I can't specifically remember the first moment I thought, "Hey, my religion might be bullshit," but I remember one of the first times. I sat in the Gem State Academy chapel, my cheeks burning. It was the culmination of one of the many prayer weeks, and the preacher had just made the altar call. I was ashamed and angry, and my face felt flushed. I was being asked to come to the front as a symbol of my willingness to serve Jesus, and I was terribly conflicted. On the one hand, I wanted to be a good person, which I and everyone I knew equated with following Jesus. And on the other, someone from my religion, which prides itself on intellectual argumentation and religious scholarship, was using heavy-handed emotional arguments and peer pressure to get me to make a meaningless gesture as a token of tribal identification. It seemed mindless and manipulative. And while the preacher framed my natural resistance to manipulation as "wrestling with the Holy Spirit," the angry thought running through my head was, "Hey, maybe this is all bullshit."
It took me a long time to more or less settle on that conclusion, but the evidence kept mounting. And instead of dealing with it, I just noticed the cognitive dissonance that kept cropping up, and I just kind of passively faded from the Adventist scene. After I left college I would only attend church sporadically, although I couldn't really tell you why. I just did not like it and did not belong there. And it wasn't just the fact that I was a closeted and therefore unhappy homosexual, although that was an important part of it. It was also that the more I was outside of the church, the more I realized the church's explanations for just about any damn thing did not square with my experience of the world, and just choosing to ignore my experience when it conflicted with Adventist teachings was not an option for me. Not forever anyway.
I did two of the hardest things I've ever done on Oct 31, 2011. I told my parents I was gay. And then they asked a question I should have seen coming: "well, what does this mean for your Adventism?" Because if I could throw out what the bible says in "plain english" about being gay, then what else in the bible was I willing to get rid of? As it turns out, quite a bit of it. I didn't specifically say at the time, I just told them there were bits I liked and would keep, and the rest I had to take a step back from. In other words, I didn't consider myself an Adventist anymore. I'm honestly not sure which of those two revelations shocked and hurt my parents more.
Honestly, I probably should have told them both of those things 15 years earlier. But I dragged my feet for a variety of good and bad reasons. Partly because most of my family and friends are Adventist and I wasn't ready to face the push-back or the pity or the patronizing attitudes like, "If you just understood the bible and christianity better, you would stay," or "If you weren't so easily tempted by Satan you would stay." Because I watched a camp director I was friends with describe his son's decision to be truthful about his sexual orientation and embrace it without shame as choosing "to serve Satan." Because I knew, having watched it happen to other people before, that my friends and family would assume that the boy they all thought was so bright and observant, who had been raised his entire life in Adventist churches and schools, had somehow managed to miss the truth and beauty of the Adventist religion and lifestyle. That I could not possibly have processed Adventist philosophy and found it wanting, I must have misunderstood, been tempted, been an unobservant idiot.
The idea angers me, honestly. Perfect I am not, but I know what I know, I know what I learned, I know what I saw, and and I know how much Adventism doesn't fit with my experience, knowledge or philosophy. And while my person life philosophy is still a work in process, and I expect to be wrong, and make more mistakes and reserve to change my mind about a few things in the future regarding life the universe and everything, I can tell you this: I have some serious fundamental problems with Adventism. And I can tell you why.
To begin, I don't remotely agree with the basic world view or eschatology. In Adventist thought the world is fallen, and must become more and more fallen as time goes on. Eventually, God will withdraw his presence, the world will get really bad, Christians, especially Adventists, will be persecuted, and eventually Jesus will return to smite Satan and any human who does not worship God. In Adventist teaching, the world is always only a couple of years away from the return of Jesus, because the world's just THAT evil. People outside the church might be well-meaning, but are fallen. When it comes down to it, they have been tricked by Satan in some big or small way. It is the job of every Adventist to save them, to bring them the truth of the bible and this world view and baptize them into the church. It is a calling. If they do not convert these people, they will DIE in a lake of fire at the end of time.
To be blunt, this simply does not square with my experience or any rational observation of the world. It took me a long time to get out of the adventist mindset to notice, but as it turns out I think a lot of things have gotten better for a lot of people. More people are fed, more minorities have the civil liberties they deserve, more sickness can be cured. I don't quite buy the liberal idea that the universe MUST bend toward progress, equality and justice, it seems pretty obvious to me that civilization is a thin veneer that will tear if people get scared enough. But, I don't see a world just endlessly spiraling towards misery and destruction. Yes, there's a long way to go, yes they're a lot of idiots who could push it that way, but that is only part of the story. There's also progress and hope and change for the better all over the damn planet, much of it brought about by people who aren't Christian. To see a world spiraling towards sin and service to Satan you have to ignore large and significant chunks of it that aren't doing that by any rational measure. I don't see a spiral to ruin in the world. I'm not sure why Adventists see it. I DO see an increasing distrust of religious authoritarianism, but that only feels like the end of the world and all things good to authoritarians.
