As I wrote in this article, my deconversion walked with my going no contact. I became with all abusers and enablers of abuse. With some time out, I realized how much Christianity set me up to be abused, defending the powerful and the status quo and telling me on endless levels how I deserved it. I hope others can be free too.
This meme walks hand in hand with the coerced forgiveness and enabling of evil in some Christian circles, and even the whole sociopath battle, I've had with others in multiple blog posts, about how their preaching "forgive and love sociopaths who are incapable of remorse" is messed up.
The biggest hole in conservative theology is God/Jesus supposedly teaches "Love your enemies" and then sends his to forever burn in hell. How does that make any sense? Is this a case of "Do what I say, not what I do?" Hell too also is the foundation for a religion that advances cruelty and abuse. If your God has no problem with toasting his enemies on a spit forever where's your mercy and compassion going to come in? So as people die on ventilators and can't breathe or are weakened for months, the evangelicals say things like "It's just a flu", or it's fake.
How many get tired of being a Doormat for Jesus? Jesus himself, while he could have been a human with decent messages that got skewed via the later church empire, himself is shown taking on death and abuse to please his rampaging father. He is one of the world's most known scapegoat figures. Conservative Christianity especially pushed scapegoating overall, worshipping "might makes right", and compliance.
How many conservative Christians are taught to accept abuse and make excuses and a place for abusers, or the cruel [Trump a case in point] because of teachings like this? The bullies of the world get encouraged and this teaches that standing up against the evil is wrong, and that's messed up.
I have been reading up on the history of Christianity and I think it first became a significant religion at a time of great insecurity ie the 200 years of the gradual failure of the western Roman culture, after about 1200 years of success.
ReplyDeleteWhat was the purpose of Christianity? New religions must answer some need that old belief systems fail to. I think the purpose of Christianity was dealing with trauma, failure, disaster, bafflement, pain and dislocation. I find Christianity has a distinct tone of sadism and gloom and much more concerned about the next world than this one. But maybe that was what was needed at the time of its development.
janice
Reza Aslan in his book Zealot made a very strong case, for Christianity being born out of the fall of the temple in 70ad, with that trauma basically birthing a new religion. It makes sense. Of course things morphed with Constantine and pals and Christianity has changed even in my own life time, with the extreme prosperity gospel and Christian white nationalism. Sure religions are born out of trauma, failure, and disaster. Even the would be Gilead with religious crazies now refusing to wear masks, is a result of economic disenfranchisement [lots of fundie and evangelical Christians are well off, but they do not see their place as stable. Religions are born and die. I have seen academics claim Christianity is in it's last gasp in the West, and that is why it has grown so radical and extreme. There is sadism to a religion that is basically based on human sacrifice and a scapegoat for sacrifice. Jesus was "tortured" and the same God wishes to torture people in hell. There is a brutality to Christianity I was afraid to face while still in but then faced head on. If any new religions develop, we definitely need one with more peace and compassion to over. Sure Christianity had those messages and people too, though the majority has spread empire, misery, and worse. It's turned into a death cult in America basically.
DeleteI am not a Christian, but I honestly believe Christianity is one of those "synthetic" religions that come out of times of turmoil. A little Judaism, a little Roman pantheon, and a lot of the Pagan beliefs endemic to Europe.
ReplyDeleteSo under Pagan rules, you could kill your neighbor and take his wife and daughter because you were bigger, stronger, more vicious, and that was all right - it meant you were "better" and allowed to do so. Under Christianity it's exactly the same, except you have to go through a little song-and-dance about how the neighbor was "sinful" or something.
Think this is all in that past? Stuff like that happens in rural America all the time.
Yes a lot of it was cobbled together, and the Roman panethon is in there too. I went DEEP into bible studies so deep I came out, LOL google the council of 70 and be shocked at what scripture has to say about that. It mixed and blended with a lot of cultures and their beliefs, Catholicism in Brazil is far different then Catholicism in Iowa, and even the fundies picked up a lot of pagan rituals, especially in Pentecostalism. I was one of those fundies always on the search for the pagan, but then realized with horror, the entire religion was based on ancient and old religions cobbled together.
DeleteSee this website.
https://pocm.info/
Yeah the taking the wife and daughter when stronger, and bigger and more vicious goes together.
It happens in rural America all the time definitely.
There is a lack of empathy pushed in Christianity now, the majority of it, outside a small liberal fringe {barber, poor people's campaign, episcopalians, has become all about worshipping power but if you look at the God they believe in, why should we be surprised. As I wrote on one article here, "A Cruel God makes for Cruel Men".
