So recently I've been going back and reading some posts of mine from several years ago, and I realized something. I was like a glowing frickin' magical scepter of religious tolerance back then. Not so much anymore My spiritual journey over the last couple of years has not been what I would call a particularly positive one.

Be warned: This post will probably contain a lot of anger and might offend those of you who are devout, so only read this if you feel like you can handle thoughts that are different from your own. Remember that these are my opinions, my struggles, and my frustration being expressed. I don't want to alienate any of you, but I also want to share what I've been going through. These are my feelings, not necessarily iron-clad facts, so take that as you will. That said, please don't comment with some "evolutionist are liers youve ben decieved1!!1!" or "have you tried having a relationship with our lord and savior Jesus Christ??" drabble. I really, really don't appreciate idiotic comments OR proselytizing.

So. I was raised Christian, but I've always dealt with what my teachers and peers called the "doubt problem" (translation: the ability to think critically). I should start out by saying that I am no longer Christian, and have not been for some time. If I had to pick a name for my current set of beliefs, it'd probably be "bitter agnostic". I'm not an atheist, because I don't think we have enough information to make a conclusion one way or another, but I have come to hate organized religion on a level that I didn't think was possible just a few short revolutions around the sun ago. I have so many problems with the subject that I don't even know where to START. So let's just bullet-point random shit.

Problem # 5237: There is an inherent issue with monotheism, particularly the Abrahamic faiths, that I like to call the "we're right, you're wrong!' complex. The mindset that there is only one truth, and that YOU know it because you read it in a book written a thousand+ years ago, seems so arrogant and presumptuous that it makes me physically ill. Everyone has the right to their own spiritual truth, but when you go gallivanting around announcing that other belief systems are a hell sentence, well...that's kind of douchey, in my opinion. Even if you DON'T proselytize, the assumption that outsiders are wrong is built into the system. This leaves no room for the staggering and rich variety of human cultures and perspectives, because it demonizes anyone who doesn't follow a certain way of thinking.

Problem # 3466756435:: The Bible. I often wonder if Christians have ever actually READ the thing, because I honestly think the Bible is the number one thing that turns me off about Christianity. Here is a book that condones mass genocide, slavery, incest, the beating of children, the oppression of women, and a host of other social plagues. Not to mention that, whenever I read the Old Testament, I CANNOT shake the impression that it's like, the world's trippiest crack fic. Do Christians actually sit down and ANALYZE THIS?? I know the book was a product of its times, yadda yadda, but how can we take it seriously as the supreme Word of God when it's so filled with violence, hate, and impossible situations?
Random example 1: the Noah story. Not possible. You cannot re-populate the entire human race from such a small group of people, or it would show up in the human genome. WE HAVE SCIENCE, PEOPLE. WE'VE MAPPED THAT STUFF. IT TELLS US REAL THINGS ABOUT HISTORY. And don't even get me started on the ridiculous idea that you could fit all of Earth's organisms onto a BOAT. What are you people, kindergartners??
Random example 2: The Exodus story. Didn't happen. How do we know this? Extensive archaeology and years of rigorous study by the best and the brightest in the field. The Egyptians built the pyramids by sacrificing their own people, for crying out loud, so give them the credit they deserve for dying in service of their ruler.
Random example 3: God turns Lot's wife into a pillar of salt for looking at a city that was, for lack of a better term, being divinely nuked. THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN. Our universe displays an amazingly consistent set of physical and mathematical laws. If there is a divine being, he does not turn random women into pillars of salt. He operates by His laws. PHYSICS DOES NOT ALLOW SPONTANEOUS SALTIFICATION. Never even mind the moral quandaries you get into when you stop to think about why she was summarily executed (for being curious. That bitch, how dare she!).
It amazes me that, just because something was written down thousands of years ago, people accept it. If your wacky neighbor Phil came into your yard and started talking about how God turned his wife into a pillar of salt, you'd be like... "umm, sure dude. Lay off the peyote." You might even become concerned for his mental health and/or your own safety and call the police. But for some reason you think that an identical event that supposedly happened THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO, and that has NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER to support it, is plausible? Are you kidding me? I have this incredible urge to scream "how far up your ass can you fit your head??"
I realize that most of my objections are to a literalist interpretation of the Bible, particularly the Old Testament. Lots of people would point out that the stories are metaphors rather than actual historical fact, but I'd counter with the argument that the metaphorical nature is never made clear in the Bible and is certainly not interpreted as such by a TON of people. Either the Bible is the supreme Word of God and is thus infallible, or it has been corrupted by human hands, and is thus entirely invalidated (because how can you distinguish between the original message and the subsequent corruption?).
I will say that I do like the New Testament as a book; I find the Jesus story inspiring, and its message of love and forgiveness is a welcome respite from the God of the Old Testament, who is jealous, petty, irrational, cruel, and ridiculously fond of punishing people [/end specific objections that arise from my Judeo-Christian background].