Further, in Adventism, the basic nature of man is fallen. You, as a human being are born to sin. In Adventist teaching human beings are incapable of being good on their own. The ability to be good stems directly from submission to God. They speak of the outside world as a dark and fallen place where people can't help but succumb to their base urges all the damn time, without God giving them the strength to resist the temptation to steal, cheat and lie. They say this, despite making forays into the outside world all the damn time, and encountering decent people who are not stealing, cheating or lying without submitting to God first. I don't know how Adventists reconcile this discrepancy, but I cannot. In my experience, some of the most respectful, kind and decent people I know are atheists who grew up in non-religious households. Yeah, I've known some atheists who are tremendous assholes, and some Christians who are real nice people, and vice versa. But the assertion that people can't choose to be good without God is just false on it face. Millions and billions of people do it every day. And even if you want to argue that that's still God choosing to help them anyway, you must concede it's God choosing to help them even though they don't worship or follow him.
In my experience, people choose to be kind, truthful and decent for a variety of other compelling reasons. They like how it makes them feel. They like how people trust and like them. They have their own non-religious or non-christan value systems about how it's wrong to kill, steal, lie and cheat and think it's important to honor that. They see that when they act decently, the end result for everyone involved, including themselves, is better. They do all this without fear of divine punishment. To assert that they can't possibly be doing this without submitting to God first is ludicrous, because we have that data: they do it anyway. At least some of the time.
I'm not asserting the reverse is true either, that people are born to be good. I'm just noting the obvious, which is we are not perfect, but we still manage to be decent to each other most of the time. And it's profoundly disturbing to me that Adventists, and christians more broadly, frame a lack of perfection as perpetual failure and an inclination for evil. More specifically, that they raise children and brainwash adults into believing that they should feel bad just for existing, as innately imperfect and evil things. Not only is this teaching wrong because it does terrible things to a human's self-esteem, it's wrong because it's a obvious and terrible lie.
What has kept you from murdering your friends today? Your enemies? Lying, cheating, stealing, raping, beating? Have you fought the urge to kill at every moment of your life, constrained only by a christian conscience? Do you enjoy watching the suffering of others? Do enjoy causing the suffering, death and humiliation of others? Is your negative behavior your proudest moment? I'm not asking if you've never been tempted to do an immoral thing, or have never done something you regret, that's happened for everyone. I've had moments I'm not proud of where I was angry, lashed out, did something selfish I thought I could get away with, told a lie when I should have told the truth, etc. Furthermore, I can imagine circumstances that could tempt me to do worse things than I have out of desperation or anger. But I don't enjoy the suffering of others. I'm not inclined to kick puppies. I'm not thinking about how to cheat people when I'm talking to them. When I see other people hurt it makes me hurt. And it doesn't take a great deal of self-control not to operate as a monstrously evil bastard in my day to day life. And you know what, I don't think it takes that much effort for anyone else either. Yeah bad stuff happens. Yes there is systematic injustice to confront and fix. Yes someone can make a series of choices that lead to progressively bad choices. Yes, people make evil decisions for stupid reasons. But I don't think, in their deepest self that that "bad" is who they naturally are. Because they are not, by nature, evil. And I think it's wrong and immoral to convince them they ARE evil and fallen, just to guilt them into joining your religion, as if that was the only way they could ever hope to be consistently good.
Which is the next thing I disagree with Adventism on: It's wrong, in my opinion, to attempt to convert people to ideas you have no proof for. I think it's absolutely fair to have some belief system, about what it all means, about why we're alive, where we go when we die, what the basic nature of man is. But the key feature of those beliefs, the reason they are beliefs and not facts, is that there is no actual proof for any of those ideas. They may soothe existential worries, and that's great, but I think it's absolutely wrong to attempt to coerce people into believing something you can't prove, no matter how good it makes someone feel. I absolutely think it's wrong to prey upon people's fear of death in weak moments, in order convert them to your unprovable beliefs for any reason.
