Criticism of the foundations of Evangelical Christian faith
Introduction
The following criticisms particularly aim evangelic Christianity rather
than Catholicism. The first reason is that I know best evangelic
Christianity, for I was among them. They had interested me for the fact
that they have a definite doctrines they put the stress on, and I was
in search of precise truths. The catholics, on the other hand, rather
have some practices which forget almost the subjacent doctrines, and
which are thus less "refutable" in a strict sense. Though, for those
interested in it, Catholics have a rather complex and hardlier
criticizable doctrine, thus more moderate and intelligent (if one makes
the effort to seek it, which I had not the chance to be aware of in my
youth when I had however been to cathechism). Not being anymore
Christian, I finally find Catholicism preferable insofar as precisely,
as it insists less on its doctrines it leaves also a better freedom of
thought, a better opening, and thus gives access to a certain
rudimentary but free, simple and purer (but often more boring !)
spiritual life. In particular, recognising that the faith in Jesus is
not necessary for salvation, according to the Thomist doctrines...
though, it depends: while claiming the unity of the Church, the
catholics have various more or less sectarian or fundamentalist ways of
thinging, of living their faith and interpreting it, so, how can one
discuss such a variable and imperceptible doctrines? However, the
little I know of Catholicism is enough me to conclude that it will not
convince me either, for reasons which I may possibly develop another
time. (Something worth noticing: so many arguments proving the
absurdity of Evangical Christianity do not apply anymore to
Catholicism, for the single reason that Catholics do not consider faith
as a necessary condition for salvation)
I have been Evangelical Christian for a number of years
but, I was then (in that period, and more and more to its end) crushed
under the resulting nonsense of that sort of life and of the conception
of life that I was in. But at the same time I
hopelessly tried to deny this feeling of nonsense. I did not realize
that this nonsense was partly a consequence of these doctrines, which
seemed to me rather solid in theory, but
which was not coherent with my experience (my depression to which
Christianity did not bring any true answer but only claimed to answer
it by rejecting on me the fault of its own failure) and with some
questions I was asking myself. But when all became intolerable and that
finally I accepted
the fact that it was useless to pretend to stay in it, I allowed myself
to think freely and put my thoughts in order, still believing in a
God but finally leaving the constraint, then seen as arbitrary, of the
biblical assumptions: I gave up trying to see a finality in everything,
and finally recognized honestly and clearly the reality of life's
defects. Then, working to put my thoughts in order, in pure care of a
search of the truth and of a coherent understanding of things, the
nonsenses of life vanished at the conceptual level, even if they still
remained big at the factual level, and things came clear: my
observations and understandings of the errors, perversities and
nonsenses of the Christian doctrine multiplied, so much that I now
happen to shake my head: but how could I ever bear to follow such
nonsenses?
Statement of the problem
Christianity is first the assertion that we were created by God, who
knows all, loves us and wants our good. Up to that point, it is clear,
no problem. Then, that he wants to reveal himself to us and to guide us
in our life, for the good of us all. It is quite nice. Conceptually it
is very plausible, and it is hard to see well the reasons which prevent
him, and it would be so good that it was true! Moreover, I always
recognize that there is much truth in it: God knows better than us what
we need, and wishes that the good be achieved. But then, the question
comes of knowing why this knowledge and this will do not appear in our
world. I would even say, this absence constitutes an obviously
incongruous situation from the point of view of what should be,
according to the metaphysical nature of all things; and it is natural
to think that it is an exception compared to the universal creation, I
mean the creation of the spiritual universes, beyond our particular
universe and mode of incarnation; moreover, the NDE seem to confirm
that by showing as soon as after death a possibility of quasi infinite
knowledge and a God much nearer to our heart than what appears in our
terrestrial life.
Then, why this darkness, this obstacle to the knowledge and will of
God, to which we are confronted? Christianity answers: man is ignorant
and does not do the will of God because he is deaf and rebellious to
God. It looks like a possible answer, which a priori would deserve
examination. Let us reformulate it: after admitted that the will of God
exists, and that it is indeed interested in our decisions (this is not
easily avoidable from a metaphysical point of view), is added the
assumption here that these these knowledge and will are expressed and
somehow present directly in front of our decisions, and that it is our
will which is opposed to it by refusing to hear it.