Problem # 867-5309: The history of organized religion. I don't think I need to delve too deeply into this, since I'm sure many of you are well acquainted with the fact that religious zealotry is one of the most destructive forces on the entire damn planet. You cannot be a Christian without being insanely ashamed of the actions of your forebears. The Catholic church burned millions of innocent men, women, and children during its various periods of witch hysteria. It also thought up and utilized some of the most disturbing torture methods ever invented by the human race. To give you some perspective, I always like to point out that the Mongol hordes under Genghis Khan never employed torture, even though they came to conquer and pillage (source: Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World). The Church claimed to be the path to salvation, and yet it had no trouble at all shoving wet cloths down women's throats and then violently yanking them out so that the esophagus and stomach came out with it (source: Carl Sagan's famous book The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark). If I were Catholic, and I read the list of tortures the Church employed on innocent people (it's extensive, trust me), I would cease to be a Catholic. I might go on believing in God, but I would no longer be able to associate myself with that institution. The idea that a person could know the history of the Catholic church and yet continue to follow its traditions and edicts baffles me on a level I can't even articulate. How can you trust the proclamations of a religious body that, for at least 90% of its history, was one of the cruelest, most irrational, most hateful, most evil organizations in existence? For those of you who can reconcile this in your mind, bravo, but I think I have every right to be suspicious. When Mongol invaders are more merciful, you know you've got a problem.
Let's look at the history of Islam. Somewhat more tolerant, somewhat more open to science. HISTORICALLY. In the middle ages, the Islamic World was definitely where it was at. But nowadays, Islam is in many locales one of the most conservative, restrictive belief systems in existence. The so-called "honor killings" in the Islamic world have taken violence against women to new heights (source is graphic, read at your own risk: [link] ) There seems to me to be a huge clash in the Muslim world between Islam and modernity. I don't really know what to make of it, other than it seems to be yet another example of the CLASSIC religious problem of not being able to accept new information because your source of guidance is a single, stagnant ancient book. Islam isn't the only religion guilty of this, but we learn new and exciting things about the world every day, and you can't go around denying FACTS just because they're contradicted by a random phrase in a book written centuries ago by a guy who hallucinated in a cave for a week. This alone is enough to turn me off from Islam - never even mind the insane hatred between the Sunni and Shi'a branches of the faith, whose members have spent years killing each other because of a friggin succession issue. Yeah, that's great guys, that's a fantastic reason to murder people. I'm sorry, but whenever people argue about sects within a religion, I just want to rip my hair out and scream "are you retarded?? YOU BELIEVE IN THE SAME GOD, YOU ASSHOLES. Stop killing each other!".
I respect Hinduism for its encouragement of plurality and allowance of diversity (which my Hindu bff ~twinklingtara never tires of talking about ). Not so sold on the oppressive caste system, though, nor on the completely impenetrable meaning of many of its sacred texts (I tried reading. I really did). I admire Buddhism for its history of not massacring people, but I'm not a fan of the way it approaches the meaning of life question. It kind of skirts the whole 'purpose' thing. Maybe that's an oversimplification, but I just find Buddhist philosophy to be...well, depressing. Same with Taoism: it's like a religious form of Orwell's "DoubleSpeak". It revels in its contradictions and never really makes a point, which I find unhelpful (albeit lovely to read as a poem). I tend to feel rather fondly toward pagan/animistic religions, although we can't forget that those belief systems have participated in their own share of unspeakable horrors over the ages. Less, perhaps, than the proselytizing religions, but still enough. Nothing like ripping out the hearts of your enemies and eating them to absorb their spiritual energy, or leaving a virgin to freeze on a mountaintop to improve crop yields!  
The rebuttal to everything that I've just said is, I suppose, that these crimes are not religion's fault, but rather inextricably linked to human nature and its tendency to do really douchey things to perceived outsiders. To which I say, yes! Maybe the answer isn't more religion, but a more accurate understanding of our brains. If we humans truly, deeply, intuitively understood reality - that our violent inclinations and tendency to categorize people into "us vs. them" groups comes from hundreds of thousands of years of natural selection in a world VERY different from today - well, maybe we'd see ourselves a little more clearly. Maybe we'd understand the disconnect between our frontal lobe and our reptilian brain. Maybe we'd stop to examine our "us vs. them" assumptions, rather than zoom into hatred because "Wiccans are the devil!1!1". Or maybe we'd be equally douchey: who knows, we've never tried.

