返回列表 回覆 發帖

[轉載] 網絡名人 - 大黃傻貓GARFIELD 的離教經歷

貓貓剛剛變了無神論者

This is a long long road.

I started out as a Fundamentalist, because the church I attended was a Fundamentalist church (Rev Daniel Ng, now the pastor of Kong Fook Tong, and the church was closely linked to Society of Truth and Light).

I first turned away from my rigid position as a Fundamentalist when I found that I could not defend cases when churches or para-Christian organizations or Christian groups hire staff based on their religion (hire Christians only) as well as those rigid marriage rules (marrying Christians only).
In both cases the arguments for the positions are weak, contrary to my values of equal/fair treatment to all.

As I got plunged to a war between Catholics and Fundamentalists in a number of forums (CCfellow, allenchow.com, iShare, etc), all the deadly flaws, toxic teachings of Fundamentalism were thrown to my face. I met the meanest humans beyond description---spitting poisons, deceitful, abuse of powers (when they manage the forum), twisting truths, slanderous, etc.

(My persistent fight with the Fundamentalists indirectly caused these three forums to close down for good. There were at least 2 others which met the same fate).

It is then I changed my position to a "mainstream Baptist" (after I was influenced by writings of this site www.mainstreambaptists.org). I questioned the validity of Bible inerrancy, literal interpretation, anti-Catholicism, once-saved-always-saved, sola fide, sola scriptura, etc.

In fighting with the Fundamentalists alongside with Catholics, I delved into books of all brands of Christianity---Catholicism, Lutheranism, Baptists (of course), Calvinism, Eastern Orthodoxy, touching subjects on salvation, end times, liberal theology, etc.

It was then I started to pick up logical thinking and reasoning again, because I must be able to weigh each brand of Christianity on their merits. I owned almost all books by 李天命. There are a number of Christian theologian-written books trying to debunk 李天命, but their arguments were laughable.

Then comes ID (Intelligent Design), the Noah's Ark fiasco of Media Evangelism. Both incidences drawn me to look at evidences of the origin of earth and evolution. At the point I remember saying to a Fundamentalist (a more benign one) that I don't think the Flood happened exactly the way it was written in the Bible (I believed it was a local flood, and later I found it to be true, only that Noah became a Babylonian). By this I effectively denied literally interpretation.

The next tipping point, as I remember, was SODO (2005).

I took on the HK brand of Christian Right-wing directly and sharply criticised their actions, wrote long articles and debated with right-winged Christians on Christian Times.

When Rev. Silas Wong was forced to resign, and along with the deceitfulness of KWAC, the silence of Christian community over this, and 梁家麟博士 defending it, I lost faith totally in the evangelical circles of Hong Kong. They were just like any ideological groups, refusing to listen to facts and different opinions. I was also convinced then homosexualilty is something similar to psychiatric diseases or of in-born nature, and that they were not morally wrong.

These events gradually changed me, I already thrown out Bible inerrancy, I thrown out "simple faith", I denied that homosexuality is a sin, it was only a matter of time before I thrown out the miracles, God creationism, etc.

I did not remember when, I purchased a book written by 方舟子(方舟子揭開世界之謎). In the book there is a full section refuting all psuedo-scientific claims cooked up by Christians to claim evolution is a "theory". How different schemes by Creationist can be debunked by rigorous science.

Round about the same time I purchased "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins, and in it loads of reasons that God is not necessary nor the hand in everything that happened.

In a separate incidence, I had a confrontation with my church's senior pastor over the question of "once-saved-always-saved".

During the conversation, he just printed out 10 pages and said there were "over 100 verses in the Bible" that proved "once-saved-always-saved". He was not ready to discuss with me, he wanted me to submit. I challenged him a number of points citing the Christian Times article then labelling a church "heretic":

Me: the article listed a number of criteria that makes this church heretic. One is the divinity of Christ, one is pastoral authority, and the other one is "rejecting once-saved-always-saved". I reject once-saved-always-saved, you said the other Sunday with emphasis on this point when talking about this church. Answer me, am I now a heretic?

Pastor: ..... you took the words out of context, it should be placed alongside with the others...

Me: this is illogical, if you listed it there, then as long as you fulfill the one or more of it, then it meets the criteria

Pastor: ....no ..no, you have to consider it with others

Me: then this criterial "rejecting once-saved-always-saved" should not be there ?

Pastor:.....I am a Baptist minister for 40 years, I was to preach the truth in the Bible, once-saved-always-saved is the truth as proven by the Bible.

Me: then what about the Methodists, the Lutherans, surely you know they don't teach once-saved-always-saved ?

Pastor: I don't comment other churches. I tell you, I am a veteran minister who preached for 40 years. We preach the truth said in the Bible. The Bible is literally true, the world is created in 6 days, each day a 24 hour day. Do you know that in USA the South Western Theological Seminary, once professor published a set of commentaries and used the word "myth" to describe Genesis ? He was sacked and the whole set of commentaries were rewritten. I preach what I believed is true and I do not have to answer individual. You are free to read anything you like, but in my church, it is what it will be taught.

.....

We have no common ground.

The above incidence convinced me that I could not stay in this church as long as this pastor is there.

To research on Creationism, I went to www.infidels.org to look for more research material. Most questions of evolution was answered by 方舟子, but there was yet a question not answered, how do the universe arise? (Creation Ex nihilo)

This site gives me that article: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mark_vuletic/vacuum.html

Then I also realized, the preposition that "things can only come to existence via creation, before that there is nothing" contains an assumption -- "before that there is nothing".This assertion is unfounded, why can't it be that things were there all the way along, then creation will be unnecessary.

The articles answered my doubt, and then I realized that Creation thing is now out of the window. The same night, I was supposed to attend the Hong Kong Franklin Graham Festival (I was one member of the big choir), then I found that I could not bring myself to go.

My mind would not allow it. I loved singing, but my mind told me that I could not do it, I should not go.

I kept this change of mind for about 2 months, I go to discussion forums as usual, but my demeanor has changed already.

During this period, I purchased a number of DVD from BBC discussing Bible mysteries (the Flood, the fall of Jericho, Jesus' death etc). Those materials confirmed me that God could not have existed, or the chances of it would be even slimmer than Jesus is a female.

I almost gave myself away when I told my ex-Pastor (Dr. Sun Po-Ling) that I was about to be an ex-Christian. He was kind, gracious and not a judgement word came out of him when I had coffee with him. He certainly appreciated me as being a socially concerned Christian, but he had no idea that I was so near to the brink of quitting Christianity.

However, the more I ponder on this, the more I felt I should make a decision. I decided that I should not kept this to myself so I declare it in discuss.com.hk.

I am planning my exit from my church friends and deciding how to break the news to my Christian friends.

I am lucky that most of my Christian friends are genuinely kind, friendly, and many of them are funny people that you will like to hang around with.
I hope that my news will not startle them. I have to really think hard on how to tell them.

I was initially worried that my change will also give ammunition to the hostile Fundamentalists (mainly on the Internet, e.g. in Christian Times), that they could use this against me and my causes. However, I reconed that I should not be deterred by those people, they considered me an apostate anyway.

However, I do not want my case to harm those groups I affiliated with. Those mean Fundamentalists can do anything just to show that they are righteous, so I have to plan my exit very carefully.

.....

抽覆:

貓姐:

看到你的文章,十分欣賞你的坦誠和勇氣。我想你在宗教問題的透切了解,絕對在許多人之上(包括我在內)。

對於在信仰問題上的痛苦掙扎,我想你已一一承受過。因此,儘管在立場上是對你的「新生」表示認同,但我不會「恭喜你」。我想,你亦不會因此而停止一切對生命的思索和追求。

你的分享很值得借鏡,絕對是許多人希望獲得的寶貴經驗。冒昧一問,離教者之家可以傳載你的分享麼?

抽刀斷水 謹上


http://www.armbell.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4888&mforum=liberalhk
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹

我的信仰經歷﹐特長版本。以後會翻譯為中文。

Resigned from Christianity after 23 years of journey

The beginning

I am a keen learner and enthusiast of knowledge. I and my siblings used to beg our parents to buy kids encyclopedias, popular science magazines. We do read comics of course, but our crave for knowledge was unique among our peers.

I was especially fascinated by nature and science from a very young age, and even considered to be a scientific researcher. I watched TV programs like “Cosmos” (Carl Sagan) and those programmes by Sir David Attenborough on science and nature.

I studied at a Christian found high school (Episcopal), and there were a number of Christians (teachers and students) keen on evangelizing the schoolmates. I never took things in the Bible seriously even though I knew a lot about the Bible. The religious atmosphere was great, and most of all, the teacher heading the religious part was a relatively open minded person, who would not judge or condemn other religions or faith like the Fundamentalist. Her openness and her approach in discussing topics by engagement took root in my mind.

I was brilliant in my study, doing debates and public speaking, because I had a good mind in making arguments and reasoning. I had a lot of hopes with my life.

The crisis and the conversion

However by the time I was 18, my family went into a deep crisis. My father and mother separated, my father’s business collapsed. I was greatly depressed, my grades fell, I missed classes, and I started to hang around with the “bad” kids. My father was the authoritarian type and control-freak, and my mother the submissive type, which infused some kind of inferiority feeling and lack of confidence in my mind; I found that my life was always in their tight grip, and I was not allowed to have my opinion, and there was no self-assurance given to my in my upbringing, which probably explained my receptiveness to Christianity at that time.

Those Christians in my high school approached me then. Maybe I was moved by the kind of caring they gave me, and that I needed so much emotional supported that I said yes to an invitation of a evangelizing meeting at a schoolmates church, and there I, “accepted Christ as my personal savior”.

Years of living in faith

Like many new converts to a faith, there was a kind euphoria that that somehow appeared to give me great peace and joy in the heart. I was so excited of my new found peace and faith that I immersed in it quickly, began witnessing the Gospel, sharing my experience around.

