thinking human being. Especially for "eternity".
Delete"Upon initial deconversion, I was still fearful of Hell. Actually, that is not quite accurate. I was more fearful I had lost Heaven."
ReplyDeleteI was still fearful of Hell during my de-conversion. But I must confess that I have never, and I mean never, really looked forward to an eternity in Heaven. The entire concept of Heaven has just never impressed me. Streets of Gold? Gates of giant Pearls? I do not prize jewels, gems and precious metals here on Earth. Why would I desire them in the afterlife?
Ah… but they are metaphor to represent that which you prize most!
Yeah… whatever.
I realized when I rented the 90’s movie “What Dreams May Come” why I have never been impressed with Heaven. Movies and Books are especially good at representing Hell. The imagination is limitless when depicting horrors and torments and the tortures of the afterlife. But ever see a depiction of Heaven in the movies? Angels with harps, floating on clouds? Eating grapes around Grecian columns in the Elysian fields? For all eternity? And this is the best movies can do??? I got one word for that – lame!
Both otherworldly destinations are products of the superstitious imagination. But for some reason, our imagination cannot conceive of the infinite pleasures of Heaven. Heaven, for the most part simply becomes – Not Hell. And that is good enough.
Hell does not concern me anymore. It scares me about as much as I fear Sasquatch sneaking into my house while I am asleep. But I am not ambivalent about it, because I remember the terror it filled me with, and I know what it does to others. I still remember.
HeIsSailing: Hell is also a useful concept that leads one to reject the horrible creation known as Christianity. (Or Islam for that matter).
ReplyDeleteI suppose my experience is quite similar. AT the beginning I was still afraid. But as I kept on discovering more and more lies that I had believed, the threat of hell became just another story that I couldn't believe.
ReplyDeleteI now think there couldn't possibly be a being who claims to be good and also roasts people in hell. There just can't.
Thanks for great information you write it very clean. I am very lucky to get this tips from you
ReplyDeleteSandwiches New Westminster
Another thing for me...Hell does not make me "afraid". It makes me angry. I guess there us still a believer/theist lurking underneath the bravado, but the concept of eternal punishment pushes me away even more from the mythical Godhood. It doesn's scare me straight but makes me angry that there could (theoretically) be such a monster as Yahweh. Even the Calvinists sorta get that when they somewhat admit that their God is a monster THAT MUST BE OBEYED anyway.
ReplyDeleteAccording to true 5-point Calvinism, obedience isn't even a choice. It's predetermined.
DeleteI grew up in the 5-point Dutch Reformed church. At the end of the day, existence is just a movie playing itself out.
Written by a stupid and pathetic god, an illiterate schizophrenic carpenter son turned zombie, and some ghost who's purpose is never really explained, except to rape a virgin (Pro-tip Joseph: she cheated on you).
Oh, and all three are individually 100% god. Three separate 100% individuals = one 100% individual. No wonder the reply to every question is "it's a mystery"
It's not so much the concept of a hell or heaven, but that if these do not exist it means our lives are meaningless and we are void souls wandering aimlessly until we die. THAT concept is unfathomable.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 11:59,
ReplyDelete“Meaning” is a loaded term difficult to pinpoint. Do roller coasters have “meaning”? Arguably they are a selfish waste of time—waiting in line for 15 minutes for a 2 minute ride that solely pleases oneself. No one gets a benefit from a roller coaster except a few moments of pleasure.
Yet I enjoy them. Why? It is the moment away from reality—a break from work and heady responsibility to laugh with adrenalin rushing from a combination of height, speed and fear. I find “meaning” in roller coasters as they make the rest of my life a little bit easier.
Now I certainly understand why roller coasters may not have “meaning” for someone else—they may not enjoy them or find them a needless waste. Thus we discover human diversity calls for “meaning” to be discovered in a variety of ways, suit to our individuality.
I saw Herman Mehta asked this same question once, and I cannot improve on his answer (paraphrased.) “Have you ever gone on a vacation? Even though you know it is going to end, does this mean you enjoy it less? Of course not. In the same way, we know life is going to end, but still enjoy the time we have.”
I may be a void soul, wandering aimlessly until I die…but I am certainly enjoying the journey!
To quote George Carlin, "It's like someone gives you an ice cream cone and you let it melt in your hand in the hopes that he'll give you another one."
ReplyDeleteMore unfathomable to me is the idea that the eternal meaning of our lives is determined by our ability to guess correctly based on the available evidence who, among all the various claimants, really did hear from God.