I don’t think people quit Christianity.
I used to think that but I’ve changed my mind.
I’ve got several reasons.
Please feel free to argue with me.
1. Many Atheists believe themselves to be “Deconverted” Christians.
Atheists are wrong about almost everything when it comes to theology.
Atheists believe in deconversion, which means the idea is likely wrong.
2. Nobody would kick the Holy Spirit out of their apartment.
The Spirit of God moves in and changes people. (2 Corinthians 5:15- )
The “old” is gone and a “new creation” comes alive.
The new creation remembers how putrid the old creature was.
If the Holy Spirit was speaking to your heart, you couldn’t write something like this:
Is it possible to be inhabited by God’s Spirit and completely misunderstand the message of the Gospel?
The “deconverts” pop into my head when I read 2 Timothy 3:
3. Jesus is more trustworthy than fools.
According the Christ, he doesn’t lose people. (John 6:36- )
And Jesus acknowledges that it’s possible to “see him” and still not believe. (John 6:36-Â …again)
The reason we are to judge trees by the fruit is because barren trees will say, “I used to grow fruit.”
Then they talk about how gullible the fruit trees are for staying in the orchard.
Some of them even admit their dishonesty.
So my current position is:
43 Responses
I’m no Calvinist so I believe people can choose to stay or walk away. That’s the nature of love. It’s a matter of the heart not head (Prov.4:23). However, I have yet to see a good example of leaving Christ. So I agree with you with regard to these alleged “deconverts.” (spellcheck says this isn’t a real word, so points for you there). From their own words, they didn’t leave a life of actually following Jesus, they left bad religion. And you certainly can de-convert from religion. They left fear of hell, they left an argument. And if fear or an argument talked you into it, it can certainly talk you out of it.
What puzzles me is why do they argue with Christians now? Why do they spend so much time evangelizing on Christian blogs? Methinks the “de-convert” protests too much.
I’m not Calvinist either but I’ve had some theological crisis with regard to the question of “leaving the faith”. Do we have the possibility of turning our backs on Christianity or are we once saved, always saved. There are scriptural arguments for both sides.
Frankly, I’m a little shocked by my conclusions because I’m skewing toward the Calvinist position. I can’t help it.
To be honest, I owe KIA a hat-tip for starting me thinking about this. His theology is so thoroughly twisted that I just can’t believe he ever understood actual Christianity. I suppose it’s not entirely different from the way divorced people talk about their ex-spouse. At a certain point, I want to ask, “Why did you ever marry this awful person?” The reply is usually, “They changed after we got married.”
The problem is that God doesn’t change.
Frankly, I’m a little shocked by my conclusions because I’m skewing toward the Calvinist position. I can’t help it.
One of us! One of us! One of us!
(also, I see what you did there ;p)
How amusing that Steve says “It is simply an opinion wrapped in argument clothing.” That is an excellent description of most of the anti-theists’ pronouncements.
What else besides “argument clothing” can you even wrap an opinion in? I guess you can leave your opinions naked?
“Unmasked” I think.
Well JB, you’re Calvinism is showing. At least, the P of your TULIP ^_^. Also, that’s not a metaphor ^_-
While I think I agree with the conclusion (To paraphrase: you don’t become “saved” and then possibly and unfortunately become “unsaved” before you die), I don’t know that it’s important for us to distinguish if someone is a Christian or a Non-Christian outside of maybe our tight-knit relationships. What makes it moot is that no matter the identity, we should be essentially preaching Christ to each other.
I think there’s more danger than good by focusing on someone’s identity in such a way. Finding out someone is a brother in Christ can make us more likely to accept their premises or leave their thinking unchallenged. Conversely, finding out someone is outside of Christ can lead us to reject their opinion outright. To further elucidate my heresy, I think Jill was on to something when she was saying about there being no “sides.” While, I think I’d agree with you in that there are “sides” when it comes to belief in God, I would be more apt to agree with Jill that there’s no practical difference in how we should approach people regardless of side. Atheists and Christians need to be challenged on their beliefs and be able to defend them coherently. Perhaps it looks different in that I’m more likely to challenge a person who disagrees with me, but my basic hope for the person is the same no matter what.
I agree that the labels are of little importance. The “deconvert” label, however, ascribes authority in some circles. The deconvert has “been there done that” with regard to Christianity so their opinions are given more weight. Obviously, it is stupid. But atheists are a stupid bunch of people.
I understand what you’re saying about picking “sides” but it’s Biblical. There is a pretty strong, distinctive line between “God’s people” and “everyone else”. And what’s God going to do with people who flat out say, “I don’t WANT to be on your side”?