With my brain in overdrive, I zoomed pass the entire part of the “new Christian induction” that was used in my church. I attended all gatherings apart from Sunday services diligently, showed up on time, join the choir, volunteered to do a lot of things in the church.

In less than a year, I was almost indistinguishable from any veteran Christian. At the same time, I tucked my scientific and logical mind up to a little attic in my head until 15 years later and basked in the 2 year honeymoon with Christianity.

My church was a Baptist church that subscribed to Fundamentalist position, though I met a lot of Christians that took a more moderate position. The Fundamentalist view of the world affected my a lot. I held a very exclusive mindset that Christians and non-Christians could not work together, not to mention marrying. I also looked down on other faiths, fully convinced that Christianity is supreme. I stayed a Fundamentalist for at least 8 or 9 years, during which I invested in a lot of Christian books, Bible commentaries etc. I led Bible study groups, sing in the choir, and sometimes taught in Sunday schools. Every year we attended summer camps, where there would always be a section where the youths were called to “re-dedicated” themselves. People went forward, tearfully said they would dedicate their lives to Jesus etc.

Yet I noticed a kind of pattern. After a number of years in summer camps and seeing all these people re-dedicated themselves, those who “cried” the most were often the ones who “fell away” from the faith.

Likewise, those who appeared to be very fervent would also tend to disappear from church. It was then I figured that in many of the conversion cases, emotion was the main element, not faith or reason. I had no idea I was one of this kind.

The first glimpses of the dark side of Christianity

Before long I had my first brush with the dark side of Christianity. I led a small group and we had Bible studies. This mode of gathering was new to the church, and our church, a Baptist church, was trying to figure out the mode and decided that in order to get people to know each other, the groups would undergo re-organization every year. This was greatly resisted buy my group members because they would rather settle in a group for a longer term, and not to be forced to build new relationships. Temper flared when the church’s person who led this said this was the “church’s policy” and that we had to make up our minds or the church would do it for us. I asked the church not to split the groups and got a promise from the committee. Yet four months later I was shocked to find that they split the groups anyway. I was very disappointed. I realized that in a church, individual’s concern could be ignored for the convenience of church administration.

The second brush happened when I switched church. It was the pastor. He had disagreements with one of the deacons. The pastor back-stabbed that deacon in small Bible study groups, and he talked behind his back in front of the other deacons.

The church hired a woman minister, and that pastor felt threatened by the woman minister; she was popular among the senior members and initiated a lot of good programs. The pastor started to play games, intimidating the woman minister, and at some point, verbally abused her. The woman minister was very distressed, and her performance plummeted. There were so much double-talk, back-stabbing and suspicion around the church that the Sunday services was affected, the programs were affected and the volunteers morale were low (except for the youths, which the pastor had a lot of influence).

The situation got so bad that an ad-hoc member’s assembly was called; a group who were influenced by the pastor sat in and wanted to fire the woman minister. It almost went ugly but the deacons stopped it. The woman minister found she could not cooperate with that pastor and decided to resign.

It was at this point the deacons realized that they had to fire this male pastor because his action was a clear sign of his lack of integrity and deceitfulness. The ugly power struggles were all being talked about in the choir (the choir was the circle where many rumors and gossip happened).

The Net-Christian days and my first compromise

I majored in computer studies during my undergraduate studies and after I finished my degree, I was worked in the computer/software business. I was the early ones that used BBS, and later the Internet (using slow dial-up modems) to access the Internet, and there I was opened up to a world of different opinions of Christianity, challenges to my mind and reality of Christianity I never imagined.

I began discussing issues of Christianity and faith at newsgroups, went into heated debates with non-Christians (atheists, agnostic and ex-Christians).

During that newsgroup age, I had crisis, which I found out later that it was called cognitive dissonance.

It was common practice for Christian organizations, schools or para-church organizations then to employ almost exclusively Christians. They would require the applicant for a position to be a “born-again” Christian.

This sparked a heated debate on the newsgroup. Non-Christians accused Christians of discriminating non-Christians on the basis of religion and denied them opportunity for employment.. Initially I flatly denied the accusation, and used all my ammunitions to justify the kind of employment practices. I soon found myself at the corner when I was shown cases were Christians were employed by Buddhists organizations, but not otherwise.

I looked everywhere in the Internet to find reasons that Christian organizations were allowed to practice this kind of “discrimination”, yet I could not come up any strong arguments, legally or even from the Bible (except a verse in Leviticus that prohibits two different animals from carrying the yoke).

Most other Fundamentalist would simply snap back at the non-Christians, quoting Bible verses the referring to passages of. However, I was not comfortable with this approach, we should be able to present our arguments clearly apart from pulling verses from the Bible; yet deep inside me I believed that faith should not matter that much for employment, as long as key posts are Christians. For example, a non-Christian could be an accountant for a Christian organization, or a non-Christian graphic designer or a general office clerk.

Arguments from Christians would claim that a non-Christian (accountant, clerk, whatever that may be) would draw anger from God because the service they rendered were “imperfect” because they some were from non-believers, or that the non-Christian account would not be as honest, or that they would compromise their effort to “glorify God” because one of them is a non-believer, even if that one is just a janitor. They believed that being a Christian can make so much different. My reason would not allow me to agree with that kind of argument. As long as that person followed the procedures, policies of the organization and behave well, why such a fuss with his religion? They could even take the change to evangelize!

Eventually after some struggle, I came to realize that if I could not found any sound argument, both on the Internet, the Bible and from logical reasoning, it was because that practice was wrong in nature. As much the “Truth” Christianity was claimed to be, you cannot use “Truth” to turn things that are inherently wrong to otherwise, and any attempt to do this is an abuse of our Bible and our teachings.

This feeling of cognitive dissonance aroused because I was trying to use the “Truth” to justify something which was wrong inherently, and I knew it. I then posted a message on the newsgroup saying that I renounced that position.

This was the beginning of the “end” of my Christian journey.

The Fundamentalist mindset

Here I would like to distract a bit and describe about how a Fundamentalist Christian mind worked.

If my mind worked like the one of a hard core Fundamentalist, I would ignore the fact that I could not find reasons or justifications.

I would turn a blind eye to the logical problems with the Christian’s reasoning, I would suppress my feeling of “cognitive dissonance”, because for a Fundamentalist, he/she already had the truth, and that because what they held had to be true, and truth must be defended, then all things against the truth “had to be wrong”, and that if he/she was not comfortable inside, it was the lack of faith, a temptation from Satan etc. (circular arguments, empty assertions etc.). In the end many Christians would respond with a quote from the Bible like “blessed are those who are persecuted because of my name” (Matt…) or (Cor???) or (Phil???).

I did not assumed that I had the truth as the Fundamentalist, probably because I was more influenced by the moderate Baptist position (which were non-creedal, and never presume they had the truth), this left a little gap in my mind that allowed me to use facts and reasoning out from the attic in my head from time to time. Yet when it comes to core part of the faith (Jesus’ birth and resurrection, the Flood, the salvation, Trinitarian God etc.), I blocked the logic and reasoning again.

The years of war with Fundamentalists

The Internet evolved, so was the Christian community and tools on the Internet. The text based newsgroup gave way to web-based forums, and many Christian organizations jumped on the band-wagon of the during the Internet boom, setting up web sites, and started discussion forums. They thought Internet was great to allow fellowship of Christians from all places.

There were three forums I regularly visited to post and discussed with others. One was called iShare, one was called CCFellow, the other called “Allen”.

CCFellow and Allen were dominated by Fundamentalist and in particular the hard core ones (Biblical inerrancy, literal interpretation, young-earth, anti-Catholicism, rapture and end of world etc).

At that time, forums used software that were a lot more primitive, so moderators could only delete posts but not banning accounts or barring IPs. At that time I spent time mostly on iShare, until I got to CCFellow. It was 2002, and several groups of Christians were locked in a heated debate regarding if Catholicism was a heresy. There were Catholics, Christians who regarded Catholicism as orthodox, and of course the hardcore Fundamentalists.

Initially the debates were still courteous, but as Catholics debunked one proof of heresy from the Fundamentalists after the other, the Fundamentalist got furious and started to play dirty.

They swarmed the discussion from with a lot of posts to bury counter arguments from Catholics and their sympathizers; they used all kinds of smear tactics, and posted those debunked arguments They also used multiple pseudonyms on the forum to make them appeared numerous (actually there are no more than five of them, about the same as the other side). The forum moderator was also a Fundamentalist, allowed those Fundamentalist participants to post articles that attacked the Catholics (and sympathizers) personally, posting those “proof of Catholic heresy” again and again (many of which contained false information), but when the Catholics and their sympathizers tried to respond, the moderator deleted their posts promptly.

I was not prepared for such kind of mean-spirited manner from my own camp, and immediately I “deflected” and fight the Fundamentalist alongside with the Catholics.

During that process, I need to muster sound arguments from both Christianity doctrinal aspects and historical aspect, so I started to read widely on different denominations (Episcopalism, Lutheranism, Calvinism, Arminianism, Baptists etc). I realized that diversity (or confusion ?) of Christian understanding of the Christian faith, and that there were core dogmas as well as varieties of teachings.

Furthermore I found that many of the Fundamentalists / Evangelical teachings on sola fide, sola scriptura, salvation, end times, and justification etc. were not as biblical as they claimed. I found out that Fundamentalists cooked up many lies against Catholicism (that they removed books from the Bible, that they altered the Ten Commandments etc.) and that they distorted many of Catholics position.

After that incident in CCFellow, I realized I could no longer subscribe to the Fundamentalist position.

