I have not yet found too many book-length stories about leaving Christianity on the internet for free. But here is one: My Christian History. It is probably closer to chapter-length than book-length. However, it is longer than the testimonies people post on exChristian. It may not be the best written story you've ever read, nor the most attractive and best-designed website you've ever seen. But the frustration and sincerity are real; the pain is palpable. If you read the story you will find that the swindle was not the only reason for leaving. BUT:

If the Church truly operates through the Holy Spirit, and if God can truly see into the hearts of people, how could the Church not know that it was endorsing the work of a swindler?

Though the author does not put it in those words, I think that is a very real part of the author's pain.

NOTE: You may want to keep track of the links in case you want to visit them again. There seems not to be a complete menu posted. I got some of the links from the author's posts on exChristian.

Swindled for Jesus Homepage http://www.swindledforjesus.com
My Christian History http://www.swindledforjesus.com/My%20Christian%20History.html
Mission Statement (detailed story of the swindle) http://www.swindledforjesus.com/Mission%20Statement.html
Discussion Forum http://www.swindledforjesus.com/bbs/index.php#9

Here is the most recent update on exC.

Here’s a whole batch of stories about leaving Christianity. It’s on Atheist Alliance and the title of this section is Awakening Tales. Pretty interesting stuff!

Bertrand Russel (1872-1970) was a famous atheist of the 20th century. Here is a lecture in which he explains why he was an atheist. Basically it's an Examination of the God-Idea and Christianity. It's pretty heavy reading so I will summarize it here, but readers can veiw the whole lecture at the link.

First of all, he was speaking about 80 years ago and things have changed much in the world since then. He is speaking about what things were like at that time. He says that at that time, by Christian some people simply meant "a person who attempts to live a good life." He disagrees that this is a good definition because he believes that "all the Buddhists, Confucians, Mohammedans [Muslims], and so on -- are...trying to live a good life." Russel was in the UK and in his country the position held by the official Church was that belief in hell was not an article of faith. For Russel, the criteria for Christian was a person who believed in God and immortality, and that "Christ was, if not divine, at least the best and wisest of men." Those are the two points he argues against for his position as atheist.

His arguments are being used by atheists to this day. Christians fail to come up with successful refutations. Fear, he says, is the foundation of religion. To quote him:



Eighty years later, the victory of science is not so clear. With fundamentalist religion ruling the White House in the United States and passing laws to restrict the progress of not only scientific research but the teaching of science to children in the public classroom, one may well ask whether humanity is returning to the Dark Ages. In the next post I will look more closely at Russel's arguments.

[edited for typos and clarity]

[align=center]Argument re Existence of God[/align]

First Cause Argument

Russel rejects the First Cause argument because, if everything had to have a cause, then someone or something had to make God. And if there can be something that did not have to be made, it might just as well be the world as God. He explains that:



In my own experience, at that point of Christian doctrine, the Christian say, "You have to take some things on faith," or "Faith is not logical."

The Natural-Law Argument

For this argument, Russel draws fairly heavily on science as it was known in his day. While the knowledge base regarding the known universe has changed dramatically since his day, in my opinion, the over-all theory of this argument still holds. There are still three feet in a yard no matter how deep in space the measurement is taken, and this is still a human contrivance rather than natural law. Today we tend to measure distance in terms of how much time is required to travel it. For example, a person lives fifteen minutes from work and a certain planet is so many light-years from another planet. However, according to Russel's theory, these measurements are human contrivances and not natural law.

Using abstract philosophical constructs of reasoning that I find difficult to follow, Russel explains how the Natural-Law Argument fails to prove God's existence. He says this argument was used a lot in the eighteenth century (1700s), and that in modern times it was losing its intellectual respectability.

The Argument from Design

Russel tells us this argument is built on the premise that "everything in the world is made just so that we can manage to live in the world, and if the world was ever so little different we could not manage to live in it." I notice that this argument is commonly used by Christian proponents of Intelligent Design theory today. After reading Darwin's Origin of the Species, I concluded that, as Russel says:



Russel makes a number of other points:

1. The universe and its inhabitants are not as well designed as one would expect of an entity that is all-powerful and all-knowing and has had millions of years time in which to perfect it's design.
2. According to the ordinary laws of science, the space of time during the life of the solar system in which conditions are suitable for life on earth is but "a flash in the pan."

Though Russel does not specifically say so, this is in stark contrast to the Christian teaching that humans are created as the crown and glory of creation. I believe Russel was responding to this teaching. Russel mentions that some people find it depressing to think that life will be extinguished millions and millions of years down the road. He suggests this is rather silly, and to redirect one's thoughts to something more worthwhile. I agree with him. I find it much more frightening to consider that the world might end catastrophically at Christ's Second Coming during my lifetime than that I can live out a normal lifespan, and that life will be extinguished many millions of years after I am dead and decayed.