There are two essential claims made for why someone should be an Adventist. One, you get to live forever (and more importantly aren't killed and then re-killed in a lake of fire). Two, your life on earth will be better, because these beliefs lead to better thoughts and therefore better behavior and better results in the here and now. I heard over and over in my youth that the Adventist lifestyle was self-evidently better, and that Adventists living that lifestyle would be such happy and well-adjusted and fulfilled individuals that people would naturally be curious about and eventually willing to join the religion to get the same benefits. But very few people actually do that so they also insist church members must go out and save their friends, using emotional appeals and manipulation (Jesus died for you, you'll die forever if you don't join, don't you want to feel like a good person not like the terrible asshole you are now?). How little faith do you have to have in your philosophy or religion when you can't actually let it speak for itself, after proudly proclaiming it speaks for itself? Either your religion leads to such a good life that it speaks for itself, or you have to go out and convert people to get them to join. Doing the one kind of puts the lie to the other.
Of course, the basis of these beliefs that they are so keen to impart to you is the bible, and the belief that the bible contains infallible truth, is the true word of God and can be read in plain english. Personally, I don't see any reason to believe the bible is more true than the Quran, or the Bhagavad Gita or the writings of Nostrodamus. But even if I were to concede, for the sake of argument, that the bible is true, I have a tremendous problem with the inconsistent ways Adventists interpret it. As I mentioned in part 1, they have no formal method for determining which parts of the bible were cultural, and specific to the time it was written, and which are timeless truths. In practice, it seems to me, Adventists interpret the bible as is culturally convenient, unchallenging and in accordance with their pre-existing biases. They rely on "intuitions from the holy spirit" in order to distinguish truth from lie, with no training or discussion whatsoever on how to distinguish "the urgings of the holy spirit" from "accumulated emotional biases." They consistently refuse to understand the main principles of the text, when they conflict with arguably interpreted rules that are less challenging than the principle. The bible is the Truth . . . except when it's not . . . depending on your feelings. I don't find these standards of interpretation or logic particularly impressive or likely to yield much truth.
As far as Ellen G. White goes, I think I would have liked her as a human being, but I'm not sure I believe she was a prophet from god. She was hit in the head with a rock when she was young, which dented her brain and put her into a coma for a while. A few years later, she started seeing visions. I think the simpler explanation is she had some minor brain damage that resulted in periodic hallucinations. She seemed nice though, especially as she aged and relaxed on the condemnation and embraced compassion a bit more.
Which leads me to the most major problem I have with Adventism: the unhealthy and unnecessary dominance of authoritarianism over grace. I honestly believe there is a beautiful core to the message of christianity that's been absolutely corrupted by a very human need for certainty and control, and Adventism is no exception. I think the ideas that God is the all-powerful and all-knowning embodiment of love and also bound by rules and vengeance and must kill you for being imperfect are absolutely irreconcilable. Adventists usually do some handwaving about "the divine mystery" when this kind of thing comes up, but that usually just means "we can't explain it, so try not to think about it." The ideas don't match. They can't be reconciled. God can't be both of those things. The basic story of christianity can't be "You are so bad that only the threat of hellfire can keep you in line." and also be, "you're so kind and so moved by the suffering and death of Jesus that you want to follow him." God can't be a kind and wise person who only loves you if you serve him as a slave because that correlates with no definition of kindness or wisdom I've ever encountered. And the only people it serves to ignore the voice saying "this makes no sense" are the people at the top of the very human religious organization here on earth, or at least the people who suspect they may believe a crazy thing and don't like to be reminded of the obvious problems with their story.
Which is what rankles me, the prioritization of the organization and rules of the organization over the message. They don't challenge the cultural biases of their congregations because they want those congregations to stay and give money, and the only challenge they do give to their members is to submit to God and the church. The stuff about grace, love, humility and whatnot is given lip service, but when it conflicts with the needs of the organization, the organization wins. They single out people who are different in a way that conflicts with the general congregation's cultural biases, on the basis of broken and cherry-picked rules but irregardless of important christian principles, and make them feel unwanted and unloved. So my divorced and gay friends end up leaving the church because they can't feel the church's love in the church's disdain for who they are or choices they had to make to have a better life. Meanwhile, the remaining congregation, who will look you in the eye and tell you all sins are equal and that all men are pre-disposed to sin, therefore no one can look down on another for their sin, are NOT run out of the church even though they are fat, or lazy, or prideful or shameful gossips or cheaters or otherwise breaking the rules. It's comfortable hypocrisy in the name of goodness and humility and I can't stand it.