This fighting with the Fundamentalist lasted for at least 3 years. During the years at CCFellow, the Fundamentalist also used the forum as a launch pad of their attacks to Christians or organizations they saw as “heresy”, “Liberals” or “apostates”. In one instant, they posted an article accusing a university professor at the university’s school of theology of teaching people to pray to “God the Mother”. They took the professor’s word out of context and attacked that school of teaching heresy. When they posted the article, they used that school’s official email address. I promptly informed the head of that school, and the school responded by posting a statement denouncing the actions of those Fundamentalist. The Christian group hosting the forum apologized, the Fundamentalists stopped for a short while, then started their attacks again. At this moment, their shameless and mean-spirited manners was so appalling that the forum drew other in to start quarreling with the Fundamentalists, and the fight heated up. The organization running the forum decided to shut the forum down because they found that the whole situation was out of control.

In another battle ground at “Allen”, the fighting was as intense, some Christians were so frightened by the quarrel there that they moved to other forums, and before long that forum had to shutdown too.

The battle was repeated in one forum after another, scared the shit of all those Christian organizations - some forum posted articles accusing Dr. Billy Graham to be an apostate, some had death threats to those opposing Fundamentalist views. Those organizations running the forums might have decided that the Internet was too “rough” to be a place where faithful Christians could “fellowship” and be “edified”, and that the Internet was the place that caused wobbling Christians to stumble. They could no longer maintain the control as if it was in the church building. By 2004, only two or three open forums run by Christian organizations are online, but very few visitors.

At the time of writing of this article, which is 2008, no other Christian forum run by individual believers or organizations survived the “heat” when they accepted open membership. Those which operated exclusively for Christians (often Fundamentalists) were inactive with very few people visiting. The more active forums are moderated by both Christians and non-Christians, and hosted by private companies for commercial reasons.

For about 2 years, I followed the trails of these anti-Catholics around every Chinese forum.

There was one particular anti-Catholic (dubbed keyperson, also called himself “puritan” , “John Knox”, MandM, and a number of other names) that always tried to settle in forums and used it at his anti-Catholic launch pad. During the CCFellow days, he was the leader of the anti-Catholics.

At first Puritan displayed a very civilized demeanor and appeared to be reasonable and even loving. It was just a front, when everything went his ways.

When Catholics began to proof him wrong he started to “loose it”.

During the CCFellow days, it was also the time when the outrageous Catholic Church scandal (priest sexually molested boys) erupted. Puritan treated that scandal as his powerful ammunition to Catholics, and kept posting news clips about the scandal even 1 year after it was out of the news headlines. His tactics of “Red Herring” was so annoying that I devised a very nasty plan of revenge.

I secretly researched about clergy sexual abuse in the Protestant side, and gathered at least 30 or 40 such clippings, each involved a pastor, including cases from Campus Crusade and the Salvation Army. Then I posted all to the CCFellow forum with a report on clergy sexual abuse that was submitted to the Southern Baptist Convention.

This proved to be a terrible blow to him. Puritan must have had his perfect image of “orthodox, God fearing and Bible believing Fundamentalist” shattered, and remained silent for weeks before he re-emerged. He tried to counter my facts but he was no match to me.

Then my next blow came when I met him in another forum. I researched heavily on Bible canonicity, and found out about how the New Testament and Old Testament was evolved and the entire list of books was only official declared “Canon” (canonized) in the late 15th Century at the Council of Trent by the Catholic Church (contrary to the assumption that the books were there “from the beginning”).

I posted my detailed research, and again dealt another blow to him. Then I posted another on “sola scriptura”, and then some testimonials on Fundamentalist turning to Catholicism. These Catholic-friendly articles were all on my blog and were quoted by many Catholics to counter attacks from Fundamentalists by many Chinese speaking Catholics. For a while I really considered Catholicism because I loved the beauty of their liturgy.

After thought on the wars with Fundamentalists

During the times, I slowly understand the kind of Fundamentalist mindset and many thoughts emerge. I witnessed first hand what this kind of mindset could do to a persons’ integrity.

This is what I saw happening to them:

At first, a Fundamentalist would appear kind and courteous (just like those holding Bibles and knock on your door with a wide smile). They lives are upright, with high integrity. But as their views and beliefs were debunked one after another, their rigid Fundamentalist mindset created a strong internal conflict in them. Because they choose to defend their “treasured faith”, and that all of their sound arguments were out of the window, they mind started to be locked into an ideological vicious circle:


  • I knew the truth (or I had the truth, whatever)
  • They were non-believers, liberals, heretics, apostates, they did not have the truth
  • So even they had facts, reasonable, used means with integrity they are still wrong
  • Even if I used things that looked like a lie, unreasonable, illogical, and even without integrity, I am still with the truth
  • To defend the truth I had to use any means

This kind of reasoning somehow motivated them to use tricks that get meaner and meaner, because they would rather compromise their own intellectual integrity than to suffer the humiliation of admitting that they were wrong. This resulted in the breakdown of their integrity. They no longer capable of loving the enemies, they would speak bitter words of hatred and curse. They turned into Crusaders.

First they would post things with false facts, and then mud-smearing, then back stabbing (they found out which church I attended, and send emails to my church’s email address), flooding the forum to drown out other articles, assumed multiple identities to make it appeared they were the majority, and when they had the authority to delete posts or bar participants in a discussion forum, they used it like some repressive regimes against dissidents.

One case was that I met up with Puritan in another forum that supports deletion of membership, Puritan somehow got the post of administrator, and he barred my membership account, deleted all my posts, put up a notice that basically turn the facts about what happened upside down. This process gave Puritan a inflated self-esteem, he felt he was more powerful than me, he felt a kind of gratitude and satisfaction, as though he won a Crusade for God. The forum went back to “normal” with those “heretic posts” gone, and that served as a confirmation to his terrible tactics - he did it for God using these means, he won, he had “peace” in heart, the good Christian now had a place to share, this had got to be pleasing to God.

This is precisely the dark side of Fundamentalism: in the face of opposition, if they had the powers to crush their enemies, they would use it without hesitant, there is no “Love your enemy”, or that “love” comes after they crushed you. Look at the situation in USA, in those denominations taken over by Fundamentalists, the pattern is all the same.

The battle years with Fundamentalist gradually turned me to a moderate Evangelical, and somewhat leaning to the Liberal side.

In forums, I did not subscribe to common Christian myths (e.g. Darwin turned Christian at his death bed, Einstein was Christian, majority of scientists was Christian, there were tracks where human and dinosaurs walked side by side, the Noah’s Ark was found etc) and often was among the ones that debunked posts containing these lies the very moment they appeared. My action incited Fundamentalists, even some Evangelicals and conservative Christians, because I embarrassed them.

Similarly, when anti-Catholicism articles appeared, I refuted them without hesitation. I then earned the nickname of “the whore” (given to me by Puritan, of course), and gain reputation among forums as the very radical Christians with unorthodox views.

The gay rights controversy

During the same time as I fought the Fundamentalist, I also befriended a number of gay Christians on the forum. I was appalled by the hatred and hostility displayed by other Christians to them. The Fundamentalist and many Evangelicals wanted to stop those gay Christians from posting at the forum. I was a staunch believer in freedom of expression, and I opposed those Christians fiercely, making a lot of Evangelicals and caused a forum to shutdown again. I and one of the gay Christians became friends (he is now going after mysticism).

In 2005, a bill that would make discrimination based on sexual orientation an offense was out for public consultation (“SODO”, “Sexual Orientation Discrimination Ordinance”) in Hong Kong.

This started my new round of fight with conservative Christians. One para-Christian group called the Society of Truth and Light (STL, one that imports all right-winged, conservative views directly from their counterparts in USA). They published large ads on papers containing many false scientific research about homosexuality plus twisted cases in the West. I posted on public forums long articles reprimanding STL, again having heated debates with many Fundamentalists/Evangelicals. Many of my long articles were quoted by LGBT rights activists because I struck at those groups weakest points again – their lack of, cover up or distortion of facts about homosexuality (if it could be “straightened” and “typical cases of homosexuals persecuting Christians” etc).

During that year, a pastor befriended me. He was the kind of seeker sensitive pastor who does not agree with the “military-like” tactics of Hong Kong Christian right/conservative groups, and in particular STL. He preferred the “engagement” mode of helping homosexuals. He wrote some articles criticizing STL in newspapers. STL, unfortunately has a number of senior advisors coming from the denomination which the pastor belonged. About 6 months after he published his views on newspapers he was forced to leave his church (apparently the leadership of the denomination was angry when he embarrassed them). The whole thing was handled in a shadowy manner, the church who asked that pastor to leave even lied about the reason. Their cover was blown away when the pastor released the letter ordering him to resign, showing the deacons had lied public.

The whole Christian community was silent about this issue, allowing the church to lie. The Christian community (mainly evangelical) were just like any ideological groups, refusing to listen to facts and different opinions.

I was convinced then homosexuality is something similar to psychiatric diseases or of in-born nature, and that they were not morally wrong.

These events gradually changed me, I already thrown out Bible inerrancy, I thrown out "simple faith", I denied that homosexuality is a sin, it was only a matter of time before I thrown out the miracles, God creationism, etc.

This event made me decided that I had to cut my ties with Evangelicals and then I completed my transformation to a Liberal Christian, and that had not stopped.

Science – the antidote

By then, I picked up a lot of books about critical thinking, logical reasoning, different Christian doctrines, and finally I returned to my favorite – popular science.

At that time I traveled a lot in China. In China there were big bookstores, the equivalent of Barnes & Nobles in USA. The books were well printed and most of all, dirt cheap. I was drawn to the section of popular science, and picked up 3 or 4 books at every visit there.

I enjoyed those reading so much that I gradually rekindled my love of science.

The war against “Ark finders”

During the same years of SODO (2004 – 2005), there was another event in the Christian circles of Hong Kong. A Christian media group called Media Evangelism (“ME”) announced in the fall of 2004 that they had found the remains of the Noah’s Ark on Mount Ararat, and wanted to raise tens of millions of dollars to fund a grand expedition and research project.