Yeah, labels seem to be stupidly important to at least the Atheist crowd in this part of the blogosphere. Conversely to the “deconvert” title, I’ve tried to respond on topic KIA’s posts a few times in the past and have gotten brushed off with “Are you a Christian?” relentlessly so he and Ark can just discount my opinion on topic and say how dumb fundamentalism is – super frustrating.
Re Sides: I would agree with God makes a strong distinctive line with his people and everyone else, but I’m hardpressed to find a cohesive theology that calls us to do the same. Some of Paul’s writings can be spun as “sides,” but I don’t think that’s what he’s getting at (at least, what I’m thinking of when I say sides, which always has to do with sports, war, and other competitions). Everything that’s coming to mind is more about restoration of status. Perhaps “sides” is a broad a brush, but still gets to the point and I’m being too nit-picky about articulating it.
I see what you’re saying about “sides” causing us to treat each other differently, and I think I could agree. EXCEPT, people like Jill tend to operate backward from the way you described.
There are lots of professing Christians (like Jill) who are MORE LIKELY to disagree with someone they see as a fellow Christian because “Jesus was hardest on the religious leaders”. Yet they tip toe around Atheists (because “love”).
Your point is taken, though, that we shouldn’t have a double standard in our treatment of others, regardless of who we’re talking to.
I think you’re right about “people like Jill” in general, but that just means we (all sides ;p) need to be nuanced and articulate, so we don’t fall into tribalism in any topic.
To the extent that Jill is correcting for tribalism, I think that’s a good thing. However, it does seem that there is some overcorrection/ entering into the other tribe (subconsciously?).
I know you’re already talking with JB along this topic, but I wonder how you distinguish between “tribes” (bad) and the Kingdom of God which is sharply contrasted with “the World” in the Bible…?
The tribes I was talking about immediately before that was more regarding individual topics. Humans are tribal by nature this way I just wanted to distinguish that before answering what I think you’re asking.
Short answer: God’s people recognize their brokenness, that they are incapable of fixing themselves, needing God to fix them. I believe the mechanism of becoming whole is by believing in the sufficiency of Jesus’ offer to be fixed.
This topic is one I’ve been really having a hard time nuancing recently, trying to avoid safe Christianese and venture into a little more danger to fully dive into what all it means. I’d love some critique of potential heresies ^_^
I too have changed my mind. Our faith is not entirely in our own hands. It’s actually a two way relationship. Perhaps a Christian is someone who has genuinely put God fully in charge of the relationship?
Predestination can be a bit of theology hard to wrap our brains around and full of misunderstandings, but basically what it says to me is that God gets to decide who is a Christian and who is not. That’s actually a comforting concept. Our faith is not dependent on our feelings or our declarations or our doubts or how many times we volunteer for VBS. I am a Christian because God has said I am. If God has said I am, I lack the power to contradict Him.
If you were living a lie as a Christian, living a sham, then the odds of you now living a lie as an atheist, still promoting a sham are high, because you take who you are with you.
I get what you’re saying. I just can’t get with what you’re saying.
How come God tells us to do stuff like “choose life”, repent, and be Holy? If I don’t really get to decide whether or not to follow the Ten Commandments, I don’t see the point in writing them down.
It can be really mind boggling. I’m laughing here, but the ten commandments are kind of like one document that clearly demonstrates our inability to operate exclusively under our own freewill! The more grace you receive, the easier it becomes to actually choose what is right, to desire it even.
I suppose it is a bit like marriage, God actually wants us to fall in love with Him and what He has designed and written, rather then simply signing a marital agreement that strengthens our allegiance with France and increases our wealth and power.
Remember the rich young ruler who had kept all the commandments since his youth? And the Lord says, now go and sell all your stuff, give it to the poor, and follow me. That parable kind of calls our bluff about how much of our faith is actually in our own hands. The rich young ruler will follow all the rules, but he won’t actually surrender to Jesus. That’s what atheists do too, you’ve shown that very well by cartooning Nan’s comment.
I find it interesting that they talk about themselves as if they were model Christians- preaching and attending Bible studies, yet apparently their deconversion removed from them all memory of what the Bible says, or any memory or comprehension of any Christian doctrines. Has it not occurred to them that they were heretics to begin with? What they left was not Christianity just as the cruel, hateful, morally deficient god they reject isn’t the God of the Bible. It’s not the No True Scottsman fallacy to say heretics are not Christian just as it’s accurate to say people who eat bacon aren’t true vegans.
And I’d like to see these people have the honesty to admit what sin they chose to embrace before conveniently discovering the arguments that convinced them to a abandon their faith. For once that would be a story worth listening to, unlike the pretence that they are now too educated to believe a faith they don’t understand.
Right.
