Posted on 07/12/2012 9:34:51 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A former Methodist worship and teaching pastor who served in ministry for 20 years before becoming an atheist has been appointed as the American Atheist's public relations director. In an interview with The Christian Post, she revealed that despite initially being ostracized by friends, she is now happy and at peace with her decision.
"No it was very, very gradual. Actually there's not really one single moment where I can look back and say ah, that was the moment. It was kind of a slow progression," Teresa MacBain shared about her loss of faith with CP in a phone interview on Tuesday.
After leaving her ministry earlier this year, MacBain, a Florida resident, also served as executive director of the Clergy Project, which offers support to former clergy members who have lost their faith and become secularists.
"My husband and kids were fine, they knew that things had changed for me, but extended family, I lost those relationships. I lost all of my friendships except for one couple. I have one maybe from the church that I'm still in contact with, but initially they were all just very angry. They locked me out of the church and it took me some months to collect my belongings. It was a very difficult situation," MacBain explained about reaction to her initial announcement.
There were those from the church who tried to reach out and speak to her, but those discussions did not go far.
"One pastor that was a former colleague of mine did reach out immediately and I went and sat down and talked to him. He discussed everything and let me share. It was kind of an intense conversation, but after that I haven't heard from that person anymore. I'm not really sure, I guess he just wanted to find some answers," she said.
Unable to point to one specific incident that made her change her mind about God and the Bible, MacBain chronicled the train of thought that led her from the Christian faith to her secularist reasoning today.
"It's just theological. I had no problems with the church or the structure or the organization. There are basically four steps that occurred over a long period of time. One was the contradictory nature of the Bible; the lack of scientific or historical foundation or accuracy, which took me a very, very long time to come to terms with. That was the starting point I guess when I realized that that wasn't true, that the Bible wasn't true. From there I moved to thinking about all of the religions in the world and how people basically associate, in most cases, with one religion or another based upon their own culture and how they were raised," she said.
"So I kind of moved into a position where I thought that all religions were equally valid and that it kind of depended on who you were and how you were raised but that we were all on the same journey. From there I moved to the question of the existence of hell and trying to understand how a supreme being could create humans that according to the Christian Bible are very weak and finite, as compared to God. How that creature, being, entity, whatever you want to call it, could punish them eternally in such a horrible and torturous place as hell. So that was kind of a third discovery."
While the former teaching pastor confessed that often during her ministry she had doubts about her faith, now as an atheist she feels more secure about her views in life.
"I feel secure. I feel peaceful. I just kind of clarified the doubts. All the while I was having those doubts and trying to struggle with those issues, I always felt that it would make me a stronger Christian. That it would make me a better pastor. It wasn't until it really hit home for me, where I was at, that I realized that instead of that I had actually grown much further away from my faith to the point of I no longer had faith."
In her new position as public relations director for American Atheists, which is one of the largest secularist organizations in the U.S., she says that her main goal is to defend First Amendment rights and continue fighting for the separation of church and state.
"I think one of the misunderstandings about what the term atheist means is that all of us think we're 100 percent certain that no one can change our minds about the belief in God, which isn't completely accurate. An atheist as far as what I believe means that we don't see any evidence; we don't think there is a God. We're very skeptical about it and choose to live our lives without God," MacBain said.
"Instead of looking to an outside source for the solution to humankind's problems, we see that responsibility as [our own]. We have to reach out and support each other. We can't say a prayer to an invisible being somewhere and expect that to be the solution. The solution has to be when one human reaches out to another."
The Clergy Project, with which MacBain serves in a voluntary role, was created in March 2011 as a private, invitation only, website for "for active and former clergy who do not hold supernatural beliefs." Starting with 52 members, it now has more than 300 members, according to the website.
-- CP reporter Brittney R. Villalva contributed to this report.
She sounds like an agnostic to me, not an atheist.
An atheist is a man who has no invisible means of support. -John Buchan
An atheist is a man who looks through a telescope and tries to explain what he can’t see. -O.A. Battista
If there was no God, there would be no atheists. -G.K. Chesterton
Ominous warning for such found in Heb 6:4-6:
For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
Sounds like adolescent rebellion to me:
1. Who are you to tell me what to do? (Bible has no scientific proof, and that’s the only type of authority I approve of).