When I examined their claims, I was appalled and angry. They just filmed a cave somewhere on the mountain, throw stones into it, and said it had a “hollow sound of echo”, they found big rocks with holes drilled on top (which they claim they were anchors, actually they were shrines made by Christians) etc and they declared “we have the ark”. In news conferences, they repeated said they found it, but showed no physical evidences. They produced a movie and asked churches in the whole territory to buy up big lots of tickets.

I and other Christians posted on a Christian newspaper our views, stating that “ME” was misrepresenting facts about their discovery of the Noah’s Ark, and had heated debates with again the Fundamentalist.

I also found out “ME” site about the “Ark discovery” was full of false materials (including those from the notorious Ron Wyatt who claimed he found the remains of Pharaoh’s chariots that were under the Red See). I sent out an open letter listing all the misinformation in their site, eventually forced “ME” to remove them (but they did it quietly without making an apology on posting wrong things).

Re-visiting origins

The substantial amount of research I did draw my attention to an ancient problem – the earth was over 4 billion years old, there were no evidences of the Flood, that the Ark of that size cannot be seaworthy etc. – the origins of life, the Earth and the Universe crept to my mind. I started to question if Genesis was wrong, how about Virgin Birth and Resurrection ?

As I continued my research I found that much of the claims by Christians, whether about science and history, contained a lot of flaws. Furthermore, the Bible is by no way the inerrant word of God.

Nobody could explain the inconsistencies and cruelty in the Bible. Moreover, the Bible’s authorship was not as simple as most Christians learned about in Sunday Schools. Those were teachings from over 150 years ago. The new discovery and textual analysis, showed that, for example, the book of Genesis, was a compilation of sources up to the time the Israelites were abducted to Babylon, a long after the supposedly time of death of Moses (said to be the author of the first five books). The other books like Joshua, Ruth etc were all written in a manner to teach Israelites not to turn away from God, but many of the events were probably fictional. They were written again at later years.

The battles and wars by the Hebrews in Canaan resulted in large casualties, but no remains of the war were ever found, and the numbers were too high if we considered the world population at that time. Mostly they were exaggerations to make God looked powerful.

The account of Creation by Genesis was also scientifically wrong (plants appeared before the sun was created for example), and that the flood could not have covered the earth (that much water will be triple the volume of the waters of the ocean today) and a boat of that size (450 feet long) could not even stay afloat.

This clear errors in the Bible make me ponder the question, between science and Christianity, I must decide.

At that time I also kept myself updated on the development about arguments of Intelligent Designs and Evolution, I started to realize that, if there is proof that the origins of life, the Earth and the Universe are not a result of a higher being’s intervention (you may call it the Flying Spaghetti Monster), but purely the result of natural forces, then the foundation of Christianity will be gone. You don’t even have to talk about Virgin Birth, Resurrection and End Times.

I examined the evidence in the Bible, and there are clear inconsistencies on the accounts of Jesus’ birth and resurrection. I do not want to go in to details as this was well covered by many other ex-Christians. In a nut shell, the accounts were later created to elevate Jesus to Godhood, but it failed terribly when historical facts were checked. Jesus’ year of birth according to Matthew’s account and Luke’s account was 10 years apart. The census mentioned by Matthew never happened. The mention of the governor at Luke’s account was also in error.

Secondly, the genealogy of Jesus was clearly something created by the authors, they both referred to the paternal side (Joseph’s side of the family). Even if you take into accounts that gaps where there when generations were skipped, there were instances of clear inconsistencies.

The inconsistencies between the accounts of resurrection of Jesus was also disturbing.
I had those doubts buried until I bring myself to face it, and there could be no way anyone can harmonize it. Refer to infidels.org article here for an elaborate discussion: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/testimonials/bradley.html.

Up to this point, my long held belief that Jesus is God were all disproved, I did not ignore the facts presented to me.

As for Evolution, I already found out that those Christian claims that “Evolution” was challenged were all again blatant lies, they twisted news about new discoveries of bones that changes view of Evolution, and claimed that those discoveries “overturned” Evolution.

I visited infidels.org and another site dedicated to Evolution, and then a very good book that outlined how Evolution works and answered a lot of challenges to Evolution, how simple organisms emerged and evolved without conscious “design” and eventually to advanced organisms by natural selection.

I also read a fine book written by Mr. Fang Shi-Min, a PhD in heredity and biology, who did a brilliant job in explaining some intricate mechanism of Evolution (e.g. how a complex organ like the eye evolved). I was fully convinced evolution is a fact and needed no divine intervention to occur.









The point of no return

It was 2007, I still attended Christian activities, and I signed up for the Franklin Graham Festival as a choir member. By November, as the event drew near, I read another articles. This was the very last question that I needed answer. Does our universe (the energy, the matters therein) needed a creator ? Did somebody create our universe out from nothing ?

Here I found a logical flaw. Its hidden assumption was “for something to exist, it must be create”. This was simply begging the question. What we should ask was “how did our universe begin” without jumping to assumptions that it has to be “created”.

In reading articles on modern physics (which showed that matter could come to existence from non-matter) and that the universe is not a true vacuum, and about virtual particles, it can be demonstrated that matter can arise from non-matter. Secondly, the universe can exist on itself without being created. If something was there along, it needn’t be created. By then I cannot lie to myself, I am not a Christian anymore by definition, I am an atheist.

After some hesitation, I announced by switch to atheism. I could not bring myself to sing in the Franklin Graham Festival Choir (even I attended all the practices, knew the anthems back to back), because that was against my intellectual integrity and conscience. Once I realized that, I knew my mind has passed beyond the point of no return.

Settling in

As I settled after I made my announcement, I really am amazed how we can trick ourselves using our mind. We see what we wanted to see, for example goodness or kindness, we cannot find in our lives, we turned to religion because we hoped that we can find it in some deity. We need assurance that things are in control, probably because we felt at times we lose control of things. We are also uncomfortable that forces of nature are impartial and has no emotion when it happens in ways that stirs our mind. We projected our human nature to the “nature” (mother nature, storms have names etc.). Sure, we shared a lot of commonalities with animals, but that does not give laws of nature a “personality”. The mechanistic view of nature is not pleasing or appealing, but should we go as far as to create our god so that nature is more appealing?

One aspect of Fundamentalism and Evangelism is to attribute God’s hand in everything. The Tsunami in late 2004 was branded as God punishing South Asia and India, which are predominantly pagans in their eyes. However they overlooked cases where pagan temples stood intact after the earthquake and Tsunami, and Christian lives lost in that event (I knew an entire family, the parents and children were lost). They failed to see the human kindness displayed by people during the hard times.

Another is that, Fundamentalist used evangelization to justify everything. For instance, to evangelize Catholics, they created bunches of lies to lure them to convert. To evangelize university undergraduates that has some background in science, they created lies about Evolution. They would even justify persecution of fringe religious group (e,g. China’s Falungong) so to “make way for Gospel”. They even hailed the torture of prisoners held at Guatemala, that the Muslims no matter what, the present of US Troops in Iraq open doors for Evangelization.

Evangelicals are no better. The book by Barna Group (unChristian: what What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity... and Why It Matters) described precisely their distorted world view because of Christian teachings.

The many pseudoscience stuffs (equivalent to quacks) propagated by Christians are just a direct product of their view that God is there to push things. When there is a gap in the argument, they fill the blanks with the word “God did it”. Their behaviors are just like politicians or lobbyists of big corporations creating opinion to support their agenda, rather than the pursuit of truth.

Concluding words

My story will definitely hurt a lot of my friends I had since I became Christian. Many of these friends are kind and compassionate, but will definitely not able to share my views because their world view is so different from mine. I will like to maintain relationship with them. Fortunately I made new friends who are Liberals, agnostics, and atheists. Something I am happy about.


Prologue – A confrontation

This dialogue was a confrontation between me and my pastor some months before I left Christianity, which just shows how narrow-minded, irrational and authoritarian ministers can be when their core beliefs are confronted. I hope in time, my Christian friends will see the facts.

This confrontation with my church's senior pastor was over the question of "once-saved-always-saved".

During the conversation, he just printed out 10 pages and said there were "over 100 verses in the Bible" that proved "once-saved-always-saved".

He was not ready to discuss with me, he wanted me to submit. I challenged him a number of points citing the a Christian publication reporting a newly emerged church being a "heretic":

Me: the article listed a number of criteria that makes this church heretic. One is the divinity of Christ, one is pastoral authority, and the other one is "rejecting once-saved-always-saved". I reject once-saved-always-saved, you said the other Sunday with emphasis on this point when talking about this church. Answer me, am I now a heretic?

Pastor: ..... You took the words out of context, it should be placed alongside with the others.

Me: This is illogical, if you listed it there, then as long as you fulfill the one or more of it, then it meet the criteria.

Pastor: ....no ..no, you have to consider it with others

Me: then this criteria "rejecting once-saved-always-saved" should not be there. It is one that the Christendom never agreed on, and I do not believe any pastor should preach it as the dogma similar to Trinitarian formula.

Pastor:.....I am a Baptist minister for 40 years, I was to preach the truth in the Bible, once-saved-always-saved is the truth as proven by the Bible.

Me: then what about the Methodists, the Lutherans, surely you know they don't teach once-saved-always-saved ? The Methodists is against this doctrine.

Pastor: I refuse to comment other churches. I tell you, I am a veteran minister who preached for 40 years. We preach the truth as said in the Bible. The Bible is literally true; the world is created in 6 days, each day a 24 hour day. Do you know that in USA the South Western Theological Seminary, once professor published a set of commentaries and used the word "myth" to describe Genesis? He was sacked and the whole set of commentaries were rewritten. I preach what I believed is true and I do not have to answer to any individual. You are free to read anything you like, but in my church, it is what it will be taught..

.....

We have no common ground. All I saw was a person that refuses to have a conversation, but only wants to thrust his set of beliefs down my throat.

http://www.armbell.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4895&mforum=liberalhk
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
原帖由 Guest from 218.103.205.x 於 2008-3-2 08:56 發表
After spending so many years in the church or the religion, I can imagine that your social circle is much resticted to Christian circles. Tough or painful time can be ahead in this aspect.

