Fortunately, I too am comfortably married to an ex-Catholic atheist farmer who walked out of confession at 11, having struggled to invent a few sins so as to let the priest get on with his job, and, as he says, "kept on walking." He doesn't argue with anyone, but just says if asked, "no gods, no devils, just us." As you say, we agree on most things, and so, at least within my marriage, there is a minimum of "sturm" and only the odd "drang"... Cheers back to you.

Your story reads like so many "born again" leavings. It requires effort to leave, and the effects are often traumatic to families and friends.

My own experience was one with no sturm und drang. Merely the recognition that it all made no sense. I was born an atheist, raised in the mostly moderate Presbyterian tradition and reclaimed my atheism at 16. At 65, I am very comfortably married, with children. My wife is a radical Catholic lady, condemning her church quite frequently, but comfortable with the wide community it provides her. We both agree with each other on almost everything.

Cheers.

To answer your question, I was brought up in the fundamentalist evangelical "born-again" tradition, by missionaries, in a country I will not name, because there weren't that many of us. We had no specific denominational affiliation, and went to many churches over the years, including some reformed ones, but always affiliating ourselves to the "born-again" movements within each church. Books like "Poisonwood Bible" and " Don't Sleep, there are Snakes," while not entirely true to my own experience, certainly ring lots of bells. My parents are good people, as it happens, much better than their own Bible.

My leaving process took place about 25-30 years ago, during my college years - but I have to say, my decision appears more right to me as the years go by, and as I look back, the faith I left is more and more like a suit of clothes that didn't fit right even when I was small enough to get into it - with all the places I've grown into since, there would be no hope of putting it back on, without cutting important bits off of myself.

Still, I love my family, and remain as close to them as is possible, given the circumstances - including the fact that they feel so compelled to pray for my salvation - which, although I can totally understand why, still feels like an outright rejection of who I've become. Perhaps who I've become, by definition, feels to them like an outright rejection too, so I retain some sympathy.

Quixote, I realise that you are far too well-mannered to say so, and if the following question is rude, please forgive and ignore...but here goes..
Does your belief in our essential fallen-ness and need for a saviour mean that you pray for me (and the others here)?

Hey Scotlyn,

It's a great question, and not rude in the least. I can't think of a "too rude" question, actually, and if someone asked one, it might be fun to see the "other" Quixote come out :)

The folks here have requested specifically in the past that I not pray for them, perhaps not me specifically, but they've said it's offensive, so I honor that. You'll also notice that I leave my Christianity at the door of this place for the most part, unless asked to bring it in. This puts in me the awkward position of being criticized sharply by some of my Christian brethren, but, that's their problem.

The intolerable burdensomeness of this only became evident to me when I stopped.

I understand, and have witnessed firsthand what you're referring to. I'm out of a reformed background, though, and this burden is not as prevalent in that tradition for theological reasons. May I ask what Christian tradition you left? I'm guessing that will prove the difference between us in this. At any rate, please know I don't project this onto you or anyone else here.

I remember you saying this, but it's not that way for me. If anything, this belief helps me to be more forgiving of folks, knowing first that I'm no better, and second that there's a reason people do what they do from time to time. Perhaps you were taught that fallens implied an utter depravity? I wouldn't agree with that either, so maybe that's the difference.

Quixote, I realise that you are far too well-mannered to say so, and if the following question is rude, please forgive and ignore...but here goes..
Does your belief in our essential fallen-ness and need for a saviour mean that you pray for me (and the others here)?

You see, the requirement I felt within my former faith, was to regard others who did not know Jesus as having a "god-shaped" hole in their lives - in other words that, at least in this respect, I knew something about them that they either didn't know or refused to recognise. The fact that I also knew that I was no better than them, (just more fortunate in having found out where to find the right filling for my own "god-shaped" hole) didn't change the fact that I was forced to project this belief onto my relationship with every non-believer I met, no matter how much I liked them, and no matter how little they seemed to be lacking in this vital fundamental. The intolerable burdensomeness of this only became evident to me when I stopped.

I found this doctrine utterly skewed all my relationships, such that I could not have a normal friendship with someone not of my faith

I remember you saying this, but it's not that way for me. If anything, this belief helps me to be more forgiving of folks, knowing first that I'm no better, and second that there's a reason people do what they do from time to time. Perhaps you were taught that fallens implied an utter depravity? I wouldn't agree with that either, so maybe that's the difference.