So what do we make of Hebrews 6?
aBiteofOrange,
Since Arkenaten quoted you here I was thrilled and obligated to address this personal opinion of yours. 🙂
I really wished many more “Christians” would ask this sort of question of us deconverts! It is a great introduction into some key components of Christology’s theology, faith, exegesis, and most of all the revelation of just how poorly self-proclaimed “Christians” know so (very) little about their 4th-century CE canonical New Testament and its parent Hellenistic Second Temple Mosaic-Herodian Judaism — not to be confused in the least with Second Temple Sectarian Judaism/Messianism. So great question aBite! But I am a bit entertained by your sketchy speculation. 🤔
“What sin [did I choose] to embrace before…” abandoning my faith. The short, easy answer was reading the New and Old Testaments, front-to-back 30-40 times minimum (in English, Greek, and Hebrew) in my 11-years of ministry, church staff, seminary, and missions-work abroad on 4 different continents. In particular, reading precisely and repeatedly (in the Greek especially) the four Gospels. That was “my sin” as you presume to put it aBite.
Now, logically anyone’s next question would be along the lines of… “How does closely reading the Bible, and in particular the Gospels, with seminary training-education, and in Greek too, make someone lose their faith?” Another easy answer — the LONG answer — that I am more than happy to “honestly share/admit” and share exactly HOW it happened, and began the revelation of the complete and utter failure of the entire 4th-century CE canonical New Testament. I stop here because most Christians don’t care to understand (blinders & earplugs) or they’re utterly frightened to understand showing very LITTLE faith in their “Lord/Savior.” And this posture by arrogant elitist Christians and their apologists inspire me to test them whether they are a True Christian; a True Spirit-filled Christian according precisely to their own New Testament! Scrutinizing should go both ways, right? That’s more than fair.
Nonetheless, for anyone who IS courageous enough (in their “faith”? 😉 ) to walk the journey with me in a civil manner, I’m more than happy to do so — you have a standing invitation!!! Simply let me know.
Reading the gospels is not a sin.
11-years in ministry should have taught you that.
Indeed, and all of my background helped immensely to decipher more and more, but in case you weren’t able to follow the implied inference, it undermines aBite’s personal (erroneous) speculation on Deconverts. Christians and non-Christians MUST go further, much deeper into exegesis or one of Mel’s favorite words: Hermeneutics. And that process CANNOT be done extensively or accurately without historical context. That was the purpose and intent of the comment.
That said, I hope at least aBite will carry this inference and logic further into HOW anyone read’s “God’s Word” correctly — i.e. as ‘milk for a child, or meat for/as an Apostle.’ Are you familiar with that NT passage/concept? And I’ll lead you even further forward, a hint… cuz I’m in a gracious mood 😉 …
What litmus test(s) determines whether a True Christian knows whether they are indeed “saved” based upon behavior AND their “holy scriptures”? The Hellenistic 4th-century CE canonical New Testament (the one everyone has and every church has) is explicitly clear on how to determine.
Your exegesis and hermeneutics are both wiggedy-whack if you claim multiple readings of the gospels are “sin”.
As I suggested in the article, deconverts construct a bastardized Christianity which they then reject in order to gain credibility with other pagans. You don’t have the vaguest idea how to do exegesis.
Everyone is entitled to their own personal opinions BrainYawn. Show me a Christian Church that is cumulatively and unanimously agreed on theology, doctrines, and hermaneutics/exegesis then MAYBE (barely) this is a relevant topic for life. Whatever, you are clueless of many many things as I’ve adequately shown you and other bloggers.
I’m much more interested in reading aBite’s reply — his About page offers more to this topic than you could EVER dream of imagining — that’s why I addressed him not you. Have a blessed week and weekend. 😛
“Everyone is entitled to their opinion!”
This is what people say when their ideas burn to ashes. The irony is, you don’t even believe this. If we are entitled to our opinions, why are you constantly trying to change mine?
I’ve told you TWICE that it is not a sin to read the gospels. Your response has been to accuse me of not staying on topic.
You aren’t interested in Orange’s reply. “His page offers more than you could EVER dream of imagining…” LOL! That would upset me if I was 6-years old. Orange isn’t stupid, Professor. He doesn’t respond to ego strokes from cowardly simpletons. (I’m speaking on his behalf without consulting him. What’cha think he’s going to say about that?)
It is not a sin to read the gospels.
Your thesis is incorrect. Everyone is entitled to be incorrect. Only idiots cling to errors out of pride.
Waiting on aBite…
Let me know if he returns with a reply. Thanks.
It’s “A Bit,” by the way. ABOO. A Bit Of Orange. 🙂
Certain words are filtered automatically in the comment section.