However, the reward is the freedom to seek for knowledge and truth.

一直以來,離教者之家的定位是不設會員制,我們沒有入會退會的手續,各位朋友來去自如,希望可以減少離教者要考慮「入會」的猶豫和戒心。

理念上,我希望各離教者能以過來人的身分和經驗互相扶持,和分享各方面的種種。

非常同意「the reward is the freedom to seek for knowledge and truth」,許多基督徒都沒有這種自由。人生有很漫長的追尋道路,期間亦可以欣賞的角度去看身邊的美麗事物,而不必再考慮它們是否受造之物。

朋友,加油啊!You are no longer a victim but a survivor!
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
終於看完了傻貓的經歷,我列印出來也要11頁紙。

23年來,經歷這麼多,才找到一個出路。究竟基督教有甚麼魔力,令這麼多人難以自拔?是靠一個又一個的謊話?還是龐大的勢力與社交群體?就算教徒明明已發現有許多問題,也都在努力自我掩飾著這個懷疑?

最近本網亦收錄了一名專研神經內分泌學的生理學潘震澤教授的宗教經驗,我想很多人為此浪費掉的寶貴光陰也實在太多了,尤其是求學的黃金時期,假如沉迷在基督教,忙碌於事奉、積極參與屬靈活動等,或許會輸掉學業與前途。傻貓與潘教授是幸運兒,他們的學業似乎並無受到太大影響。

正如潘教授最後都引用孔子的說話:「未知生,焉知死」,中國傳統上都覺得不應浪費時間在這些身上。周兆祥苦思多時,得出的結論也只是:「人生那麼短,哪有時間去想這個問題。」

以上這些,都是各離教者的經驗與智慧累積。
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
原帖由 龍井樹 於 2008-3-4 14:35 發表
係呀, 十一頁紙咁長, 所以我都係等你個中文版翻譯出黎先細心睇.

我參與教會聚會都有廿多年, 魔力在哪? 魔力在當教會成為你的全部, 你就無法有一個清晰的頭腦, 去思想信仰所是. 我的經驗是先離開教會, 再離開信仰. ...

要踏出離開教會之前,往往都要權衡一下在其中認識的好朋友,在離教之後會否改變。

或者,學習一下傻貓,先認識一下其他觀點不同的朋友,那麼在離教後都不會太孤獨。
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
原帖由 龍井樹 於 2008-3-6 09:06 發表

所謂物以類聚。如果我真係能夠同教友玩得埋,就證明左我同佢地係同一類人啦,
仲點會離教呢?

假如玩唔埋而離教,當初又點解信教?當初唔係同一類人咩?

這「物以類聚」的假設有一缺憾,就是假設了人不會改變。

沙文的簡化程序相當具結論性。
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹

回復 18# 龍井樹 的帖子

有沒有興趣把你的經歷加以補充,像貓姐一樣總結一下自己的宗教經歷,使之成為你自己的離教見證呢?
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
原帖由 龍井樹 於 2008-3-6 14:19 發表
謝謝你再次邀請!

我是個眼高手低的,自己的寫作能力遠遠落後於對文章的要求,恐怕無法完成「離教見證」這類比較嚴肅的東西。

不要緊的,也不一定需要很嚴肅地去寫,隨心就可以了。不如以訪問形式,我問你答,然後讓我輯錄一下好麼?

1. 在小五信教後,對這個宗教及教會有甚麼感覺?(包括剛信時和信了一陣子後)
2. 可否形容多些關於「不冷也不暖的宗教生活」?
3. 離開教會後,仍然信這個神的麼?在甚麼時候、發生了甚麼事,令你開始不再信這個神了?
4. 你現在對這宗教的看法如何?你現時的宗哲思想是甚麼?
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
剛剛信教時有甚麼感覺?信了多久後,才感覺非常沉重?

說多些你離開教會時的感覺好嗎?
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
原帖由 Guest from 59.188.129.x 於 2008-3-7 22:28 發表
太長啦! 不如你讀比我聽仲我啦?

每日睇幾行,一兩個星期都睇得完啦。

畢竟她是在耶教打滾了很久的人,而且在網絡上亦百足咁多爪,她的經歷還是值得一看的。

但假如是她用英文讓人看不慣,唯有等她出個中文版吧。
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
跟「弟兄姊妹」合不來,是否曾經發生過甚麼事件?
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹

回復 29# 龍井樹 的帖子

在缺乏教會的「餵養」後,你接觸了甚麼思想,令你覺得這個「神」不再可信?
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
原帖由 Guest from 218.166.209.x 於 2008-3-15 05:41 發表
Hi all :

非常驚訝有這個網站, 太棒了! 我喜歡你們這些有自我思想的人!

謝謝您的欣賞和支持。
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹

回復 38# 的帖子

夜遊兄:

很高興你找到了屬於自己的方便法門,謝謝你報這個消息給我。

有何研佛心得,不妨說說看看。

原帖由 prussianz 於 2008-3-24 03:30 發表
does My Fair Lady 大黃傻貓 know the existance////existence of exchristian.hk 離教者之家 ??

#5 那個reply應該就是她。
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹

寫在向朋友宣佈離開基督教後

向與自己頗熟的基督徒朋友宣佈自己離教後﹐總算是一個了結。

我廿多年前信基督教﹐走了一段長路﹐到今天的決定﹐多數的基督徒朋友是尊重﹐但未必理解。

未必理解﹐是因為我思想上的改變已經令思維和一個基督徒很不相同。

我只可以覺得討論點無關通癢或者不涉及核心的信仰題目仍然是可以的﹐但當對方希望我改變主意或者從新考慮﹐我相信我一定很直接的拒絕﹐也會直接的指出他/她言論中錯了什麼地方以至他/她的言論是對我無效的。

雖然手法有時候真的會令一些關心我的基督徒朋友不好受﹐但我離開基督教也是決絕的﹐我的做法是要朋友斷了一切要我回去的念頭和希望。

所以我的「不」﹑「錯了」真的會很直接而不留任何的余地﹐或者是﹐一下就要人家全部用來「挽救」我的辦法都全部失敗。

聽來很不近人情﹐或者應該這樣說﹐我是有點想要他們快點接受我離開基督教的事實﹐我以我一個無神論者身份和他們作為一個今日已經是無神論者的信徒朋友﹐都要從新上路﹐他們無謂浪費精力勸我。

信徒朋友太多對離開基督教者的 stereotype﹐和我很熟的只有幾個﹐其它比較沒有那麼熟的﹐都未必能夠馬上理解﹐只希望他們不要給基督教內流行的歸類手法把我歸類 (雖然最後人們如何看我﹐我也沒有辦法)

http://hkneoevangelist.blogspot.com/2008/03/blog-post_295.html
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹

中文初稿

Tuesday, September 09, 2008

結束23年基督徒生涯﹐辭別基督教 - 撮譯自本人給朋友的英文版本 - Resigned from Christianity after 23 years of journey (初稿)

真理叫你們得自由 —《聖經》

結束23年基督徒生涯﹐辭別基督教 - 撮譯自本人給朋友的英文版本 - Resigned from Christianity after 23 years of journey



這篇文章是我一生人最花心力而寫的。初稿是英文﹐沒有太多註釋提供進一步資料﹐只是稍微梳理了我從尋求真理﹐信基督教到離開的心路歷程。

當我決定把我離開基督教這事告知我親密的朋友時候﹐為了讓他們和我有真實的相遇﹐我修改過英文版本﹐加了很多我個人的感受﹑剖白﹑和生命經歷﹐敞開自己﹐希望他們是能夠像聽一個好朋友分享一樣﹐大家保持一份情誼。這次修改我動用巨大心力﹐似乎也達到了我的效果。

一個我離開基督教後認識的好友知道我為朋友耗費心力去寫﹐說我為朋友的情義如此耗費心力和真誠分享﹐任何人看見都會為之動容。

走筆至此﹐我為這位知交真誠的支持而感到很開心和自豪。這個版本是我一個方法對這個朋友致以敬意。

我這次這一版本對象是不同讀者而寫的﹐因此我略去不少之前版本的細節﹐主要為了保護不同當事人的私隱的緣故﹐但我保留了大部份我個人的想法和重要促使我離開基督教的原因﹐同時相對其他版本﹐我加了大量註腳﹐列出一些有關信息的網站﹐和涉及的人物﹐部份甚至是基督教裡面有點名氣的。我鋪陳這些信息是要讀者自知道我離開基督教是基於事實﹐這些都是有出處的﹐並且要大家看清楚基督教裡面虛偽和醜陋﹐和其信仰的謬誤之處。

寫這個版本的目的是要想不同讀者群展示我的心路歷程和導致我最後決定基督教不可信的具體事實和資料。

基督徒朋友

你們讀下去一定會非常不安﹐因為部份基督教醜陋的一面我是很不保留地寫出來﹐其中涉及部份是香港有名望的基督教人士﹑大宗派等他們的卑劣行為﹐如果你們上網的話﹐你們點擊部份的互聯網連結﹐會發現更多令你們不安的信息。

讀到這裡﹐你們有兩個選擇﹕
一. 你們可以選擇不讀﹐按一個摯刪掉文檔就一了百了。
二. 你們不怕裡面內容令你信仰動搖就讀下去。

但你要誠實的看裡面的內容﹐不要因為裡面的事實和你信仰不符就否定。你如果不同意﹐可以上我的博客和我討論。(謾罵攻擊或廢話就不要來了)