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/godlessindixie/2015/07/13/three-ways-your-religion-may-hinder-empathy/
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Council
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thedivinecouncil.com/
"Psalm 82:1
God has taken his place in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods he holds judgment."
I indeed agree with the central point of that article and this one. However, I think it misses a slight point of the verse, which was to change the previous belief of the death sentence. Oddly, it is very hypocritical since the 'eternal death' is still present, but taken as it is, I think it holds itself well. Since this is from the gospel, not the later texts, it is a more literal supposed first-hand 'words' of Jesus.
ReplyDeleteThe ENTIRE passages are from Matthew 5:
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
This translation is sufficient. However, the next section of text is a little more obvious in its intentions. I do not think it is about 'letting someone abuse you', but rather, about patience. Don't attack back. Fight back with love, rebuke not with hate but with love, etc. It's about not stooping down to their level. In that interpretation, I find it quite relevant. ie: don't strike back, love back, because an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind but love for a strike may falter the next strike. It's considering less about equals and more about a child- since it considers the one doing evil a child. Since they are, frankly, but some children never grow up. Discerning the two (one who just needs help and one who can't be helped) is important to being equitable and not unreasonable, and in not preaching to a choir.
Being capable of knowing when this is actually effective or not is where religion fails, and thereby, the nullification of empathy in religion begins. My father is a narcissist. I didn't know him very well growing up. I did give him another chance, to see if the stories were true, and indeed, he seemed fine at first. As soon as things got stressful, I realized I was wrong. He had never changed. He was just more comfortable the month before. The psychological torment began, and I was lucky enough to understand that eventually, I had to leave, and had the chance to do so. That was the point where my belief that 'everyone has some good inside them' ended. However, it did not become 'don't trust anyone except yourself', because that's what my father told me to do.
Argh. I had to split this comment up. I should just make my own blog lol.
Hi Rachael,
DeleteI am curious do you believe in hell still?
Matthew 5 always bugged me, even the handing your clothes over thing seems foolish and bowing before abusers. There's some Christian sects like the Amish who preach full pacifism based on some of this stuff.
I think patience can be good and things like that but have you ever wondered why the Bible ignores the reality of evil people who harm others and why there is so much in there, that tells the "good" people to back down to them. A few weak off handed comments about "reprobates" doesn't even get close to what we deal with in the real world and past days in ancient times were pretty violent where someone could cut off your head just for looking at them the wrong way.
"Fighting back with love" honestly when it comes to evil people does not work. I tried it and got squished so many times. I can't even tell you how many times I tried to talk things out with people only to be disappointed. Even with Queen Spider, I was going to CHANGE things and made her a glass painting and other things, and it all miserably failed. Maybe my own disbelief in the bible occurred from all the poor results. This stuff may work with reasonable people who have made mistakes and done a little bit of harm unknowingly to someone else, but people out to hurt you, it simply does not work and actually gives them an opening.
So yeah I get an eye for an eye makes whole world blind and how revenge back and forth just means digging the hole deeper but I see major limits on this preaching too. Some children never grow up. I am of the opinion since we can't change narcissists, this advice backfires.
I am glad you admit that religion fails not telling people when this would be affective and or not and separating out the reasonable people from the willfully wicked ones who like harming others. Yes it destroys empathy.
It's too bad you dealt with a narcissistic father, good you were spared growing up with him day to day, sounds like your mother escaped and that's good but nope they never change, its always more of the same.
I never believed everyone had good in them, but then that is from my past. I do think SOME people can be trusted though it's probably very few.
Going to your next comment.
second part of the post approve or not up to you:
ReplyDeleteInstead, it is the next passage of Matthew I find very personal to my morality. It exists very distinctly in most other religions, especially eastern ones (Daoism has it almost word for word some centuries beforehand lol). Because it's a simple code of graciousness that has nothing to do with forcing another to do something, changing people, or attacking anyone. It is, in my eyes, the most basic thing possible, that most people seem to miss. NIV version of Matt. 5: (note; 'neighbor' refers STRICTLY to Jews, and thus excludes gentiles, which is the point of these verses, to tell disciples to not discriminate. my notations in parenthesis)
Matt 5:43-47
This translation is absolutely horrendous. It is less specific than Luke's (or, Luke's author) rendition of the same story.