Keep telling the other heathen that you’re being moderated though! I know that’s a badge of honor. Unearned but you don’t care about truth.
You never do stay on topic do you? LOL Thanks for the promotional quote however. 😉
Since you’re online, are you going to answer my question to you in the other thread?
I asked whether you are claiming that your comments are being moderated here on this blog?
Apparently not.
:/
What’s a gal gotta do to get a question answered by an alleged professor? I’m raising my hand over here.
I didn’t even see his reply until just now.
Promotional quote?
LOL! The atheists make this so easy! I’m worried that smart people are going to start accusing me of writing the Professor’s responses myself.
Let me assure everyone…I’m not especially gifted. The contrast between my average I.Q. and the Professor’s broccoli stalk I.Q. makes me look like a genius.
Before recently when I commented 1-2 times awhile back my comments immediately posted. Now… not anymore. Exhibit A:
https://professortaboo.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/brainyawn-moderation.jpg
I’m sorry, I’m still confused.
This comment posted just fine, I think?
What’s Exhibit A?
That’s because BrainYawn keeps changing and deceiving based on what he has posted in order to cover his “image” and to not look like a fraud. And I’m sure since you are titled “Admin” — I believe you are his daughter? — you will most likely deny all of this too. This is an impossible task to find the truth because you two have total control of this blog. Hahahaha. I am not the one changing and doctoring up images to suit my own hard-on for personal attacks that are mere dodging and attempts to divert the content/topics at hand. That’s always been BrainYawn’s M.O.
Furthermore, I hope you, BrainYawn, and others here — who can’t deduce any of what’s really going on — NEVER become forensic investigators or investigators in law-enforcement! “God” help us if you do. Hahaha.
Anyway, if aBite ever replies to me it’s fine if someone lets me know. Thanks.
Wow.
Okay.
Yeah, I can see when things go to moderation, and I pulled someone else’s comment out the other day. It was flagged by mistake.
I have asked my dad not to send things to Spam before, and he insists he didn’t do that with yours. Ever. He says one of your comments used Ark’s full name, which was one of the blacklisted words.
If you don’t believe me, that’s fine. But I hope you will keep commenting here. 🙂 I definitely want our readers to see more comments like that last one.
Thank you for YOUR honesty. That’s appreciated.
Regarding returning in the future, I’ll be honest in return. Very unlikely. When I first arrived here to ask questions and also on other blogs your Dad was commenting, I was sincerely polite, but he quickly turned the discussion into a playground bullying session. I’ve had no interest whatsoever in returning. I also know about his history with his father, your specific history with ‘depression,’ and I just thought it wiser to not encourage this sort of… anti-social behavior toward people different than you? I usually ignore your Dad completely until he went after me AGAIN with this weird unnecessary personal attack about my occupational background and level of education acquired. Not that any of this matters, but what annoys me it is an established tactic he uses when he DOESN’T want to address the content and context of a topic. No one should have any desire in going around in pointless circles or staying on a hamster-wheel. He knows this, I’ve told him this several times in as many words. But EVERYONE has the right to defend themselves and their integrity. That’s the 2nd reason I am even here… again. LOL
Without aBiteofOrange returning or replying, to me this is like being sucked back thru time, stuck in a time-capsule of Watergate-The Post vs. Nixon. Waste of time. Just quit Nixon, you can’t keep twisting the truth and lie about The Post & Watergate. You’re busted. Stop your self-incrimination. Bow-out with a little dignity and move on. I hope you see the analogy.
Nevertheless, I’ll repeat probably for the last time: Let me know if aBite returns and replies.
I’m confused again. Am I the lying Nixon or is my dad?
Orange has a blog with an open comment section. You are free to go ask your question there.
I’ll bet you don’t do that though. Instead, you’ll reason that Orange didn’t answer your question because it was such a profound question that gazing upon it melted his brain.
You could add that to your LinkedIn profile! It would fit with the other stuff about being a teacher!
I’d reason that perhaps “A BIT of Orange” is waiting for the Professor to ask him a question, since “A BITE” of Orange doesn’t exist…
Well, yes. That’s a possibility. I noticed that you’ve reminded The Spoof-fessor a couple of times of his “error”.
He could add “Masters Degree in Oblivious” to his LinkedIn profile too.
Yikes!
These people don’t believe in sin, Bryan! They have nothing to confess.
On atheism, there is no such thing as evil until they need the term to describe the behavior of Christians or Donald Trump.
As you know John I concur totally here. I also thank you for taking the time to respond to that absurd post. Your ministry in this is appreciated
Well if we gave atheists the benefit of the doubt that we are all born atheists, technically all Christians are deconverts. Just saying.