慕道(即考慮新基督教的)朋友
我相信你們可以被稱為慕道﹐都對基督教有一定好感﹐甚至有好好的朋友是基督徒邀請你返教會。和上面一樣﹐你們讀下去一定會非常不安﹐那些你認識的基督徒朋友從來沒有告訴你基督教有這些黑暗面﹐他們甚至不知道。要是你讀了覺得不妥﹐你自己考慮﹕
一. 你要拿文章裡面的東西與你基督徒朋友質問導致傷了你們的情誼﹖
二. 你還是讀了文章後覺得要考慮﹖
三. 還是你沒有興趣考究﹐總之朋友信你都信﹐憑感受好了﹖
四. 其它想法﹖
你想法可以很多﹐但我只說﹐如果信的東西是假的﹐不如老老實實的承認自己是迷信﹐同拜祖先﹐拜黃大仙差別只是基督教在宗教上面處理人生問題確實優于拜祖先﹐拜黃大仙﹐宗教裡面大概只有佛教可以和基督教相揮影。

選擇一個宗教身份的決定不是只為了和朋友一起(為了和朋友一起不是不好﹐但不需要跟他們信一樣的宗教)﹐而是知道自己決定信的是否合理。

非信徒朋友﹐包括對基督教意見中立或者反對的人
這些提供的資料﹐一般不是在普通網上討論區可以看到的﹐要是有大家歡迎把這篇文章全部轉載。

這不是論文
先聲明﹐我這不是學術論文﹐中間可能偶然有些論述是有人覺得有謬誤。我想強調﹐可能我追尋過程中不免犯上一些思維謬誤﹐多數人的生命歷程都是如此﹐因為這種過程和一個人可以靜下來慢慢寫學術論文﹑小心論證是不同的。但我最後驅使我決定離開基督教的﹐是基督教本身一些是違反科學事實和道理謬誤的地方。我過程犯上的思維謬誤﹐仍然無法令不存在的神存在﹐無法令從進化發展來的生物變成全部由神創造。

你們當是一個離開基督教的人詳細的分享﹐帶開放和寬容的心去細看我的歷程。

一切的開頭

我出生是富有的家庭﹐不愁衣食﹐家住高尚地方﹐自小進入今天人人爭崩頭的名校讀書。

學校是教會學校﹐必定有聖經故事聽。這些故事對一個小小孩子當然引人入勝﹐和安徒生、格林童話、西遊記一樣﹐不過﹐老師講這些聖經故事給你聽時候﹐一定說那些故事都是千真萬確的。
說來這些故事都很精彩﹐好像摩西帶希伯來人出埃及的神跡﹐耶利哥城如何給攻下﹐魅力逼人的詩人戰士的大衛王﹐聰明絕頂的所羅門王﹐約瑟和他十個哥哥的故事﹐還有耶穌(聖詩有 Jesus loves the little children, 小學時候學的)。

這些故事令我對基督教留下很好的印象。而當時小學不少老師是基督徒﹐都是對學生愛護的好老師﹐我對基督教是沒有什麼反感的﹐甚至有點點嚮往﹐都是因為這些老師的吸引。

我很好學﹐喜歡學不同的東西。我和自己的哥哥弟弟自小就央求父母給我們買兒童百科全書﹐訂閱科普雜誌﹐當然我們也看兒童看的連環圖﹐不過對學問追求是我們幾個孩子的共同點。

我少年時候追看科普節目“宇宙”( Cosmos, Carl Sagan)和“生命之源” ﹐令我特別喜歡科學。

我想我是天生喜歡追求知識﹐好奇和對新事物有興趣﹐我也發覺我喜歡公義﹐正直和真理。

度過快樂的小學生活我順利升到中學﹐又是這家名校的直屬中學。人大了點點﹐小學聽的聖經故事就都不過是故事﹐我沒有很認真理會宗教問題。

中學既然是教會學校﹐自然有老師是基督徒﹐也有很多學生是基督徒﹐多數的都是友善﹐當然也遇到同學向我傳教﹐我都沒有理會他們。學校宗教風氣濃烈﹐聖誕節﹑復活節必定可以提早放學﹐參加宗教活動和看宗教戲劇﹐總之可以早放學﹐學生一定開心。

個別基督徒老師﹐特別我記得負責中學宗教科的一位英國女士﹐她有一股不怒而威的正氣﹐人人都對她又怕又愛﹔她和一般硬銷基督教的信徒不同﹐肯用討論的態度談信仰﹐是少數我到現在仍然尊重的信徒之一。


最令我反感的就是一個聖經老師﹐居然教導中華漢字的船字是「舟 + 八 + 口」組成﹐和聖經記載挪亞一家(剛好八個人)上方舟一樣﹐以為漢字裡面含神的啟示﹐ 為傳教強姦中華文化。

加上老師不斷空口講聖經如何有權威﹐要我們信﹐都非常令我反感。





人生危機出現

我以優異的會考升讀預科﹐感到前途無限﹐我更加參加學校辯論隊和參加校際朗誦節的演講比賽﹐訓練得一副精密思維和懂得辯論的技巧。我對前途很有信心﹐相信自己高級程度會考後﹐就算上不了香港的大學﹐也可以出國留學﹐攻讀我喜歡的科學或者電腦學。

我從來不知道家庭已經發生了巨變。

我中六那年﹐父親生意失敗﹐欠下巨債﹐家住的大屋給銀行收回﹐父親避債去了外地﹐和母親一起﹐母親和父親更後來分開。

由於家庭是比較保守﹐我自小被父母管得很緊﹐不許有自己空間﹐因此我自小缺乏信心﹐缺乏接納﹐這造就後來我容易接納基督教的因素。

由於家庭巨大打擊﹐我感到我認識的世界完全翻轉﹐什麼我預算的都化為烏有﹐我變得意志消沉﹐學業一落千丈﹐甚至開始做出軌的行為﹐走堂﹐不回校等。

中七的時候我想振作﹐而同時有基督徒同學開始來關懷我。我當時很需要支持﹐因為實在我感到家庭發生的事情對我打擊太大﹐在一次佈道會上﹐被臺上牧師言論感動﹐他說信耶穌就得到內心的平安和喜樂﹐和真理﹐於是在激動下就信了耶穌。其實我是一個容易與人 emphasize的人﹐讀感動人的故事我都這樣﹐我大概是給耶穌的故事感動﹐又非常需要精神的支持﹐於是就這樣決定了。

信主並沒有改變我家的巨變﹐我仍然要自己面對。
不過原來教會多數人都是出自比較好的家庭﹐好像我這樣的不是沒有﹐不過在教會氣氛下﹐你是不敢透露的。我稍微說了每天和父親吵架和壓力的事情﹐教會弟兄姐妹只懂得告訴我要忍耐父親﹐要按照聖經教導順從他。卻不知道父親給我的壓力隨時可以令我無法集中精神讀書﹐到時候我無法畢業﹐邊個可憐 ? 最多不過幾句安慰﹐叫我靠神好了。

我不禁問﹐信了耶穌﹐不是有所謂聖靈內住嗎﹖聖靈為何無法給他們智慧令他們說我需要的安慰說話呢﹖最少不會說那些「行貨」答案罷﹖

我知道有信徒一定質疑我是否有尋求神﹑有真的求問。其實說穿了﹐根本基督教沒有任何所謂確定尋求神的方法﹐但它肯定是﹐把個人一切不順利﹑不安樂﹐歸咎在哪人尋求神不力﹑不夠信心上﹐形成一種叫信徒自我責備的循環﹕你不快樂﹑靈性不好﹐因為你沒有尋求神。你尋求神尋求不了﹐有話是你靈性不好。總而言之﹐人的問題是人自己的問題﹐神是完全沒有問題﹑基督教完全沒有問題。

不久後我慢慢發現﹐基督教根本經不起現實的考驗。

我當時教會的文化﹐其實今日也是﹐就是多鼓勵你分享正面的東西﹐要感恩。如果你分享你的苦況﹐而一句感恩或者信靠的說話都沒有﹐教會的人都不免覺得你有問題﹐缺乏信心。不要小看這種文化。基督教一位學者龔立人博士的太太因癌症去世﹐他分享妻子從患病到去世歷程寫的一本書「眼淚未抹乾」﹐得到好評﹐偏偏一次聚會介紹那書後﹐某牧者居然對龔立人博士說﹐本書名字要改為「眼淚已抹乾」﹐言談顯示這個牧者覺得堂堂一個基督教神學博士如果哀悼亡妻寫的書仍然帶懮愁就不對。

人家已經是大學神學教授都遭到這樣對待﹐教會報喜不報憂的文化可以看到是根深蒂固的。尤其教會每年除夕最喜歡辦感恩聚會﹐人家個個可以出去感恩﹐我自己一點感恩之情都沒有﹐要我聽人家面對困難可以感謝神。當中我真懷疑那些感恩多少是真心﹐多少作大﹖這些只是令人窒息和非常虛偽。

回想我所以信耶穌﹐其實我因為家庭打擊﹐當時變得非常脆弱﹐真的像走投無路一樣﹐好像遇溺的人﹐如果有人告訴我一根飲筒可以就我﹐我都會毫不猶豫抓住那根飲筒。

年青﹐21歲前因為未定性﹐一般都有很波動的情緒﹐又同時很需要肯定自己﹐或者問人生的問題﹐進入長大成人時候為自己找尋定位和方向。
需要關懷的在基督教找到溫暖的群體﹐追求正義和真理這種理想主義的又可以看到基督教教義救世的吸引﹐在未受過獨立思考﹑邏輯思維訓練﹑缺乏歷史科學知識下﹐很容易就會對基督教的佈道產生反應。如果向我一樣面對人生危機﹐就更加容易信基督教。

無論信的動機如何﹐最後無改基督教裡面虛假的東西完全虛假的事實。

隨著時日﹐我慢慢發現基要主義 是不合理﹐福音派信仰裡面的信條自相矛盾﹐而基督教圈子﹐特別華人基督教﹐更加是驕傲﹑教條主義和偽善。
華人圈子口裡面說容許自由思考和異見﹐但都是說說﹐最後都是要信徒毫不質疑的接納他們一套。而為了推他們一套營造學術姿態兼不守學術游戲規則﹐更是近日令人憤怒的發展。

