Of my past podcast interview on the Unbelievable? show:
Hi Justin,
Thanks for fixing the link to the feedback section of last week’s show. I listened with great interest to the emails you read. Unfortunately, I wasn’t all that surprised at the many negative reactions to my out-of-the-faith testimony.
Usually when someone accuses me of never being an authentic believer, it’s for one of three reasons: it’s either out of fear (I don’t want to lose my faith one day!), defensiveness (how dare you reject something I hold so dear!) or it’s a response bred from a sense of competition (Christianity is so much better than atheism, let me tell you why!)
I understand the reasons behind all of these reactions, but it doesn’t make hearing them any easier. My motivation for going on Unbelievable? was not to spotlight my former faith and make a case for my past Christianity. I recognize the futility in persuading someone else that my past Christianity was genuine. What evidence could I provide that conclusively proves I was a true believer? For some Christians, it’s not enough to believe me when I say I was honest in my past beliefs, and for others it’s not enough for me to recount the actions I did while I was in the church (actions that were motivated because of my faith).
I was excited to be on your show because I had hoped opening myself up about my story of apostasy would encourage more empathy on the part of Christians toward their non-believing friends and family members. Yet the judgmental feedback I’ve heard from the show is discouraging, mainly because I still hear the usual reactions of fear, defensiveness, and competition against atheism — and I don’t hear the empathy I was hoping for.
While I’m not expecting someone in the faith to embrace my story out of the faith, I still hold hope that there are some Christians who will think twice before jumping to immediate judgmental conclusions about someone else’s life story.
Thanks for allowing my story to be told, and heard.
Rebekah
[So far my favorite line in an email was one that read: Atheism as a "morass of inconsistent, pseudo-spiritual, cold scientific Darwinism survival-of-the-fittest hedonism" -- wow.]
I asked you , I think on Twitter, why is it that some Christians have so much trouble believing that a former, actual Christian (spiritual) can change and become an atheist, yet it’s so easy for them to believe that a gay person (biological) can become straight?
OMG!!! I HAD to laugh at the comment you were left re: atheists and how cold they are (NOT) … Not To Worry… the clear, unvarnished truth is better than the warm and fuzzy cloud of delusion… well, for me anyway. Keep on keeping on. Sheryl
I just listened to the Unbelievable podcast. Well done! Your “opponent” was quite reasonable, and your answers were always poised and to the point.
It’s surprising that Christian apologists, particularly those like Justin the host, who presumably has heard and read about this kind of thing many times, still seem confused about where atheists (or humanists or freethinkers or whatever) get their morals.
Unbelievable always seems to have guys on, and somehow the tension gets ratcheted up a bit in those cases. But the reason doesn’t much matter–you did a great job. Thanks.
Thanks, Bob. I’m sorry it took a while for your comment to appear — it was stuck in moderation! I’m glad you enjoyed the interview. I’ve been talking to a lot of the UK believers over on the Unbelievable? Facebook page, and I’m continually amazed at how eager many of them are to embrace straw-man (straw-person?) versions of atheists. It’s frustrating, to say the least.
It’s always interesting to read how many religious folk used to be atheists. Some even say they were Christian, atheist in, say, University, then back to Christian, and still don’t believe in ex true Christians.
I just listened to that podcast. I found it amusing that the host seemed to be upset that you would do good because it would have pay-it-forward effects which would ultimately make the world a better place. A better place for everyone, including you. He insinuated that reciprocal kindness (although you hinted that it wasn’t directed at people that would repay you back directly) was selfish. He also assumed that you wouldn’t be kind to your ‘enemies’.
I found that ironic since his view of morality was based on being kind to other based out of fear of punishment and promise of reward.
He could argue that he is inspired to be loving by Jesus’ example, but if that was really his motivation then how could he be surprised that non-Christians could be inspired to kindness by example without needing to believe in an eternal reward/punishment system?
I thought you did well but I am finding that many Christian family members only say they want to hear our thoughts and don’t really want to listen. They try and pick out points they can attack and actually try and understand. We are accused of not listening to them, when we do. Their definition of listening to them means agreeing with them. Maybe that is why they refuse to listen to us.