I am aware of the fact that my perceptions and internal reconstruction of what the world is like are based on my brain's active interpretation

Excellent. You've got the makings of a fine continental philosopher. These analytics around here could use some more of that balance :) Still, there's still the lingering tendency here to confuse a basic belief with one that's necessarily true. There's a difference....

This is not a solipsistic disbelief in the reality of the world,

I agree, there's often an urge to insist on an analytic/solipsistic either/or dichotomy that doesn't exist.

MS Quixote - I wonder if you will get around to my question (comment #156) - do you believe in the essential fallenness of humanity, and our essential need for a saviour?

and you answered - for which, thanks...

I apologize, Scotlyn. The oversight was not intentional on my part. Actually, I was enjoying following your comments, and had meant to answer you. Yes, I do believe that. Why do you ask?

The reason I asked is that, as I explained, this doctrine is at the core of my decision to leave my faith (although it remains part of a larger process and set of questions). I found this doctrine utterly skewed all my relationships, such that I could not have a normal friendship with someone not of my faith, and my friendships within the faith were likewise skewed by a continual intrusive vigilance as to the state of one another's "relationship" to our saviour. In otherwords, this intrusive third party seemed to stand in the way of really getting to know, appreciate, cherish, and relate to every other human being.

When I relinquished this doctrine all of that went away. I could now relate to others for themselves, and present myself to the world for what I am. It felt exactly like a liberation - I, and the people I know and love, are NOT fallen!

Quixote you also said

I don't believe that you walk around all day skeptical of things that are readily apparent to your senses, self-evident, or incorrigible.

Strangely, I am probably one of the people who do. I am aware of the fact that my perceptions and internal reconstruction of what the world is like are based on my brain's active interpretation of, for example, a selection of wavelengths of light and sound. Although I believe my perceptions probably correspond well enough with what is around me for most practical purposes, I also am aware that my brain can "fill in" blind spots so they are not noticeable, I am aware that my brain constantly searches for patterns and can sometimes come up with one that is not necessarily a good fit for what is being looked at. I know that my beliefs and prior experiences and current mood can all affect what I perceive, and that there are lots of other possible "slips twixt the cup and the lip". (The cup being the world around me and the lip being its representation in my brain).

This is not a solipsistic disbelief in the reality of the world, but simply an awareness that my perception may only be an approximate fit with that world reality. Although, as I said, a good enough fit for most practical purposes.

I don't believe that you walk around all day skeptical of things that are readily apparent to your senses, self-evident, or incorrigible.

Perhaps some of us do? When people ask me what I believe, my response is that I don't believe anything. When pressed, I will admit that "I believe I'd like another glass of wine". Its a distinction I use between belief and trust. Trust can be betrayed.

Most of the time, I do trust my senses. As for self-evident, hmmm. And incorrigible, as in impossible to be mistaken or uncertain about its truth, unable to be corrected, I find that statements of personal state might be incorrigible, but lack trust that statement about the world we inhabit can be incorrigible.

Approximations, current best guesses and tentative conclusions I find useful. People tend to die when certainty is invoked.

Please keep beating the dead horse until incorrigibility and belief in God are no longer conflated here, at least in my case.

My belief in God is not incorrigible. That I have an awareness of something is. Many believers make the jump directly from one to the other. I don't.

Knowing that I could be wrong about my beliefs leads me to be skeptical of those same beliefs. It seems to me that such skepticality is a good thing.

I don't believe that you walk around all day skeptical of things that are readily apparent to your senses, self-evident, or incorrigible.

Knowing that I could be wrong about my beliefs leads me to be skeptical of those same beliefs. It seems to me that such skepticality is a good thing.

Besides, in a blog with some often lengthy discussions it is helpful to know one word to use in place of a drawn out explanation of a more complex idea.

Amen, Danikajaye.

and I in NO WAY mean this as a derogatory comparison or with any condescension

Thank you.

I do believe, as you have said, that individuals are maybe predisposed to believe or not to believe.

Siding with the dread Christian when it seems appropriate to you? You're a freethinker. I like that. Great Santa story, BTW.

One final thing- just because something can be explained by chemistry or physics or any other branch of science does that make the world any less amazing? For me, no.

Neither does it for me. But the truly amazing thing would be if we could explain everything through chemistry or physics. :)