天主教和東正教比較溫和﹐比較包容不同的人﹐但同樣也見教條主義。

自由派基督教 是我覺得做基督徒時代比較自在的日子﹐因為他們容許自由的思想(free thinking)。

早年的基督徒日子
和好多初信的一樣﹐我經歷了一種亢奮﹐覺得好像很釋放﹐滿足﹐平安和喜樂。大概在行出去決志 時候我情緒洶湧爆發﹐激動的哭了﹐把埋在心裡面的不快發泄了。
之後的 euphoria 令我沐浴在一片釋放﹐滿足﹐平安和喜樂。

年青的人未定性﹐是很重情緒和感受的﹐因此我也不例外地把這種感受當是「得救」的感覺。

我信的時候根本不夠成熟去細想﹐情緒的波動就好似一個巨浪把你推了去信。

然而﹐當我年紀長後﹐我發覺這種感覺是可以用不同方法複製的﹐就算不是信仰經歷也可以的。我朋友參加 Life Dymanics﹐感到被更新﹑重生﹐感覺和信耶穌的一樣。

我信耶穌後非常興奮﹐全情投入信仰﹐參加事奉﹐見證基督。

我是屬於聰明的人﹐在這種情況下腦袋轉數簡直好像電腦CPU超瀕一樣﹐半年的初信訓練根本就好似小學幼稚園東西﹐毫無難度。我投入教會生活﹐參加不同聚會﹐在不足一年﹐不認識我的還以為我信了很久。
在這信仰初期﹐我把所有我對科學的熱愛和我參加辯論時候運用的理性思維擱下超過15年﹐開始我和基督教維持兩年的蜜月期。

我參加的教會是屬於浸信會 ﹐而採取基要派立場。不過多數裡面的會友對人都不錯。

基要派的世界觀影響我初期信仰日子很深。典型的是他們採取排他的觀點﹐不論是極端和溫和﹐都有所謂黑白二分的想法。只是“either or” ﹐非此即彼﹐也認為信主和不信主的固然不可以結婚﹐就算是工作不不會合作得好。當然少不了的是攻擊其他宗教﹐以自己為優越與並只有基督教擁有真理。

我維持這種信仰態度最少八﹑九年。這期間我不斷讀聖經和有關參考書﹐甚至開始涉獵神學題材的書﹐又帶查經小組﹐參加教會詩班。

功課和教會﹐就是我的一切﹐此外我就很少理會其他東西(我有參加教會外的合唱團體的)。
基督教﹐特別福音派和基要派設計信徒的教會生活﹐其實就是把信徒的時間﹑空間﹑心靈儘量塞滿基督教的東西﹐讓他們不去接觸基督教外任何挑戰基督教的東西。這個方法就是耶穌來自聖經的比喻。
當一個人時間﹑心思﹑朋友﹑地點都是基督教﹐放工都是教會﹐那個人就慢慢地在基督教建立了一個網羅﹐基督教一切都是那個人身份﹑生命的一部分﹐離開等於把自己從一處安身立命的地方割裂出來﹐絕對不容易。

操控性教會更加把這推前一步﹐連私人生活也受到他們所謂師傅的控制。


夏令營奇遇
我的教會每年都舉行夏令營。夏令營我去了幾次﹐最後一個晚上聚會叫「獻心會」﹐講員一定大談基督門徒的本份﹐要如何奉獻基督﹐然後就好似佈道會決志一樣﹐部份信徒就上前﹐不少都哭得很厲害﹐說他們要奉獻一生給主耶穌。

過了一些日子﹐我發現那些在「獻心會」哭得最厲害的﹐往往有不少都後來離開教會。
現在回想﹐我推測﹐那些夏令營﹑奮興會 等﹐人出去奉獻﹐目的是從拾決志時候那種感覺﹐好似給一種熱力充滿的感覺﹐那種感動。那種感覺其實﹐是他們 identity ﹐或者最少是他們以為﹐的一部份。他們那刻是人生一個 defining moment﹐life changing moment﹐他們難以忘記﹐卻發現這種感覺最終沒有帶來他們真實的釋放﹑平安﹐為了重拾﹐他們要重演那個感覺。教會不斷聚會﹐也是帶這種方式的﹐不斷重演﹐要人相信那種感覺就是自己的一部分。

這種感動可能曾經令他暫時忘記了他當前的困難和自身的問題﹐可是亢奮過後﹐一切回復正常﹐他又面對同樣問題﹐當他發覺問題仍然困擾自己﹐他會感覺自己不「屬靈 」﹐感到內疚(覺得自己信得不好)。

正如好多表現非常熱心信徒﹐都屬於熱得快﹐死得更快。我估計都是情緒感情因素多﹐而不是什麼很深思熟慮的事情。

我當時當然不知道我是因為情感需要而信耶穌。

信了七年八年﹐我那些排他思想慢慢的軟化﹐可能是因為我本性不是太排他﹐總覺得排他是要對一些不同(而非直接衝突)的擺出一副敵意﹐而因為我名校出生﹐思維上相對開明。
自己當時的教會仍然教導基督教排他的觀念﹐例如信和不信不可以結合(有教會某部部長因為和非信徒結婚﹐結果在一次會員投票中﹐有人質疑﹐想投反對票)﹐強調分別為聖等。

我基本都對這種信仰有懷疑﹐但口裡面不會反對﹐心裡面開始不安。越見基督教一些我難以認同的做法﹐這種不安就增加﹐只是因為我在基督教感到安全﹐我沒有覺得需要面對我裡面的不安。

我不是那些「又天真有傻」的信徒﹐我當然知道很多對基督教的批評﹐但當時我被說服了基督教是真理﹐我如其它基督徒一樣﹐都是認為是少數壞的信徒迫害基督教名聲﹐從來沒有考慮基督教一切的信仰系統是「無根」的。

我和很多信徒一樣﹐實在是因為對歷史﹑科學和基督教本身缺乏認知才以為我們把握的是理所當然的。

基要派思想和材料最多的﹐首推中信月刊 , 海外校園 ﹐兩本刊物的材料包含大量偽科學﹐蒙蔽教會的人。但因為我本身大學不是學科學科目﹐也不留意﹐和其它信徒一樣﹐我都相信那些鬼話。

不過當你自己甘心受到基要派信仰或者福音信仰所影響﹐你不會覺得這樣做是有問題的﹐因為你自己不自覺的停止自己的獨立思考﹐你只是不斷想到保護自己的信心﹐「認定」自己信的東西﹐然後只是不斷增加知識去堅固它﹐使它不動搖。至於那些知識是否真確﹐那不會有人問﹐反正只要可以堅固信心就一定接受。


首次看到基督教的幽暗
我首次接觸基督教幽暗的一面﹐源于我第一間返的教會。當時教會進行小組化聚會﹐即是把信徒群分成約十人上下的小組﹐小組聚會說是比較靈活﹐比較可以親密認識支持。我是其中一個組長。
不過教會當時據說聽了部份意見﹐說參加小組接觸少了教會其它人﹐我不知道是教會領導層那個人想出來的主意﹐說每年小組要再重組。

我小組的組員是屬於靜態慢熱的﹐要他們認識其它人﹐不是不可以﹐但不可以快。組員都已經開始大家熟落﹐不想那麼快就要從頭來。可是負責的信徒表示勢在必行﹐我們不得不從。我雖然想保留不改﹐最後是教會行政需要大於小組需要。
這事件對我衝擊不小。我當時認為﹐聚會是為聚會的人而設﹐而非為了方便行政﹐可是行政的往往覺得就是為了更大發展﹐又借使多人得救過橋等﹐要你依從教會的放向。總之做的東西每次可以南轅北轍﹐不過用的理由都是要為福音。

而後來我一次又一次看到﹐基督教為了傳教﹑福音﹐是可以用謊言的。
而教會為何要不斷有人呢﹐因為教會要大﹑要增長﹐才可以財源滾滾﹐才所謂有勢力傳福音﹐然後教會更大更大。。。

不論是牧師或信徒﹐都會用不同的方法叫人信主﹐基督教到今日仍然流行大量謊言﹐不見任何跡象會停止﹕
a) 提倡進化論的科學家達爾文臨終悔改信主
b) 提倡進化論的科學家達爾文臨終悔改信主後表示後悔發表進化論
c) 進化論只是理論
d) 多數科學家都是基督徒
e) 同性戀是可以改變的
f) 很久以前﹐恐龍和人是同行的


第二次看到基督教幽暗面是轉了新的教會後﹐牧師為了和個別領袖的不和唆擺執事和會眾﹐並且逼得一個女傳道辭職。
當時教會可以說是烏煙瘴氣﹐也很多弟兄姊妹受傷害﹐教會領袖束手無策﹐個別還糊塗得不知道這個牧師的人格操守問題。
大家或者覺得這屬於個別事件﹐不過只要大家把所有耳聞目睹的教會分裂或者紛爭羅列﹐你都不禁問﹐事件這麼多﹐好似比非信徒群體也有過之而無不及﹐那麼信仰的效果是那麼大嗎﹖若果大家把基督教界所有敗壞牧師﹑敗壞領袖是的事件都全部一起看﹐我們就應該問﹐這信仰是不是有用的﹐所謂神轉化生命的力量﹐若果按照基督教觀點神是不變和是有貫徹性的話﹐看見的表象就不是那麼一回事。
這些表象不是基督教錯謬的證據﹐但肯定推動了我日後深入看基督教的問題。

網上基督教論壇 - 我第一個妥協
我本科修讀電腦﹐所以是很早使用撥號上網去互聯網的人。
互聯網讓我看見一個普通信徒平日未必接觸的世界。在那裡我才知道教會告訴信徒的都未必盡是真實﹐甚至是作假﹑不確的。

