The most important reason I'm xtian

[Aractus]

Thankyou for sharing, and I would like to offer you some observations.

---

I was raised in an anglican household, where faith was something we did on sunday morning between 945 and 1030. As a teenager I was therefore what you might call a social christian. Went to university and while there got into a modest amount of trouble with alcahol and other recreational substances, to the point where I was using them because I needed to rather than because I wanted too. I would not be able to get up and go into clinic without a couple of shots of rum and some pain killers inside me. I was also very out of place at uni, I didn't really like most of the people there and hated going out (but did so because I was young and stupid and trying to conform). Also got quite involved in self harming, which is very easy to do when you have a ready supply of scalpels and sutures. I practiced closing wounds on myself.

Scraped through the course and graduated in a haze. Started work but was still lacking in either boundries or self control. In this state I had my religious experiance and was born again in the classical evangelical sense. I won't bore you with the details.

My life, at that point, improved rather dramatically. I dried out, stopped staying up for 36 hours at a time, started to enjoy life. Got married to somebody I had known from before university, had a career, 2 kids etc.

During this time my religious beliefs moderated from what you would think of as fundamentalism to a more liberal sort of faith. I was exposed to the writings of an American ex Baptist minister by the name of tony campolo, who has written lots of books on the subject of liberal christianity, and the concept of red letter christianity, that being that the words of Jesus in the bible are more important than the rest. I somewhat extended beyond that and now consider the rest of the bible, especially the OT to be very errant. The inerrancy of scripture being one of the things that i discarded by the wayside. However the Sermon on the mount

My view at the moment is that I see the bible as much like a self help book. I read it, the bits which resonate I think "gosh yes, that seems right" and the bits that don't I put down to a bad day on the part of the author. I see the bible as special, probably because that was the context of a very useful and positive religious experience, but not infallible.

Intellectually, I admire atheism and I suffer a good deal of dissonance because a big chunk of me, the scientific and analytical bit, has a sneaking suspicion that its actually correct. This is cemented by having done a diploma in hypnotherapy and being able to recreate religious type experiences in others, on demand. However my right brain, the sloshy and emotional bit is still nausatingly in love with the concept of an all knowing and all loving force, loosely defined as "love". In many ways I would like to be an atheist, but to do so would mean giving up my comfort blanket / crack pipe / happy-moist-joy feelings on tap. So no, I'm nowhere near to atheism.

Having said that, I am acutely aware that my experience is absolutely no proof of the reality of anything I choose to believe in. As such I'm a rubbish evangelist, as the best I can ever do is "it worked really well for me, give it a go". Which is much the same line drug dealers use and for much the same reasons. I try to deal with the dissonance the same way I deal with the things in medicine I don't understand. Some things seem to work in defiance of the fact that I / We don't understand them. I don't stop using them just because I don't know how they work, and I don't try to force the facts to conform to my model of how they work. But I'm happy to use and to recommend them BECAUSE they seem to work.

So there you go. For what it's worth and on the off chance anyone is interested. It's not a unique story, nor an especially interesting one.

Any questions? Anyone else want to say why they are Christian?

---

What I read into your story is a very selfish/inward-looking approach to Christian faith.

The entire reason for the Protestant Reformation was to break free from the shackles imposed by the Catholic Church who were a very inward-thinking and controlling organization. The theology reflected this, and in 1517, Dr. Martin Luther wrote the famous 95 Theses, infuriating the Church.

• 6. The pope himself cannot remit guilt, but only declare and confirm that it has been remitted by God; or, at most, he can remit it in cases reserved to his discretion. Except for these cases, the guilt remains untouched.
  41. Papal indulgences should only be preached with caution, lest people gain a wrong understanding, and think that they are preferable to other good works: those of love.
  42. Christians should be taught that the pope does not at all intend that the purchase of indulgences should be understood as at all comparable with the works of mercy.
  43. Christians should be taught that one who gives to the poor, or lends to the needy, does a better action than if he purchases indulgences.
  49. Christians should be taught that the pope's indulgences are useful only if one does not rely on them, but most harmful if one loses the fear of God through them.
  85. Again: Why are the penitential canon laws, which in fact, if not in practice, have long been obsolete and dead in themselves,—why are they, to-day, still used in imposing fines in money, through the granting of indulgences, as if all the penitential canons were fully operative?
  86. Again: since the pope's income to-day is larger than that of the wealthiest of wealthy men, why does he not build this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of indigent believers?
  87. Again: What does the pope remit or dispense to people who, by their perfect repentance, have a right to plenary remission or dispensation?
  88. Again: Surely a greater good could be done to the church if the pope were to bestow these remissions and dispensations, not once, as now, but a hundred times a day, for the benefit of any believer whatever.
  89. What the pope seeks by indulgences is not money, but rather the salvation of souls; why then does he suspend the letters and indulgences formerly conceded, and still as efficacious as ever?

Well you get the picture. Anyone who forgets the reformation, anyone who doesn't believe in freedom from Catholicism, doesn't deserve to be called a Protestant, much less an Anglican. The Catholics remain proud of their faith, through doctrines and sacraments we consider heretical - but also self-serving, inward-looking selfish, primitive, nonsensical, the list goes on and on and on.

Christian faith is an outward force, and by that I mean it is measured not in deeds, but in faith and the evidence for it, the expression of it, the intent and the temporal results of the faith - the gifts of the Spirit - walking in faith.

Ask not what the Christian faith can do for you ie "self-help"/"prosperity-gospel" etc. ask what you can do for the good of the Christian faith, for the good of your neighbour, your community, your God. This is all broken back down to what I think you'll have to accept as a "red letter":

• When the Pharisees heard that He had silenced the Sadducees, they came together. And one of them, an expert in the law, asked a question to test Him: “Teacher, which command in the law is the greatest?”
  
  He said to him, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and most important command. The second is like it: Love your neighbour as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets depend on these two commands.”

---

---

So you're satisfied with rationalizations and wishful thinking. How very analytical.

---

---

Ask me a question about science, or medicine, I'll give you an analytical answer. Those are the areas where analytical is important, nay essential.

So far as a world view, individual morality, psychology and suchlike goes, I'm satisfied with functional. If analytical works well for you then give yourself a big hand . Woot for the more analytical than thou chas

---

Don't mind him, he's a grumpy old prick wherever he goes, and has no ability to discuss or debate civilly or on-topic with anyone who doesn't share his particular world-view.