Speaking of scams that only speak to peoples inherent weakness of mind and rational thought. Organized religion is nothing more than a collection of myths and fairy tales designed to control the populaces of the world. It doesn't matter which religion it is, it IS a fraud perpetrated since the beginning of human awareness. Two DVDs- ZEITGEIST and ZEITGEIST ADDENDUM

Sarah and Bill O'Rights,

Sarah I appreciate your sharing with us this particular post. I believe, however, that what it shows is not so much the bankruptcy of Christianity, as the bankruptcy of the type of Christianity we've come to deem popular and proper over the past several decades.

Unfortunately it has gotten more self righteous and self indulgent as it has gained the attention of and proximity to the power of commerce and politics. This isn't unusual. It's happened to religion down through the centuries. And Christianity is no exception.

I think, though, that the blanket condemnation of religion and those who are religious is unwarranted and the pointed condemntation of Bill O'rights is, on its face, untrue.

Simply because we as human beings lack the capacity to reach a spiritual ideal doesn't mean that the ideal itself is unreal or illigitimate. And there certainly are problems associated with organized religion. But, as D. Elton Trueblood has asked, 'What is the alternative to organized religion? Unorganized religion?'

Horrible things have been done in the name of religion - even Christianity. Horrible things have been done in the name of the medical profession; education; politics; business; art and science. Yet we don't denigrate them nor do we condemn them as useless. Who would deny that people have been made healthy by medical technology, or have founded great civilizations through political processes, or have been able to make life better through business.

In like manner, people of deep faith have not only found personal peace, but have made deep contribution to our world. Who would refer to Mother Theresa or Martin Luther King, Jr. as weak minded or irrational? But I don't have to refer to the more celebrated figures of history. My grandfather pastored a church for 69 years, having entered the ministry when he was 19, he died a committed Christian at the age of 101. His life was crowned with blessing as he made life better for countless men and women throughout his entire life and career.

My father pastored a church for 29 years before retiring. He comforted the dying and the bereaved, helped those going through difficulties find courage and discipled young people through their spiritual, academic and professional achievement.

I have been a preacher for more than 30 years. I pastored a church for almost 25 years. I wish I could tell you of the emotional stamina and courage of people old and young who give more than they receive from others, who bear up under the most terrible trials and who have a sense of dignity that can only be attributed to their faith.

The problem we have began when 'evangelical' became a political and cultural term as oppossed to an ecclesiastical function. A real 'evengelical' church has at its center the Love and Sacrifice of Jesus Christ and the crystal clear claims of a God of Justice and Peace associated with that Love and Sacrifice.

Please forgive me for this long post, Sarah. But my attitude is, when I die and I find out that everything I've believed was wrong - I've lost nothing,praying, worshiping or proclaiming the God in Whom I've believed. I haven't missed anything trying to love my neighbor, fighting for justice, or trying to make this world a better place. Bill, I feel neither weak minded nor do I think myself irrational. I just think that either way - wrong or right, inspite of all of my faults and failures along the way, this has been a journey I won't regret in time or eternity.

Fascinating blog, Sarah! I like Gerald's long comment, too. Indeed, I like almost everything that Gerald and Larry James write on this site.