Then, Christianity calls to repentance from this rebellion, and to
accept to do from now on the will of God. There still, a priori, such a
call would be eminently respectable: ifever there was an available
means to manage to know and to follow the will of God, if God wanted
that we listen to him and to follow his will and that that is essential
to the achievement of significant objectives, then refusing to do it
would be a most terrible and catastrophic, condemnable thing. Far from
me any attempt to escape according to my whims, the mission that God
would address to me, ifever such was the case !
Yes but there is a problem: however one makes the resolution to
listening to God, that is not enough to receive from God a direct,
clear and sufficient inspiration, to know if he calls us, to what he
calls us, and how to listen to him. Well, is that enough? From
experience we see that not. Moreover, Christians are also partly of
this opinion, since they find the need to propose a book to us and say:
here is the Word of God, written in exceptional circumstances where God
had better succeeded in expressing himself, and makes use of it as a
substitute to a more fluid communication with us, to tell us once and
for all what he had to say to us. Believe it and apply it, it is there
you will know all that you need to know and what you have to do to
respect the will of God. And even, while doing this, you will come to
communion with God, to being filled of His Spirit, to be guided by Him.
This aims to fill the vacuum of our ignorance with respect to God and
our difficulty of seeing Him and of hearing Him.
Does that satisfy our metaphysical aspiration, and does it solve the
oddness of our ignorance and our distance of God? Not really, for
several reasons:
- That does not change anything to the fact that the possibility
for who wants to hear God and follow him is no way universal, since
this book did not always exist. There is thus no intrinsic metaphysical
requirement nor absolute need that the will of God appears. Indeed, if
God could not bear the absence of this revelation, how could he have
beared it a so long period before the appearance of this book?
- However Christians claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit, they
are obviously not so directly enough to be able to do without this
book.
- A book is only a book, its capacities of information are limited,
especially compared to the infinite diversity of the life and the
circumstances which we must face. Then, is the Holy Ghost enough to
fill its insufficiency ?
Obviously, the question a priori requires an in-depth study, on the one
hand not to miss a mission that God would like to put on us, on the
other hand to check whether that is or not the case.
I initially believed that it was true, I desired to believe in it,
in order to commit to follow the will of God the best I can... until
finally being embanked by the obviousness of reality, that all that was
false. On the other hand, I did not choose this observation, it forced
itself to me, and through reflexion, it proves to be of a luminous
clearness. Not of a light "of God" of course, but a presently obvious
experience, impossible to circumvent. Bringing also with it the
realization of the almost forgotten fact that, to be followed
accurately and honestly, the truth should not be chosen but discovered,
far from the calls to the act of faith of Christianity in "favour" of
its God.
But will you say, how to claim that, whereas Christianity has been
existing for 20 centuries, and everyone does not yet agree for saying
whether it is true or false? Some adhere to it, others don't, therefore
isn't everyone free to choose his camp? Indeed, if the ones had really
good reasons to believe what they believe, it would be strange that the
others did not recognize them. So what happened ? Are all the arguments
of the ones and the others too weak to be able to impose themselves ?
Christians, going in this direction, think of having reasons, but that
they do not impose themselves to all as "God lets us free". Admittedly,
at such a level of abstraction and superficiality, not considering
anything else about the core of the problems, such an approach of the
disagreement appears almost plausible.
But I am not there any more: I found various reasons to conclude
that the Bible is false, reasons which I see as solid and clear, and
which everyone should recognize... provided some small effort of
careful thought is made, admittedly. But how is this sustainable ? Are
these reasons quite valid? Had nobody thought of them before ? If one
had thought of them, had the Christians examined them, and are they
such morons to not have recognized them ? Or do they have contrary
reasons to believe quite as valid?
Quite strange mystery, you will say. For me too. Then what?
Already, of what I knew of the Christian positions, it appeared to me
that if the Christians had valid reasons to hold their position
vis-a-vis such criticisms as those I had just discovered, they hide it
well, missing the core of the problems in all their claims ! They seem
totally unaware of the true reasons to disagree with them. Then, to
solve the question with certainty, just try to present these reasons to
Christians, to see how they answer. It is what I did. Why, after all,
to wonder how they answer up to be reduced to make the experience,
whereas I was theirs, I knew them well and thus I should know how they
think and react ? In an somehow astonishing way, the result of this
experience surprised me quite well. Christians thus globally appeared
in a very different way from what I believed to know when I was theirs,
and who on the other hand assured me in a way still much clearer and
accentuated the subtle critical analyses that I just managed to put in
clear.
