The Church Shoots Its own Wounded!
by John W. Loftus
How many sermons have Christians heard about Joseph and Potipher’s wife where the preacher asked something like this: “How many men would've been able to overcome this temptation?” And they conclude with, “I fear not many men here could’ve overcome this.” What are preachers saying here?...That Joseph was a man of faith and had real strength of character, but most men, even Christian men, do not. And yet when a Christian (former one) like me actually does succumb to such a temptation, these same preachers are quick to condemn me. Isn't that odd? Which is it?
The story of my affair [which took place 15 years ago(!)] that I tell in my book, Why I Rejected Christianity, is a story that shows the church is the only place that shoots its own wounded. Say it isn't so? If someone has a problem, the church is the first to condemn.
Christians stress that the marriage vows are sacred. And what part of those vows is most important? Sexual faithfulness. Why? Aren't there other vows there too? Like to love, honor, and "obey?" LOL. There are Christian couples out there that can boast of being faithful to each other in marriage for 25 years and more, but they hate each other and bicker and fight all day long. But whoopee, they're faithful to each other! Big deal. Their marriages are a sham.
Ethicist Richard Taylor wrote a book on Having Love Affairs (Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1982) and he discusses whose fault it is when there is an affair. I am not excusing myself here, but as he explains, there may be more to it. “Though a wife may be ever so dutiful, faultless, and virtuous in every skill required for the making of a home, if she lacks passion, then in a very real sense she already is without a husband, or he, at least, is without a wife. Similarly, a husband who is preoccupied with himself and his work, who is oblivious to the needs of his wife and insensitive to her vanities, who takes for granted her unique talents and who goes about his business more or less as though she did not exist, has already withdrawn as a husband, except in name.” “What must be remembered by those persons who wish to condemn adultery is that the primary vow of marriage is to love, and that vow is not fulfilled by the kind of endless busyness exemplified in the industrious and ever generous husband or the dedicated homemaking wife…What has to be stressed is that the first infidelity may or may not have been committed by the one who is having an affair. The first and ultimate infidelity is to withhold the love that was promised, and which was originally represented as the reason for marriage to begin with.”
Christians are still condemning me here at ex-Christian.net. Why? Because that's what they do, and it should be no surprise to atheists here that Pastors have problems with sexual sin. Now I am happily married to an atheist and faithful to her. I love that woman. She is my best friend.
In my opinion Christianity is psychologically harmful by creating and maintaining the circumstances whereby we do wrong, since we cannot be free to express ourselves or even confess our problems to other Christians for fear of condemnation. I no longer have to hide my true feelings about anything with my wife since I no longer have the Christian guilt trip and the potential condemnation that goes with it.
For the record, it wasn’t just my affair that led me to reject Christianity. I could’ve gotten beyond the damage that had done to my faith. It was being cut off from the church, of which the affair with her was the catalyst. Taken together with what I was learning at the time, and the subsequent church experiences I had, I eventually came to reject my former faith.
By the way, haven't you seen documentaries on TV where a con-artist (male or female) got someone to marry them for their money and then killed them? There are people out there like that. Wake up! This woman wasn't that bad of course, but she was a modern day Potipher's wife who sought to destroy me because I was speaking out against pornography in town and she was a former stripper who had it "in" for preachers like me. And I never said it wasn't my fault, either.
Now, deal with my arguments. I want to stress the fact that my thinking has indeed changed. You cannot explain away my present ideas by pointing to these bad experiences in my life. They may be what provoked my thinking, but they don’t explain my thoughts. I am an atheist regardless of the experiences that led up to my present way of thinking. In talking with me you will have to deal with my arguments. Otherwise, I could point to your past experiences and explain your beliefs away as a product of what you have experienced too! People believe and doubt for a wide variety of reasons, and that’s all there is to it.
The real questions to me are: 1) Why God allowed this in the first place, if he knew the outcome would be that I'd become an atheist because of it and eventually lead others "astray;" and, 2) Why does the church shoot its own wounded?
How many sermons have Christians heard about Joseph and Potipher’s wife where the preacher asked something like this: “How many men would've been able to overcome this temptation?” And they conclude with, “I fear not many men here could’ve overcome this.” What are preachers saying here?...That Joseph was a man of faith and had real strength of character, but most men, even Christian men, do not. And yet when a Christian (former one) like me actually does succumb to such a temptation, these same preachers are quick to condemn me. Isn't that odd? Which is it?
The story of my affair [which took place 15 years ago(!)] that I tell in my book, Why I Rejected Christianity, is a story that shows the church is the only place that shoots its own wounded. Say it isn't so? If someone has a problem, the church is the first to condemn.