The Moral Arguments for Deity

Russel looks at Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason in which Kant argues that "that there would be no right and wrong unless God existed." Again, I have problems following the philosophical argument. Russel thinks that:

1. In intellectual matters [Kant] was skeptical, but in moral matters he believed implicitly in the maxims that he had imbibed at his mother's knee.
2. I often thought...that as a matter of fact this world that we know was made by the Devil at a moment when God was not looking. There is a good deal to be said for that, and I am not concerned to refute it.

The first point, in Russel's words, "illustrates what the psycho-analysts so much emphasize -- the immensely stronger hold upon us that our very early associations have than those of later times." I think this is a strong reason why fundamentalist religion has taken such a strong hold today. The twentieth century was a frightening time and people returned to religion. That wars only multiplied seemingly did not turn people away from the very religion that seemed to fuel the wars. It might be said that things came to a head late in 2001--long after Russel was dead, in that fundamentalist Christians and Muslims locked horns and exchanged bombings and have not called a truce yet, seven years later. The death toll rises and the economy plummets. The American presidential election in November is a long way away; it is the brightest star on the horizon many people can see. Somehow, I have little faith in presidential elections. Presidents can only do what the people backing them want to do. We have powerful religious fanatics running the show, people convinced that war and destruction--the more the better--are what will bring Jesus back.

The Argument For The Remedying Of Injustice

Christian argument: the existence of God is required in order to bring justice into the world. Russel argues that in the part of the universe we know, "often the good suffer and the wicked prosper." Also, there is evidence of only one life. Russel concludes, however, that most people believe in God because they were taught to do so from early infancy, and that they like the feeling of having a "big brother" watching out for them.

I will use a new post for the arguments regarding the character of Christ.

[align=center]The Character of Christ[/align]

Was Christ the best and wisest of men? Russel does not think so though he thinks Christ might have been a reasonably good person. Nor does Russel think Christians follow Christ's teachings very closely. He lists some of these teachings, and also looks at the defects in teachings and the moral problem.

Some teachings he thinks Christians fail to follow are:

1. "Resist not evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."

He does advise his audience:

2. "Judge not lest ye be judged." He suggests this principle would not be popular in the law courts of Christian countries.

3. "Give to him that asketh of thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn thou not away." He then refers to a recent political election in which he feels the liberals and conservatives "turned away."

4. "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that which thou hast, and give to the poor."

He adds:



Defects In Christ's Teaching

The greatest defect is that he did not return as promised.

The Moral Problem

Russel's biggest moral problem with Jesus is his teaching of eternal punishment, and his vindictiveness for anyone who disagreed with his teaching. He also suggests that an almighty God could have solved the problem of the evil spirits other than making a herd of swine perish in the lake, and that cursing a fig tree for not having fruit at the wrong time of year does not make a favourable impression.

Russel also speaks about the "unspeakable amount of misery" brought into the world by the verse "Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world nor in the world to come."

My own comment: When major human populations are governed by such harsh and uncompromising vindictiveness, we get wars and torture and worse. This is why the power of fundamentalist religion must be broken.

[align=center]The Emotional Factor[/align]



He goes on to mention witch burnings by the thousand, the Inquisition, and "every kind of cruelty practiced upon all sorts of people in the name of religion." He notes that every kind of humane progress that has been made in the world was "consistently opposed by the organized churches of the world."

How The Churches Have Retarded Progress

Churches think human happiness has nothing to do with morals, and consequently do not take the humane approach to end human suffering. As has already been stated, according to Russel, fear is the foundation of religion.

What We Must Do

Russel believes in looking the world square in the face, and accepting the beautiful with the ugly, and making the best of the situation.



This completes the survey of this article.

I confess that this lecture is not exactly a story about leaving Christianity. And yet, if one thinks about it, it is a story. No one arrives at the conclusions Bertrand Russel arrived at by dutifully attending Sunday School and church every Sunday and repeating the Creed as commanded and taught by one's parents, church, and teachers. For a person living in a Christian country with Christian parents, teachers, schools, and government, major amounts of independent thinking and seeking must be done to arrive at the conclusions Russel arrived at. Such a person must live with questions that he or she is, in many cases, not allowed to talk about. Such a person is often strictly on his or her own to find answers.

Why are answers necessary? I cannot speak for Russel but I can speak for myself. I value my personal integrity very highly. I likewise value integrity in the person of other people very highly. It is the one gift we can give to ourselves and others that is beyond the value of money. People who can be trusted to be as good as their word--I think everyone knows how important that is. It is for the reason of personal integrity that I need answers for the Big Questions about Christian theology. For Russel to say that Jesus is the best and wisest person ever to have lived when he sees so very obvious defects in both his character and wisdom would violate Russel's personal integrity. In other words, he would be lying.

For this reason, I consider his lecture on Why I Am Not A Christian to be a story. It shows the questions he struggled with, and the answers he found. It omits the personal details from his life that often go into making a story. I am filling those in right here from common sense. To learn more about the life of Bertrand Russel, readers can also read the wikipedia article linked in the first post on Bertrand Russel in this thread. (Click on Russel's name at the beginning of that post; it is a live link to the wikipedia article).