First: Ἀγαπήσεις (agapesis) or ἀγαπᾶτε, 'love', is not a Greek word that is familiar to classical Greece. It is closer to 'sympathy' and 'unconditional(ie: charity) love' than 'empathy' or 'unconditional forgiveness'.
The Greeks would have had little understanding of a monotheistic connection so tightly with a singular 'god'. So the traditional words used for 'love' did not fit there. They are conflated inappropriately.
"Perfect" is a bad words also. "Be mature/an adult" is more appropriate, and the sentence makes more sense only if your father is mature, which mine sure is not, but an alleged God would be a 'perfect Father', just not this one. It's essentially trying to say 'be an adult, not a child that only knows how to hit back'.
The latter half of this verse is where the translation really fucks up. Because Luke recounts it differently.
Luke 6:32-36 (fuck i put too many characters so i cut out the direct words, pls look it up for reference)
Mercy is the wrong word here. Compassion- even pity. Are better words.
There is a lot of context lost in the translation, and re-translation, of what Jesus must have said in the original hebrew, into what became the written recount in Greek.
Hilariously, after asking my grandmother whether there were more direct copies of the 'original' text in the first language written available if she really wanted to reconvert me so that i could skip the middleman of the middleman, she pointed me to the interlinear old/new testaments- and this has only reaffirmed my lack of belief, but has let me learn a lot more about how much bullshit they wrote into these translations.
I do think there is a point to being sympathetic about one's enemies. But there will ALWAYS be those who will NEVER change. Those people you must abandon.
But if everyone who disagreed with me abandoned me, I know I would never learned a fucking thing about the world, positive or negative. Just some thoughts.
I believe the bible was put together with influences from other religion.
DeleteIs this the part of Matt 5 you are talking about with the "graciousness"?
"Love for Enemies
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[i] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Footnotes
I put up NIV for now...but yeah there's different translations. I was KJV only fundie BTW. LOL Yeah perfect seems like a limited word. I did use to translate the greek and hebrew, and the meanings were not always exact in the bible. Still don't believe in bible now but it made my bible studies interesting.
A mature father is a far better one? I think some fathers definitely die never growing up. Narcissists remain little children inside. Yeah the Luke verses are different more clunky.
I don't know about the Christian message to love enemies. I can understand loving people who are not like you who are not your friends, and who are strangers. We should try to look out for each other as human beings, but the focus is on loving enemies and that is odd to me because love is so lack even among friends and family etc. Like maybe too much concentration is on loving the evil and not the good people right by your side? Does that make sense.
A conversation arose long ago on one of my deconversion boards about how Christianity forced people to manufacture love even for people who treated you badly 'the enemies" and even for a "silent" God himself. Like love was supposed to be produced on command with no supports for it. For me this became difficult, as I was guilted for "not loving enemies" quite often. Just read the posts here where I say one should not love sociopaths. I don't believe in going for revenge, it brings nothing good, but why does Christianity expect manufacturing of love for the most wicked? We got something going right now where the majority of conservative Christianity is busy manufacturing the love for the most evil, while the most vulnerable of society get crushed. Falwell Jr. A case in point? He threw his wife under the bus and looks like a predator. My fear is these teachings enable the predators of the world.
continuing...
Jerry Falwell's wife could have been a predator too--don't know but she's obviously taking the fall maybe for the 10 million pay out?
DeleteI can understand forgiveness for, helping and working through disagreements with reasonable people with consciences and can understand these verses to a point with people like that. However I believe the "love your enemy" teachings have been damaging in a society so full of malignant narcissists. I am going to put up a post you may find interesting, it shows the damaging things Christianity is teaching people full bore and it relates to this topic.
I would say most people who disagreed with me have abandoned me in my life. One thing this included the family, they "left me" before I did the final walk away. Maybe I am still working through pre-no contact relationships. Outside of my marriage and very few online friends, I am coping with the fact, that I could not be "me" nor was I loved for myself. I do wonder how much of this is autism or disability related. I question my own end too for my lack of security in relationships where I am not allowed to disagree or "fail". I have realized with horror, that agreement was expected for many friendships to continue.
I was always the "lets work things out" type too. No contact is not my natural nature, and ghosting people, but I had to do these things to stop abuse.
With God if there was one, it seemed he would be able to accept people disagreeing with him too. I hope that makes sense. Why do we get sent to hell for not agreeing and beliefs alone? Something to think about.
Rachael see this post too.
Deletehttps://fivehundredpoundpeeps.blogspot.com/2020/08/christian-doormat-meme.html