Christians stress that the marriage vows are sacred. And what part of those vows is most important? Sexual faithfulness. Why? Aren't there other vows there too? Like to love, honor, and "obey?" LOL. There are Christian couples out there that can boast of being faithful to each other in marriage for 25 years and more, but they hate each other and bicker and fight all day long. But whoopee, they're faithful to each other! Big deal. Their marriages are a sham.
Ethicist Richard Taylor wrote a book on Having Love Affairs (Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1982) and he discusses whose fault it is when there is an affair. I am not excusing myself here, but as he explains, there may be more to it. “Though a wife may be ever so dutiful, faultless, and virtuous in every skill required for the making of a home, if she lacks passion, then in a very real sense she already is without a husband, or he, at least, is without a wife. Similarly, a husband who is preoccupied with himself and his work, who is oblivious to the needs of his wife and insensitive to her vanities, who takes for granted her unique talents and who goes about his business more or less as though she did not exist, has already withdrawn as a husband, except in name.” “What must be remembered by those persons who wish to condemn adultery is that the primary vow of marriage is to love, and that vow is not fulfilled by the kind of endless busyness exemplified in the industrious and ever generous husband or the dedicated homemaking wife…What has to be stressed is that the first infidelity may or may not have been committed by the one who is having an affair. The first and ultimate infidelity is to withhold the love that was promised, and which was originally represented as the reason for marriage to begin with.”
Christians are still condemning me here at ex-Christian.net. Why? Because that's what they do, and it should be no surprise to atheists here that Pastors have problems with sexual sin. Now I am happily married to an atheist and faithful to her. I love that woman. She is my best friend.
In my opinion Christianity is psychologically harmful by creating and maintaining the circumstances whereby we do wrong, since we cannot be free to express ourselves or even confess our problems to other Christians for fear of condemnation. I no longer have to hide my true feelings about anything with my wife since I no longer have the Christian guilt trip and the potential condemnation that goes with it.
For the record, it wasn’t just my affair that led me to reject Christianity. I could’ve gotten beyond the damage that had done to my faith. It was being cut off from the church, of which the affair with her was the catalyst. Taken together with what I was learning at the time, and the subsequent church experiences I had, I eventually came to reject my former faith.
By the way, haven't you seen documentaries on TV where a con-artist (male or female) got someone to marry them for their money and then killed them? There are people out there like that. Wake up! This woman wasn't that bad of course, but she was a modern day Potipher's wife who sought to destroy me because I was speaking out against pornography in town and she was a former stripper who had it "in" for preachers like me. And I never said it wasn't my fault, either.
Now, deal with my arguments. I want to stress the fact that my thinking has indeed changed. You cannot explain away my present ideas by pointing to these bad experiences in my life. They may be what provoked my thinking, but they don’t explain my thoughts. I am an atheist regardless of the experiences that led up to my present way of thinking. In talking with me you will have to deal with my arguments. Otherwise, I could point to your past experiences and explain your beliefs away as a product of what you have experienced too! People believe and doubt for a wide variety of reasons, and that’s all there is to it.
The real questions to me are: 1) Why God allowed this in the first place, if he knew the outcome would be that I'd become an atheist because of it and eventually lead others "astray;" and, 2) Why does the church shoot its own wounded?
Comments
Could hypocrisy be to blame? After all nothing unifies the beleiver better than having someone to villify. The best organised crowd in the world is a baying Lynch mob...
Now I can see a preacher who stands in the pulpit and preaches against prostitutes, affairs and the like as deserving to lose his job over an affair or being caught with a hooker. Because that's hypocrisy. But the aforementioned preacher didn't do that.
As for the questions at the end of your post, well, I was asking that first question (or a variation thereof) to my husband yesterday. I can think of two possible answers to Question #1: (a) there is no god (b) there is a god, but he's an evil bastard who hates us for the unforgivable crime of being human, which, by the way, is his fault, not ours.
Answer to Question #2: Christians are notorious hypocrites who enjoy gossiping and seeing other people screw up. They hide under a veil of righteousness and compassion, but underneath, they're nothing but a frothing, rabid mob who love nothing more than pointing out someone else's misfortunes and iniquities.
As far as christians shooting their own wounded, this isn't always the case because I've noticed that in stories about christians and pastors molesting children, members of their congregation are very supportive and talk about "forgiveness" and such. They never mention how the child might be feeling.
Maybe christians are just vehemently against consenting adults doing what they want with each other, which includes gays, and are more in a forgiving frame of mind if it's only a child that is harmed. It's as if the child is a non-person, so it's o.k.