And this mindless enforcement of the rules, absent reason and kindness leads to all sorts of terrible traditions and rules, the worst of which, to my mind, is how they forbid dancing. Dancing is not a part of Adventist culture, because there is a fear that it will incite lust in the participants which might tempt them to break another rule uninformed by principle that insists people not have sex before marriage lest God kill you dead. Our old joke used to be, "Why do adventists forbid oral sex? Because it might lead to dancing." Worst of all, they claim this will make you a happier person, because you remove yourself from temptation. They forbid dancing, one of the basic expressions of human happiness and intimacy, and call it joy and freedom. That is insane and there is no biblical principle they can point to that supports it. It's just an arcane rule, based on another arcane rule, that nobody can really explain but that people follow anyway for fear of rocking the boat or burning in hell. If your religious philosophy claims love as it's central tenant, but freaks out when two people dance close together in a loving way, or two men show each other love and physical affection, it might be prudent to ask why that disconnect exists. I did, and I couldn't find a good reason, other than mindless authority, tradition and culture. The life of Jesus and the core principles of the bible have very little to do with it.
The core of christianity (and Adventism) is quite nice in some ways, of course. Jesus comes along and says, "Hey, you know what might change the world? Being kind in response to violence. Tending to the sick, feeding and clothing the poor, abandoning the crass accumulation of wealth and embracing personal and spiritual growth, loving yourself and loving your neighbor, not judging people. You know, not being a dick and maybe being helpful to someone other than yourself." That part I have no problem with. The part I have a problem with is where the church comes in after and says, "You see that nice guy? He died because you're an evil jerk. You're bad and you should feel bad. Now his dad's real pissed off for killing his kid and because of how bad you are, and he's basically going to have to kill you twice in order to make his point proper, and the only way to get right with him is to abandon your own thoughts and free will to his will, which we have conveniently written down and interpreted for you. Now, I know you're asking, how can I know you really speak for him? Well, it's true because it's true. And hey, if you submit now, not only will you not be murder-killed, but you get to live forever and grow wings!" Well, I'm paraphrasing here.
I think Jesus, like Buddha, had some good ideas that can still change the world if actually followed. I think the authoritarian framework that came after, including Adventism's onerous rule system, is essentially emotional blackmail that is less concerned with changing the world, than with false certainty and control. I do not believe a message of love and grace is at all reconcilable with the idea that God will someday return and smite Adventism's enemies because that act is monstrous, not loving or gracious. Why would you as a practicer of love and grace and a follower of Jesus want harm to your enemies, and why would the ultimate expression of love and intelligence in the universe smite them? Is God so limited that he can't sit you down and present a compelling argument? Rules, punishment and hierarchy seem so obviously human, not divine, in origin that I can't believe they were ever successfully grafted onto ideas of love, humility, tolerance and grace. I don't see anything humble or gracious in the authoritarian assertion that one segment of humanity has found all of the Truth and the rest of us must submit or burn forever. I see no love or compassion in telling people they are shit and should feel bad, giving them only submission to human authority in the name of God as a reason to feel good. In short, Adventists and other authoritarians seem more like people who like the idea of following Jesus more than they actually like following Jesus.
Finally, even if I hadn't left because of all of the above, I would be forced to leave as an unrepentant and not celibate gay man. The church thinks that sex outside of marriage is a sin, therefore, since I am not allowed to marry another man in the eyes of the church, I must be celibate forever, or God must kill me. It also thinks that homosexuality is a "lifestyle choice" that could tempt any man, that there is no such thing as a sexual orientation, just perversion, and that otherwise straight children can be turned to the gay side simply by seeing happy homosexual couples out in public. It thinks that three bible verses about slavery and rape and not by any possible reading about committed homosexual life partners are applicable to committed homosexual relationships. This is not only ignorant and wrong, it's so wrong it makes me question what other ideas they hold they aren't similarly detached from reality. It's tragic because they end up using all this ignorance as a reason to run openly gay people out of their churches. Because given the choice between loving the sinner and hating the "sin", they choose the hating over the loving more often than not. People leave, not because they can't let go of their sin, but because they can't see the church's love for them through the church's hate for a piece of their nature that they can't change. It's all so unnecessary. I've never felt closer to God than the day I first had sex with a man. It was the first time I felt like a complete person, like I finally fit in the world and understood who I really was. And my former church finds that idea appalling, that I could and would gain any solace from being loving and affectionate with another man. Apparently Jesus was about love, but only so much. And loving, accepting and socializing with the outcast, so long as it was culturally comfortable.
Adventists keep using that word, "love." I think it means something different than they think it means. And ultimately, that's why I had to go.
*hug*
ReplyDelete