2. You are no better than anybody else (Christianity is the same as all the other religions.)
3. You can’t make me obey. (There is no hell.)
If you aren’t humble, you aren’t teachable. She thought she knew better than silly old ancient people. She is now without any tools in her spiritual toolbox for dealing with the vicissitudes of life, because she did not recognize what they were and what they were for.
Hope this is temporary. Sometimes God gives people another opportunity to repent.
I believe there are several points she brings out, but
I note she does believe in herself.
The following considerations could be appled in her case.
1) Her own minds ability to understand everything(see
quantum theory for the scientists approach to this issue—
e.g.- how can one thing be in two places at the same time,)
what happens if she has a stroke and goes blind, does that
mean nothing exists cuz she can’t see them? (I.e. can your
mind really understand all that there is? If the God of the
Bible is bigger than science, does it make sense that one
could understand Him?
2) The Bible needs to have scientific credulity. As far
as I have seen, many of the things I was taught in my science
classes are now considered false. Sometimes science needs
to have credulity also(see neutrinos faster than light
announcement)
3) Historical credulity of the Bible. Many events, peoples,
geographies were once considered false, but things have
been discovered which can verify their existence.
(example: the existence some of the peoples mentioned in the Bible are
finally being discovered(e.g. Hittites). Recent discovery of mention of
David , a King of a small kingdom, in an ancient inscription)
perhaps the mines of Solomon have been found, etc...
4) Plain old unbelief. In one of his parables, the Christ
did say that if people didn’t believe Moses and the Prophets,
they wouldn’t believe a story, even if the dead came back
to life and told them that story.
5) Fear of believing in Christ. This was exhibited even by
his own close followers(disciples)
6) The person of Christ. If he is a myth, who constructed
the myth? But if he did , indeed, rise from the dead, he
is worth believing(putting ones complete trust) in.
I believe there are several points she brings out, but
I note she does believe in herself.
The following considerations could be appled in her case.
1) Her own minds ability to understand everything(see
quantum theory for the scientists approach to this issue—
e.g.- how can one thing be in two places at the same time,)
what happens if she has a stroke and goes blind, does that
mean nothing exists cuz she can’t see them? (I.e. can your
mind really understand all that there is? If the God of the
Bible is bigger than science, does it make sense that one
could understand Him?
2) The Bible needs to have scientific credulity. As far
as I have seen, many of the things I was taught in my science
classes are now considered false. Sometimes science needs
to have credulity also(see neutrinos faster than light
announcement)
3) Historical credulity of the Bible. Many events, peoples,
geographies were once considered false, but things have
been discovered which can verify their existence.
(example: the existence some of the peoples mentioned in the Bible are
finally being discovered(e.g. Hittites). Recent discovery of mention of
David , a King of a small kingdom, in an ancient inscription)
perhaps the mines of Solomon have been found, etc...
4) Plain old unbelief. In one of his parables, the Christ
did say that if people didn’t believe Moses and the Prophets,
they wouldn’t believe a story, even if the dead came back
to life and told them that story.
5) Fear of believing in Christ. This was exhibited even by
his own close followers(disciples)
6) The person of Christ. If he is a myth, who constructed
the myth? But if he did , indeed, rise from the dead, he
is worth believing(putting ones complete trust) in.
No. First of all you can see and talk to your wife. Second weather or not your wife’s diary contained lies does not have any bearing on her existence. That is a silly analogy.
Maybe this woman is wrong and maybe she is right. I applaud her for standing on her own judgement. She has looked at the evidence and come to a different conclusion, that’s all.
—No. First of all you can see and talk to your wife. Second weather or not your wife’s diary contained lies does not have any bearing on her existence. That is a silly analogy.—
You are correct. I didn’t go into detail. The background is that I can’t see my wife and I’m permanently stranded on a desert island and have nothing but my birthday suit. And the natives have never had contact with mankind outside the island.
If they refuse to believe she exists I have nothing to offer as proof. It doesn’t mean she doesn’t exist though.
If this woman truly rejects God it means she was never a Christian in the first place.