First, I don't condemn reilgion as useless. It is useful for the weak who need an imaginary friend as a crutch to explain their existence, and an organization as a support group. As far as medical, education, or science, we used to have alchemy which gave way to modern medicine, we used to believe that the earth was flat, NOT TRUE. We thought the that the sun revolved around the earth,NOT TRUE. We thought then that the universe was the earth and a few floating rocks called planets, NOT TRUE, We believed that a god created everything in seven days,NOT TRUE. These are simply discoveries of the truth. The people you mention, Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King Jr. ET.AL.did great thing as humans for humans in the name of a god. Great!! That does not make their god any more real or true. It makes them good people who did good things for their fellow man. I could make a substantial list of people who have done and are doing absolutely terrible things in the name of the very same god. That doesn't maketheir god any more true. You sir are probably a very fine person who does good things for all who you encounter, and I sincerely hope that good things happen for you in return. My problem lies in the fact that politicians, popes, and other assorted leaders try with all their might to make their religion, their faith in their god, the overiding and singular aspect of governance,to the exclusion of any and all other points of view. Especially secular or scientific. As far as Jesus Christ is concerned, and I mean no offense, I can find in my search absolutely no evidence of his physical existence. Sorry. I do, however find the teachings attributed to him exquisite and necessary to help some people make their way through life. I won't debate the difference between evangelical or ecclisiastical as they are simply nuances of the same belief system. I don't really care how people want to believe or what they want believe in. I simply and again pointedly don't want a governing body to decide what all others have to believe in. And this to avoid being punished or ostracized or even worse killed. There is in Sarah's an.d Gerald's Posts many personal relatings. Again I am sure these are two very fine people. My problem does not arise from individuals but with the power mongers that are wielding what they claim to be the absolute and only truth. This based on simple blind faith to the exclusion of all who don't believe as they and their minions do. This is Dagerous to mankind.

Bill O'rights,

With regards to your last statement, I think that's what P.J. and I were saying when we made the personal references (although I'll let her speak for herself). And while power is a relative and its expression can be in any arena, the fact is there are more women and men of faith of the sort we speak of than the one's to whom you refer.

At the same time, in a democracy, everyone has the right to express their values and influence government, whether from a faith perspective or not. We all win at times and we all lose at times. But any belief system can be turned into a god - even belief systems whose frames of reference don't include God.

Your problem seems to be in the exercise of authority and who influences that authority. Again, in a democracy, everyone has the right to that access. It may not be easy and those of us who participate and try and do good work must be peristent and vigilent, but its all a part of the system of government and culture in which we live.

Again, I point out, in any discipline you care to mention, there have been abuses. In time, belief systems evolve and become more sophisticted. At one time in medicine leeches were used to bleed illness out of patients, we'e since come to see that isn't a viable method of treatment. Religion is not static, and itself evolves with advances in science and changes in culture. But, the fact is, mankind has always instinctively understood that our universe nor our lives cannot be categorized as 'accidents'. We look for an explanation for our existences and experiences. Whether that explanation rests in a deity or a science the fact is we are searching beings. Those who devote their lives to that search are 'authorities' and/or 'experts', and are sometimes wrong and sometimes right. It takes time to tell.

I've got no satisfactory answer for you other than the fact that you'll have to bear with us who search in religion as you search in some other way. Time or eternity will prove who's right. But we can't be excluded from the public square because you don't like what we believe or because there are some of us who abuse our right to participate. History has ways of weeding them out and the overwhelming evidence is that mankind survives them and thrives.

By the way - if you've searched and found no evidence for the existence of the historic Jesus, you haven't searched far enough.

Thanks Sarah for your post. As someone who had a bad experience in an Evangelical Church as an adult, I feel for those teens who've left their churches. I hope they find the right path for them, whether it is returning to a church or some other spiritual or nonspiritual path.

In reading the debate between Britt and Bill, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I agree with Britt of the importance of the church in many progressive caused, from abolition to women's suffrage to the civil rights movement. On the other hand, I share Bill's fear of the power of the church over people's lives, based on my own experiences in conflicts at a church. In my time at that church, I witnessed in other people and eventually experienced myself some lesser traits of the church: the attempts by a group to control what individuals thought and to limit what kind of questions can be asked; the attempts to isolate individuals with dissenting opinions to make that person more vulnerable to peer pressure; the attempts of a group to pressure an individual to conform. I was really shook by that experience and it inspired a post of mine (everydaycitizen.com/2008/10/groupthink_and_the_importance.html). For a while I stopped believing in God, but I believed in God before I went to that church and didn't want these people to be the reason I stopped believing. So I eventually started looking for a new church. I wanted to be sure that I went to a church where people respected the right of individuals to think for themselves.