One of the main reasons that the webmaster posts these stories is to show that christians are no more moral than the rest of society. People are going to do what they do based on their character, not what they believe in. It appears that you definitely had some problems in your first marriage which couldn't be fixed by a belief in a fraud. I have experienced trauma in my own life and finally established some normalcy after I put christianity behind me. The crazy belief in hell and insane worshipping weakens the psyche, thereby delaying emotional growth and clarity.
I am sure that your "sin" was the result of being in a bad marriage, not that you were a bad christian. I'm glad you have left that stuff behind and are now in a happy marriage. Happiness is the perfect cure for the sickness of christianity.
I'm sorry if I didn't respond to all your points, I'm sure our other intelligent members will take up the slack. Thanks for sharing your story.
Michelle Mybell
How about a couple can simply be honest with each other about what kind of relationship they want, and if they want to register their economic agreement, which is called "marriage" with the state, let them do so. But maybe, just maybe it would be better for all of us to leave the state out of our sex lives. I have no reason to "judge" an affair as "affairs are bad." Being dishonest is detrimental to one's well-being. "Having affairs is evil" means very little to me. I also have no problem with people judging, so long as they don't declare to all that "judging is wrong." That's as meaningless as the statement "affairs are bad."
I think we've all faced false accusations from time to time and it seems that the one you suffered was extremely damaging. I don't blame you at all for being upset about it or being hurt. And you're right--it would be nigh impossible for someone who has not suffered such a horrendous accusation (ie, rape) to truly understand the feelings of someone who has not.
I remember a few years ago a well known minister went too,... I think it was Jack Hayford. He confessed that he was having homosexual fantasies,but had never acted on them.Jack Hayford told him to step down from his ministerial position,but soon of course eveyone found out about why.From what I heard,this ruined his whole life at the time.Does anyone know what happen to that poor guy?Might he be one of us now?
* That's literalist churchianity for you,...even a thought can get you fired!
Delightful post!
I am a de-converted christian with a very eclectic view of god, which makes me, perhaps, an agnostic.
In answer to your question, "1) Why God allowed this in the first place, if he knew the outcome would be that I'd become an atheist because of it and eventually lead others "astray;" and,"
Personally, I believe there is a Higher Power which led me away from christianity and vaccinated me against most kinds of organized religion.
I also believe that that higher power is more pleased with atheists than with religious people.
Atheists, in my view, are the best people. They are honest with themselves, believe only what they want to believe, and do not allow themselves to hear senseless tales.
If there is a higher power out there, I believe that power is an atheist him/her/itself.
I wish there were more people like you in the world, John.
Take care.
But I was shocked by your book!
How could GOD have allowed such a horrible thing to happen to you?
To be tempted by an ex stripper...and I bet she was a D cup AT LEAST.
Oh, how cruel!
But at least you had a loving wife who forgave you...she was a good woman you say.
Of course, you left her too, like Christianity, because you were "not happy"...well, at least you now get to live live to the "fullest" since, by your own statement, your ethical standards are lower.
But I tell you what...lets get ove this MYTH and LIE that all men cheat with the first pair of BIG TITS that get thrown in their face.
At lot of men love their wives, even though they may not always be "happy" with everything.
Don't assume that everyone is on your level.
What is saddest about living in a 'lie marriage' is to see a parent die from one knowing that they told a family friend that they stayed 'obligated' because it would financially devastate them.
Then, in walks somebody who has "given in to temptation" and allowed themselves to feed their need for love. How could a "good" christian not feel outraged over the idea that "that sinner" is getting some of what they want so badly.
Don't believe me? Just reread "Anti Atheist" above. He sounds awfully jealous to me.
I was fortunate enough to meet my love long after I escaped from christianity. We intentionally removed the words "obey", forsaking all others", and "till death do us part" from our handfasting ceremony and included the words "for as long as you both shall love" instead. We both firmly believe that it is our desire to be together that defines our relationship and after 14 years it is stronger than ever.
There aren't any ex-christians commenting. If you accepted Jesus as your lord and saviour...it's finished. You're covered by grace. You can act badly and hurt god but he still loves you and has forgiven you already. You just need to forgive yourself and others for not being perfect.
I agree, Emanuel Goldstein is seriously weird, anyone who takes pride in their nano-sized penis has some serious issues, most likely in hand.