And here is this subtle, strange observation, with an undoubtedly
absurd and incredible appearance for the first interested ones, but now
for me among the obviousnesses which are undeniable as any obviousness
by the strong coherence of their meaning and the multiplicity of their
direct or quasi-direct checks which does not leave room to any
seriously possible alternative: it is that beyond some metaphysical
truths easily confirmed by the intuition of our spirit (thus, for which
one would have no need for revelation by a book !) but carefully
exploited and musused here, the biblical doctrines are just essentially
a mere vast, malicious and humanly well explainable strategy of
blindness and intellectual dishonesty, disguised under the names of
divine revelation, spiritual teaching and life with God, with objective
to bring and preserve the adhesion to this same doctrine without valid
reason. (this concept of objective refers here primarily much less to
some conscious will than with the effect of some darwinian selection of
human doctrines.)
Indeed, to my serious and subtle discoveries and observations that I
tried to discuss, the few Christians I solicited, the same people as
those I formerly regarded as my brothers in Christ dedicated like me
and with me on the way to the truth, did not have generally anything to
answer, than their silliness, their contempt and their foolish charges
against me, and they remained on their positions without taking the
trouble to touch the bottom of the problem. Admittedly there can be
exceptions, but the few relatively judicious and honest Christians
generally trusting those which are less so, to exempt themselves from
all questioning without realizing of the problem, propagate the error.
So here, in the texts below, are some critical analysis and
refutations of the various bases of the Christian faith. In other
words, a review of the motivations by which evangelic Christians
believe what they believe, which they regard as the basis of the truth,
according to what I could feel for myself or observe in others, and
arguments that they present in support of their convictions; and why
all that does not hold.
(to be continued)
List of arguments
Short
logical refutation of Christianism
Answer to
so-called proofs of "Authority of the Bible"
Meeting
with God
The Christian doctrine, in short
God's
promises
God's will
God's
characters and holiness
An
inspiration, not a theory !
Receiving the
gifts from the Holy Spirit
Other non-translated parts:
The good news of the Gospel
Christianity as only alternative to nihilism, miraculous conversions
and consistency of the Bible
Salvation by faith
Rational logic vs Christian logic
The 10 commandments for the Christian
Other part in preparation: analysis of the Jesus miracles in the light
of modern knowledge
Summary of the position
to put in short many essential arguments developed in linked texts:
God exists, yes but...
The "faith in God" is not God, and does not inform us on the truths and
wills of God, but lets man follow any selected or imposed, biblical or
different orientation. On the other hand, the faith in a particular
doctrine like the Bible, as a belief adopted by choice and treated as a
certainty without valid reason, is nothing but an act of dishonesty. If
it were established that a word is from God, the faith in the veracity
of its contents would be a rational need and a duty; on the other hand,
the faith without proof that a word is from God as others believe that
another word is from God, is arbitrary and no way more hononable than
anything else. This turns into corruption when believing and
proclaiming things without reason is done for an advantage ("to be
saved "or to have the favours of God). But, ifever God felt insults,
what would be an insult to God would rather be this belief and claim of
Him as reflected in this biblical portrait of a stunned, sectarian and
corrupted God that asks us to believe in twaddles and to unconciously
follow this strategy of blindness and intellectual dishonesty called
spiritual growth and life with God, as the only way out of an eternal
punishment. Testimonys of people who really saw God in Near Death
Experiences refute in particular the doctrine of the redemption,
showing that salvation does not depend on such stupid criteria as
religious opinions or preliminary metaphysics, since God loves
unconditionnally.
If there were a handle of really enlightened servants of God, they
would have known how, or been guided, to establish on Earth a much
better world more quickly than one can ever imagine. Devotion is not
enough there: experience shows that "trying to obey God", especially in
Christian ways, and following Biblical doctrine, does no way help us in
informing us on, or following, the true will of God, any better than by
simple non-religious good will, however Christians may get the illusion
to succeed in this direction.