—No. First of all you can see and talk to your wife. Second weather or not your wife’s diary contained lies does not have any bearing on her existence. That is a silly analogy.—
You are correct. I didn’t go into detail. The background is that I can’t see my wife and I’m permanently stranded on a desert island and have nothing but my birthday suit. And the natives have never had contact with mankind outside the island.
If they refuse to believe she exists I have nothing to offer as proof. It doesn’t mean she doesn’t exist though.
If this woman truly rejects God it means she was never a Christian in the first place.
I think you identified a key clue to the problem here. Reminds me of the hologram in I Robot that made it clear he was asking the wrong question.
I really should have responded more precisely to your response.
You said “First of all you can see and talk to your wife.”
That is why I used the analogy. I have a personal relationship with her, as I do with Christ. I also have four bonefide miracles in my life. I’m not talking about the “normal coincidences” that are answers to prayer. I’m talking about the supernatural stuff. And for anyone other than me they are second hand and therefore of little value.
You said, “Second weather or not your wife’s diary contained lies does not have any bearing on her existence.”
I agree. And that is my point. And also, I very carefully inserted the word “apparent” in my original post. It is because I was implying that just because I think something is an inconsistency does not mean it is. I got this story from an email just today. It makes the point:
WALKING THE DOG
A WOMAN was flying from Melbourne to Brisbane .
Unexpectedly, the plane was diverted to Sydney along the way.
The flight attendant explained that there would be a delay,
and if the passengers wanted to get off the aircraft
the plane would re-board in 50 minutes.
Everybody got off the plane except one lady who was blind.
A man had noticed her as he walked by
and could tell the lady was blind because her guide dog lay quietly
underneath the seats in front of her throughout the entire flight.
He could also tell she had flown this very flight before because the pilot
approached her and calling her by name, said, ‘Kathy, we are in Sydney for almost an hour.
Would you like to get off and stretch your legs?’
The blind lady replied, ‘No thanks, but maybe Buddy would like to stretch his legs.’
Picture this:
All the people in the gate area came to a complete standstill
when they looked up and saw the pilot walk off the plane
with a Guide dog!
The pilot was even wearing sunglasses.
People scattered.
They not only tried to change planes, but they were trying to change airlines!
The point of that story is that things are not always as they appear.
I wonder what “contradictions” she failed to reconcile. I also wonder what difficulties with science and history she encountered.
Perhaps she was poorly equipped to be in a position of leadership and the accompanying battle strain proved to be too great for her ability to handle the shield of faith and the sword of the spirit.
“There are thirty-two ways to write a story, and I’ve used every one, but there is only one plot — things are not as they seem.” — Jim Thompson
True. It does not mean that she does not exist. It also means they would have no objective way of knowing she exists and would have to take your word for it. Then imagine a different scenario. You don’t speak of your wife at all but instead tell them that they are evil by nature because someone a long time ago did something to fall from the grace of some god. For this they are to be punished unless they take your word for it that this god exists and that they are not worthy and can never do anything to be worthy of living and the only way to live is to admit their guilt and ask for forgiveness and serve this God, whose purpose they are not to question because their human reasoning minds are impudent to know reality and to deal with it. And if they don’t believe they will die. Then suppose in this analogy you are not stark naked but have a single possession; a two thousand year old book which claims to be the only truth. There are some logical problems with the premises of the book but you tell them that faith is superior to their feeble reasoning ability and that those parts that don’t seem to make sense must be accepted on faith. And if they don’t accept them on faith they will die.
Can you not see that a rational person could look at the evidence and come to a different conclusion.
This statement accepts the premise that there are contradictions in the Bible.
—This statement accepts the premise that there are contradictions in the Bible.—
I very carefully included the word “apparent”. It was quite deliberate. :-)
Yeah, I gotcha.
I’m just flabbergasted by this. She seems to have turned her back on God b/c she was too lazy to research her own questions and doubts. I had similar questions, and I did some homework to see what the deal was. My research cleared up my questions. End of story. Now she gets to be empty and pretend like she’s just fine while doing her best to remove God from other people’s lives so as to make them as miserable as she is.
I’m sure this happens with some degree of regularity. Just as I’m sure that the opposite happens ... with far greater frequency. So why is it that the one is reported but the other gets short shrift?
I would not so glibly ‘applaud’ a persons choice to accept hell.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.