John L., stated "The real questions to me are: 1) Why God allowed this in the first place, if he knew the outcome would be that I'd become an atheist because of it and eventually lead others "astray;"
The christian god is an Atheist. Proof Questions: Do most christians consider a "god" concept, something "greater than themselves"? Yes. Can a supreme creator "god", believe in something "greater" than themselves? No. Thus, a supreme creator god, is "THE" Supreme Atheist.
What does a Supreme Atheist God have to gain, by interfering in a mortals' life? Nothing, unless the Supreme God is being challenged for position. Thus, enters Satan, because without a challenge, a Supreme Atheist God has no "reason" to be in anyones' life. However, does any Christian actually believe Satan can actually "challenge" their Supreme Atheist God? No, they almost unanimously believe Satan is a goner, its just a matter of time. Thus, spiritual marketing isn't required by a Supreme Atheist God, there is no true "challenge", its all known to an omnipotent, and omniscient god. A god with such Supremeness just has to sit around waiting for the obvious to unfold.
John L., stated "...and, 2) Why does the church shoot its own wounded?"
Because, many Christians actually believe their Supreme Atheist God is going to reward them, based on a distribution curve, taking into account "faith", and "works" for many. Unfortunately, its harder to earn "positive" points, because churches and religious leaders define what is a "positive" work, and it typically supports the church or religious movement, not humanity as "THE" priority.
Thus, like many middleschool children learn, its much easier to attack the competition, other christians, or other religious members, in order to raise their own "glorified" standing. Its a lot easier to attack another person using the bible, than to find passages which render a person non-contradictory, "positive" support or guidance.
i've been hurt by my pastor and i still go to that church--i have to remind my self that my pastor is still imperfect in his earthly body! don't blame your temptation on GOD, because you have a choice to choose to do good or evil! to choose to do good requires discipline! we don't want to do that--we want the easy way out!
May God have mercy on your souls.
i've been hurt by my pastor and i still go to that church--i have to remind my self that my pastor is still imperfect in his earthly body! don't blame your temptation on GOD, because you have a choice to choose to do good or evil! to choose to do good requires discipline! we don't want to do that--we want the easy way out!"
So, are you admitting that christians are every bit as evil and destructive as as non-christians - just as prone to violence, hate, selfishness and perversion as all the non-believers - they just get a free pass to paradise because they happen to pray to the right god?
And if god isn't to blame for temptation then who is? He gave us free will, right? He burdened us with original sin, right? He left us adrift in a world ruled by the flesh, right? Everything happens according to his will, right?
The question then is (and I believe this goes back to John's original query) why does god allow us to be tempted? Particularly when the penalty for giving in even a little bit is eternal damnation.
You also seen to be equating "choosing evil" with "being sinful". Keep in mind that, according to the bible, owning slaves, beating children and the wholesale slaughter of non-belivers is considered to be "Good", while doing yard work on Sunday, not screaming "loud enough" if you get raped and having too much money in your bank account are all considered to be "Evil".
It isn't really all that hard to choose to do good so long as that is what you truly want to do. It does take a great deal of discipline, though, to live within the confines of a belief system that was created thousands of years ago by people whose culture and society are extremely different from our own. This is because, sooner or later, what we are told about good and evil and what we come to see for ourselves as good and evil come into conflict. The real problem is figuring out what is, in fact, the "Good" choice. And, being as how we're all imperfect, we are all bound to make bad choices from time to time.
Which brings us to John's other question - why do you blame the sinner for being weak (not being disciplined) and chastising him/her for it instead of forgiving and supporting them since we can never "be perfect" in our "earthly bodies"?
Far be it from me to accuse any evangelical of "lying for the lord," but since 90% of statistics are made up on the spot, perhaps you can cite a reference for the 95% figure? ThanX!
Speaking of morons, here's a lovely blog that explains a few of the ways in which Ray Comfort is one. (It also goes into, but just a little bit, how he lies with statistics.) It's at:
http://wth.air0day.com/archives/59
"And some of the people on this site seem like candidates for eventual return (assuming they don't get hit by a bus first)--they want to believe and still retain many of their old values, but something or another (trashy stupid people within the church, arguments they can't win, etc) makes them think that Christianity is bunk."
Observe: People haven't left the fold of Christianity because of a few inbred "trashy stupid people". Please, they left because somewhere along the line they finally got the courage to take an OBJECTIVE look at Christianity and what it stands for.... and boiled down, that is an offering of love based on CONDITIONS. Combine that, with mythological absurdities such as talking snakes, swimming hammers, witchcraft, 3 in 1 deities---and the rest of the illogical assertions that the Christian handbook is riddle with---well, what you have is nothing more than coerison and fairy tales. Will you go back to believing in Santa? 'Didn't think so.