I respect the church for it's history of fighting for the poor and the marginalized. But Bill is right that the various different churches have also abused their power at differnt times. Thomas Jefferson was wise to fight for the separation of church and state. He wrote one of my favorite quotes. He wrote:

"Difference of opinion is advantageous in religion. The several sects perform the office of censor morum over each other. Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth. Let us reflect that it is inhabited by a thousand different systems of religion; that ours is but one of that thousand; that if there be but one right, and ours that one, we should wish to see the nine hundred and ninety-nine wandering sects gathered into the fold of truth. But against such a majority we cannot effect this by force. Reason and persuasion are the only practicable instruments. To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged; and how can we wish others to indulge it while we refuse it ourselves?"

A couple comments (or so).

First, I am not a fan of religion in any form. I think truth is important, and I think that the methods by which religions search for truth is fundamentally and fatally flawed. This goes for Christianity as well as the more liberal, modern, alternative spiritualist belief systems. Faith, anecdote and personal feelings become a substitute for intellectual rigor. Errors occur, and religion encourages followers to persist in error. This would be my problem with religion even if it did not cause widespread death and misery.

That being said, the exodus of young people from churches does not bother me.

On the other hand, I wonder about the accuracy of the numbers. Where did Josh McDowell get his "'over 69 percent of youth are leaving traditional church after high school."? That seems rather high. Evangelicals like to foster the feeling that the world is against them, the world is corrupting the youth, the world wants to take away their Bibles, etc. You will see the pattern repeated over and over in every megachurch. At least, I have never attended a megachurch in which I have not seen the technique used to motivate followers.

I would like to see how these numbers were attained. If I ever find the time to dig more deeply into this subject, I will check the mothodology of these sources. :) It is reasonable to say that there is at least SOME attrition of young adults from traditional church.

The description of modern youth ministry as a teen amusement park is spot on. I remember when the best they could offer was a puppet show. The generation following mine got the all-out effort to retain youth in church.

So maybe it isn't working. That's fine by me. What would concern me is the fact that the young adults who leave the church are not necessarily replacing faith with a more skeptical, inquisitive way of seeking truth.

I think there are more skeptical inquisitive ways of seeking the truth withink religion. A few years ago I decided to drop by different denominations, and it was illuminating. I dropped by a Quaker service a few times, stayed at a Unitarian Universalist church for a few months, then found a home in an Episcopalian church. These churches all promote that sort of skeptical inquisitiveness that you mentioned.

Though I have my own bad experiences in an Evangelical church, I think it's unfair to stereotype all Evangelicals as being unthinking in their faith. I met a few Evangelicals who were thoughtful, inquisitive and questioning while maintaining a belief in God. The only problem was that these more thoughtful Christians tended to be quiet in the face of their more strident churchgoers. I know among the Catholic Church, the Jesuits have a tradition of intellectual rigor and questioning, which has given them trouble with the Vatican on several occassions.

I think there are several paths to chose from. A good magazine in my library is about humanism, and is an alternative path that some could try.

Bryan,

I agree with your concern, "What would concern me is the fact that the young adults who leave the church are not necessarily replacing faith with a more skeptical, inquisitive way of seeking truth."

Though I am a big Obama fan, of course, I have not been inspired by the way that youth and young adults and my peers have placed Obama on a pedestal. It is as if they put George Bush on a pedestal and worshipped him, then, when he disappointed, they put Barack Obama on a pedestal and worshiped him.

What worries me is the way that people need to "believe" and "worship" and "be saved" without doing as you suggest, adopting an "inquisitive way of seeking truth."

I am a Christian, by belief. It's a choice. But I question everything that churches ask or expect, and I question most every interpretation of the bible too, just as I question every action and policy of my elected officials.

I agree with you that it is disconcerting that our youth are not being encouraged to be inquisitive thinkers, but rather they are encouraged to be sheep.