Problem # banana: I can haz logic fail. Religion-done-right plays a societal function, encouraging interpersonal harmony and giving people a sense of purpose and hope. What religion does NOT do well is give us any insight into the world around us. Science gives us insight, often in unexpected and baffling ways. Does the Bible tell us about cosmic background radiation and its implications as to the age and structure of the universe? Does the Torah elucidate the process by which organisms change over subsequent generations to better suit their environment? Does the Qu'ran explain that when we see a blue shirt, what's really going on is that all the wavelengths of light are being absorbed except blue, which is reflected? Does the Rig Veda talk about the antimicrobial properties of bread mold? Did the Tao te Ching tell us that, on an atomic level, what appears to be solid matter is actually mostly empty space? Does praying to the moon get you to the moon? No. Science does. Believing that the Earth is 6,000 years old and is the center of the universe is all fine and good when you're a tribe of herders living in the desert. It's not so fine and good when you're a member of a technologically advanced society with nuclear capabilities, antibiotics, and the internet. Look around you, fundamentalist folks. Wake up and smell reality.
I don't think religious people are stupid; I think they're generally kind, well-intentioned people who are just looking for some answers and some comfort. Believe me, I get it. I want nothing more in this entire life than to believe that it means something, that there's a force out there that loves and forgives, and that death is not the end. I really understand. But I also understand the critique that religious people turn a blind eye to reason. The problem with the dogmatic religions is that they posit a theory, and then look for evidence to back it up. With science, you find evidence, then make a hypothesis based on that, then test the hell out of it, revise it, make corrections, etc. until you have a MOUNTAIN of evidence and your hypothesis can become a theory. The theory continues to be tested all the time, and if conflicting evidence arises, the theory is adjusted or shit-canned. It's self-correcting. Religion is not. When we learn something new and scary about the world, religious bodies try to find a way to make it fit into their pre-existing worldview. If that can't be done, they reject it as false. Science modifies its thinking. When fundamentalist religious people reject a scientific theory solely because it contradicts something in an ancient text that is itself contradictory...well, it's like seeing that the grass is green, but insisting that grass must be blue because your holy book tells you so. This is especially evident in the conservative Protestant community in the United States, which seems to get its jollies by hating on gay people, denying evolution, and trying to get friggin Biblical creationism taught in the public schools of a country that has separation of church and state. They say "oh, evolution is only a theory"...yeah, well it's a theory in the same way that gravity is a theory, or heliocentricity is a theory. In science, a theory isn't just a wild guess, it's a solidly supported conjecture with a Pacific-ocean sized body of evidence behind it. Science doesn't prove things. It makes theories that explain the world around us with a remarkable degree of accuracy, and if new information arises, it adjusts its thinking (sometimes after a lot of bickering among researchers). And it works. Does religion 'work'?
Now, I do want to clarify something: when, say, Christians read the Bible and draw from that experience lessons on love and forgiveness, and try to model their behavior after Jesus, well...I get it. When a Jewish person reads the Old Testament and interprets it as a series of metaphors and cool stories, I get that too. If you want to view it in a strictly spiritual sense, I'm on board. But when religious people take their holy text and see it as an explanation for the wonder we see around us, that's where you lose me. Because for all its emotional benefits, religion is deficient in that regard. How do you reconcile the idea that God created all life on earth with the knowledge that the universe is a 13+ billion year old something expanding into nothing, and that we're just a tiny ball of rock orbiting one star among billions of stars in a galaxy that is itself among billions? Did God start the universe and put in process the physical laws that allowed, 13.7 billion years later, humans to evolve on one dinky planet? If God wants to reveal "the truth" to us, then why don't we have a religion based on that? Why do we insist on holding onto archaic belief systems? Those religions worked fine back when people still thought illness was caused by malevolent spirits. But now?

I guess my point here is that I have debated this endlessly with people from a number of different religious backgrounds, and nobody has ever been able to give me a satisfactory answer to any of my questions. The closest anyone's come to satisfying my inquiries is when my friend ~Aeyamar explained that in the Orthodox church, heaven and hell don't exist in the classical sense, but instead when you die you enter into God's presence, and if you're a decent person you revel in his love, whereas if you're evil you eternally reject it and thus are locked in perpetual suffering. That went a long way to resolving my whole "if God is all-loving, how can he condemn people to hell"? question. But that's only one semi-satisfactory idea proposed in the hundreds of conversations that I have had.

Likewise I have not had one of those "religious experiences" that would convince me of its validity based on intuition rather than logic. It's not like I haven't looked. It's not like I haven't read. I have done a prodigious amount of research and tried to approach each new religion with an open mind, but I am continually frustrated and unable to find what I'm looking for. And the more I learn about the mainstream religions, the more I am convinced that they are inadequate. We puny humans know so little about this magnificent universe we inhabit. There are so many questions, so many mysteries to discover, not to be told by some obsolete, translation-mangled book.

I see no reason why there shouldn't be a supreme being. And we achieved consciousness once, so why not again? There's no reason to say our lives don't have a grand cosmic purpose. But there's no reason to say that they DO either. What it comes down to, as religious people love to remind me, is a question of faith. You just have to believe, they tell me. But I can't force belief. So what am I supposed to do? This question has been plaguing me for years. I want to believe in 'the bigger picture', shall we say, but there's no evidence, not to mention that I have a huge problem with the amount of baggage organized religion brings to the table. To pretend like I believe in something when I don't just seems dishonest to me. Atheism scares me, but so does unfounded adherence to the ideals of a centuries-old desert culture. I'd love to believe, but right now, I can't. Hence the bitter agnostic classification.


P.S. Allow me to remind you, yet again, that this is as self-expression piece, and that I DON'T want people trying to convert me. Tell me your opinion if you must, but don't proselytize. If I've logged dozens upon dozens of hours researching this topic, agonizing over it, and debating it with extremely bright and educated people, and yet I still remain unconvinced, what makes you think that your misspelled, poorly-reasoned internet post is going to change my mind?