These people who failed and hurt me over 20 years of churchianity were wake up calls screaming,"something ain't
here"!These people caused us to examine our beliefs and they just don't hold up anymore!It's that simple.
"THERE IS NO SANTA!!!!!!!!!"
I rejected Christianity for reasons I provided. I rejected it, probably, for the same reason you reject all other religions but your own. I believe in one less deity than you.
"For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame." - Hebrews 6:4-6
MQ, I know you tried explaining away this verse once before, but I forget what it was you said - something about one translation out there is slightly different, or something...?
Anyway, does thinking christianity is bunk really deserve eternal suffering in hell?
God is pissed at whoever made up the Christian religion and insinuated that man was made in his image.
Whatever power created the universe, is obviously peeved that certain representatives of a life form that has only recently evolved enough to be able to speak a language, and read and write it, considers themselves, somehow representative of that prime mover,
"That Force," observes the humble attitude of us "non believers" ,who readily admit that we know nothing, as to who or what created the universe, or why, or how, and blesses us for our integrity with clear thinking minds, uncluttered with mythology, and pagan magical deities, doing absurd pagan things like sacrificing people and other things to themselves.
To put it simply: God is on our side, and not on the side of ANYONE WHO PRETENDS TO KNOW WHAT GOD IS, OR HOW IT THINKS, or why and how, it does what it does.
Dan (A humble Agnostic)
For one thing, the post from Emanuel Goldstein about his penis size was obviously fakes, as Emanuel would never joke about himself.
Who ya kiddin?
Besides that, I'll be blunt, when Loftus talks about his "temptation" I DON"T BELIEVE IT.
I "lack belief" in his claim.
For one thing, he bases part of his argument on what some unnamed preacher saying about few men being able to resist such temptationn as Potipher's wife gave Joseph.
So some preacher said that? So what? Sound like he and Loftus are projecting.
Further, Loftus says that he now is happier because he has "lower ethical standards".
Well, he has already said in his book that he is a man who likes to be "worshipped" (his words).
Pardon me if I think it looks like he is looking for excuses.
No sale, Loftus!
I'd also like to add, that Orwell, has provided nothing except a long post that boils down to his "doubt" of another persons words. Wow, isnt' that ironic. There are literally millions of people who doubt the bible as anything more than creative literature used to persuade the masses to conform to the religious norms of a "cult"ure within a specified era.
On statistics, the glass that is 50% empty, or 50% full, is both positive depending on "what" the observer "wants" to perceive, its based on a desired Outcome. For the observer who wants an empty glass, its positive that the glass is half-empty, and negative that its half-full. In contrast, for the observer who wants the glass full, its positive that the glass is half-full, and negative that the glass is half-empty.
Statistics, are numbers used to represent a deviation from a desired objective/rule sets. Objectives are individually subjective, and rule sets and subjectively created.
MQ59 — first year law student.
mq, as you say, that explanation would be obvious. I think it's even too much of an "Oh, derr" type obvious thing for the original author to have bothered mentioning in the first place.
It seems more obvious that, in the context of the surrounding verses, the standard translation (majority) is more likely - and meant as most other biblical teachings are meant, ie. an added fear factor against people slipping out of the churches control.
Not to mention being an expression of the petty, vindictive and vengeful mindset of that sort of religious fanatic...
'Curious---does one have to "disgrace" the concept of "The Almighty Zeus" in order to deduce that it is a false concept and has zero referant in reality? How about the Easter Bunny? The bottom line, once again, is that there is zero OJECTIVE evidence for the existance of any Deity, especially as an objective personal "being". If one is going introduce the Holy Bible, Holy Q'ran, or Book of Mormon, etc., as "evidence", then Dr.Suess has evey bit as much "credibility".
Green eggs and ham, anybody?
"The question is, who's doing the renewing?"
The writer is trying to say that while it may be impossible for men to renew apostates to repentance, God could still do it.
Is it possible for men to renew anyone to repentance, apostate or simple unbeliever?
So, since it is impossible for MQ59 to renew anyone to repentance, why does he spend so much of his time on this site.
Could it be... SATAN?
Here's a couple that say the exact opposite:
http://www.bible.ca/fall-hebrews.htm#quiz1 | http://www.desiringgod.org/library/sermons/96/101396.html
Christians can't agree on these passages at all. I wonder why? They all have the Holy Spirit guiding them into all truth, right?
Oh well, it could mean this, or it could mean that. It doesn't matter. It's all true no matter what it means.
Hmm...
Post a Comment