So, how could God be perverse enough to demand us for not going to
hell, to play this hopeless, vain and crazy game to search for Him in
vain and persuade ourselves to have succeeded, as Christians claim we
must do ? So, faith in God is not necessarily
helpful to do His will - and in many aspects it can often turn out as a
handicap or a trap as it leads us to focus on a help that does not
exist, or on an irrelevant reference that distracts us from the
understanding of the real problems we must cope with, understanding
which is (unfortunately) the only means we have to find the good.
A book really revealed by God to guide our life and to give it a
direction, would have had the wisdom to collectively impel humanity on
the way to a reliable and balanced progress, by letting us aware in
particular of the methodology and the fundamental importance of the
sense of responsibilities (towards oneself and others), of faculties of
organization, understanding and progress of various adequate human
knowledge, which, beyond their simple moral and spiritual value as
reflections of divine wisdom, would be highly necessary to the
collective salvation of mankind in its terrestrial destiny and the
safeguarding of its environment.
(This includes of course the learning of the necessary understanding of
the differences of gifts and chances to which humans can be confronted
in their terrestrial destiny on the individual level, in order to
ensure the methods of social integration, human valorization as well as
the acknowledging and responsible management of the individual
difficulties of the ones and others as far as possible. It would thus
in particular lead us to develop and promote the exercise of each
faculty useful for humanity on the practical level for the collective
good while integrating those which would be provided with less of such
or such of these faculties, while insisting on the fact that (here as
in so many other problems) any moralist consideration must be put to
background to focus on a long work of understanding and thorough and
persevering search for an adequate organization.)
It would be far more interesting than this poor Bible which has nothing
superior over what man can do, except for its arbitrary claims of
superiority, and which only seduces our thirst for truth and our desire
to do good, for better wasting them for the profit of the
ill-considered praise of its own hollow doctrines and its vain
wrongfully spiritual promises, substitutes of God only suitable to plug
us. There exists varied and serious criticisms against it, could they
just be paid attention to !
For the better or the worse, God left the Earth between our hands
without instruction. Let us think: working there seriously, we could do
much better in the understanding of life and others, and the
construction of a better world.
O Christians who see my misleading far from Christ, will you pray
for me so that the Holy Spirit enlights me again of the light of the
Gospel and the faith in Jesus ?
How nice! To thank you, I also will pray for you, so that you believe
that there are little green men on the Moon who will come and invite
you to have a party with them in orbit in their flying saucer: because
if you do not believe in it, they will not come.
A Christian asked a wise man: Master, what should I do to be an
authentic man? The wise man answered him: You know the principles: Be
sincere in any circumstance, act according to what you think, do not
cheat, do not lie, do not make a false testimony, seek the impartiality
and justice in your judgements, check your suspicions before spreading
them, do not impose any obligation on others which you would not be
ready to support yourself. The Christian answered: I observed all these
things from my youth. The wise man, hearing that, understood it, and
said to him: You still miss one thing: If you want to be perfect, give
up all that you believe and put it on doubt, you will reach the
beginning of wisdom; then, come and discuss together with me each
concept which constituted your vision of life and let us analyze them
patiently to see whether they resist. But, puzzled by these words, he
from went away disappointed, thinking of having asked a wrong adviser,
because he had a great faith. The wise, seeing that, said: how
difficult it is for a believer carried by the heat of his convictions,
to follow the way of the truth with the necessary patience !
How many evangelic Christians are necessary to pull a man from the
shit ?
Answer: Zero, it suffices to recall that man is a sinner and that
thus it is normal and right that he is in the shit, for God does not
owe us anything. Anyway, God knows better than us what this man needs:
in His infinite wisdom which overcomes all intelligence, He decided to
send him this trial and will get him out of it in His time. Who would
we think we are, to try disagreeing with our Creator, so accusing Him
to not have made all things coincide for the good of this man ?
Also, anyway one should not criticize the inaction of Christians in
this regard, for they have no responsibility here. To try to criticize
them, would mean to dishonestly forget that the perfection is not of
this world and thus cannot be required (since we are always sinners),
it would be the enquiry and the disunion among Christians, something of
unworthy of Christ. The best one can do is rather to pray so that the
spirit of God reveals to this man that the most important thing for him
should be repentance and to praise the Lord who is faithful and will
provide for the forgiveness of his sins.
Original French version
Back to homepage