初期﹐我在新聞組 除了和信徒討論﹐也和非信徒﹑反基督教的人和前信徒激烈辯論。這是我第一次感到自己信念遇到危機的時候。

當時激烈討論的就是有關基督教機構或者教會只聘請信徒的問題。
一般來說﹐基督教機構﹑神學院﹑教會任何人員﹐連掃地的﹐都必須是信徒。當時一個討論就是﹐若果一個機構聘請會計文員﹐或者網頁設計﹐甚至普通的打掃﹐為何一定是基督徒﹖
非信徒認為這是屬於歧視﹐剝奪了人工作機會。他們提出有佛教機構不計較一個人是基督徒而聘請他。我起初說因為機構事工是為神國的緣故﹐所以必須是基督徒。但網友說﹐既然是這樣﹐為何基督教機構租用非信徒的物業﹑使用非信徒提供的電力﹑通訊等設施呢﹖還有﹐基督教學校使用了政府公帑﹐怎可以這樣用來優待信徒﹖

我嘗試在不同地方找理由去解釋﹐但發現若果有關工作根本不涉及宗教成份﹐例如宣講或者製作宗教內容﹐信徒和非信徒是不可能有看得到的分別﹐更何況很多信徒是受僱在非基督教或者是其它宗教機構裡面﹐我們怎可雙重標準呢﹖
若果是普通信徒﹐例如基要派﹐面對難以反駮的論據﹐他們大概是說對方是世上無用小學來回應。
我自己對這種回應感到很不安。若果基督教是理直氣壯﹐若果基督教是有真理和智慧﹐何以無法回應呢﹖我自己也想﹐若果是基督教機構﹐只要掌管基督教信仰部份是信徒的話﹐那些職位反正是按指示行﹐如何會構成問題呢﹖

這爭論的結果是﹐我開始懷疑基督教一些做法的合理性﹐而後來導致我發現基督教整個宗教的根源是源自不合理的基礎。

這次經驗我看見基督徒﹐包括我自己﹐回應這些問題時候﹐是採取了逃避的態度﹐不肯正面回答﹐甚至是把舉證責任推去別人或者是用其它問題轉移視線。

我想﹐正直的信徒為何需要這樣做呢﹖難道基督教沒有好的答案﹖

我最後發現我無法使用合理的解釋去合理化基督教機構只聘請信徒的理由﹐於是我就向其它版友表示妥協﹐認為基督教機構要求所有員工是信徒是不合理的。

我回想這種基要主義心態﹐自己感到不寒而慄。

幾番的思考﹐我就承認﹐基督教機構堅持任何受僱員工都必須是信徒是不合理的。縱然基督教是得到神啟示的真理﹐他們不能夠說有神啟示可以把錯變成對。企圖使用聖經去顛倒是非是非常錯誤的行為。

這種在心裡面出現的不安﹐稱為cognitive dissonance ﹐即認知與我實際認同的是不協調﹐不和諧的。我被人教導要相信某些東西﹐但實際上我隱隱約約覺得不妥當。
而這次事件不是獨立的事件﹐當我開始去真的看歷史﹑科學事實的時候﹐基督教教導的所謂真理越來越令我不安。
這種不安慢慢變成了我離開基督教的開端。

分析基要派心態

在這裡﹐我會稍微討論一下我體會的基要派心態。

假如我學一個死硬基要主義者﹐我一定不會理會我是理據不足﹑不會理會我根本沒有事實支持我的觀點。什麼邏輯﹑推論﹑理性思考﹐都不死是死硬基要主義者考慮的﹐我所謂的cognitive dissonance只會被壓抑﹐或者只是被說成是信心不足﹑魔鬼的干擾。
最後﹐面對自己詞窮理屈死硬基要主義信徒的反應就是把反駮到他們的人當是迫害他們的﹐他們是為義受到逼迫﹐末日來之前﹐信徒是受到逼迫的。
如果按照基要派思維﹐任何邏輯﹑理由都不重要﹐一個這樣的人一定會壓抑自己的理性和對事實的把握﹐因為她/他一定要維護自己已經找到的真理。既然找到了﹐其他的根本沒有需要驗證就肯定是錯的了。然後就用基督教所謂逼迫的經文﹐安慰自己。
但我當時卻不以為自己是知道所有的﹐因為我自己的教育和當時的教會相對開明﹐我是可以用邏輯推論和理性思維解讀。
不過當問題涉及到信仰核心﹐例如三位一體﹑基督復活﹐我的邏輯推論和理性思維就自動停止﹗
停止﹐但我不是沒有反應的。我本身是追求真理﹑要求公義的。當我企圖通過壓抑邏輯推論和理性思維維護信仰﹐我自然感到一種強烈的不諧調﹐就是所謂 cognitive dissonance. 我自己根本不願意去支持或者認同任何在邏輯﹑事實有謬誤的東西。如果如此做﹐例如堅持地球年輕或者達爾文臨終信耶穌﹐我內裡面一定有無窮的矛盾。
就算你真的嘗試﹐你不可以把事實抹殺﹐以人作為思維﹑理性的動物﹐你的理性不會不告訴你﹐你現在堅持的是錯的。
不過在我來說﹐真正看見基督教病態一面的﹐是網上我和基要主義信徒大戰的日子。


重拾理性思維與邏輯的長路
我做的工作﹐慢慢從弄軟件硬件變成寫大量的文件﹐裡面必須就自己的一些看法和觀點提出支持﹐甚至論證。而文章行文更加需要清楚思路。慢慢地﹐我思路開始和基督教裡面慣常只聽﹑只信而少思考開始遠離。
而在這裡﹐我開始發現基督教的價值﹑思維都和現實世界﹐以至現代社會價值產生矛盾。基督教只是落後封建文化的一個現代化身而已。

在現實世界﹐基督教界裡面普遍的空洞的斷言方式﹐放在工作是往往行不通的。因此我學得如何小心的鋪陳我的見解﹐用多個角度考慮﹐要人給他們意見﹐然後抽離角色﹐自己作為陌生人的觀點看看我寫的東西是否合理。我也請教上司和同事﹐要求他們評論我寫的東西。
為了更加改善我寫作思路﹐我既看李天命的書
慢慢我思路開始更加清晰﹐更加好好組織﹐懂得批判不同觀點﹐對某些的論據都可以找到了其中謬誤﹐這對我在網上和基要主義激烈辯論有很大好處﹐更加是﹐我自我的發現﹐導致我終於可以離開基督教這個對人思想﹑心理慢性毒害的信仰。

和網上基要主義者大戰的日子
基督教不是什麼都落後的﹐2000年互聯網大大發展﹐基督教界就想利用互聯網作為他們宣揚信仰的平台。

互聯網文字界面的新聞組讓路給 Web 界面(當時主要是 Netscape﹐後來才是 IE)﹐眾多基督教機構假設了網站﹐除了提供信息﹐也開始了討論區。不過和今日使用discuz ! 或者其他討論區軟件的論壇﹐當時的討論區是比較簡陋的。基督教機構的希望是把互聯網討論區變成所謂主內弟兄姊妹互相交通的平臺。

我平常去多的網站包括了福音證主協會的「知信行」﹑影音使團的 ishare和個人網站「周Sir網站」(現改名為兔哥哥討論區).
「知信行」和「周Sir網站」為基督教基要派盤踞﹐網主都是基要派信信徒﹐相信聖經無誤﹑字面解釋﹑地球年輕說﹑前千禧年末日論和視天主教為異端。

當年還沒有 Discuz等比較先進的軟件﹐因此網主除了刪貼外﹐根本不可以使用禁言﹑鎖戶口﹑封鎖IP網址等手段。Discuz等比較先進的軟件往往同時給版主太大權力去破壞侵犯言論自由。我希望日後這些軟件可以給版友一個機製去推翻版主就好了。

和基要派的辯論﹐就和所有人在網上遇見的一樣﹐起初這些基要派信徒態度都尚算有禮貌﹐客氣﹐包括當你不斷的把他們論點一一推翻駁倒﹐他們就老羞成怒。
我當時去在那三個網站把基要派指天主教為異端的論據都駁倒後﹐他們就非常憤怒﹐開始出下三濫手段打擊異見﹕
• 洗版
• 使用分身營造他們好像人多勢眾
• 人身攻擊﹐威脅我要揭露我身份告訴我教會 (他們都以為教會都會控制信徒言行的)
• 重複已經被反駮的論點

我當時也不是很親天主教的﹐但那些基要派骯髒的手段令我非常憤怒﹐我同情天主教徒﹐就去站在他們同一陣線去對抗基要派。其中一個屬於浸信會的網友曾經勸我﹐不要那麼拼命為天主教辯護﹐認為對我沒有好處 -我聽見非常詫異﹐因為他根本就好像覺得基要派使用骯髒的手段不是什麼一回事﹐反而覺得他們因為是為了反對異端所以「情有可原」。
我可不接納他這套邏輯﹐因為明明是明顯基要派他們的論點錯﹐事實也錯﹐何以要根據所謂既定立場而決定那方該幫忙的呢﹖
這個網友的說話令我開始質疑基督教裡面憑立場去決定手段對錯的邏輯。
在這個過程裡面﹐我大量研究天主教教義﹑書本﹐也研究不同宗派﹐例如信義宗﹑聖公會﹑加爾文派﹑亞民念派﹑浸信派﹑靈恩派等。我深為基督教裡面的多樣性所困惑﹐現在我知道原因﹐因為基督教聖經本來是人的文件﹐也是任由人解釋的書﹐不出這麼多宗派才怪。
當然﹐福音派和基要派的那些基本信仰﹐例如唯獨聖經﹑唯獨信心﹑救恩論﹑末日論都不是他們所聲稱那樣符合聖經。基要派信徒更加是出名的大話派﹐專門捏造謊言攻擊天主教﹑進化論﹑佛教﹑哲學等等。
和基要派辯論和網上打筆戰的三年多經歷﹐令我徹底背棄了基要派信仰﹐當時我改稱自己為所謂溫和或中間派的浸信派信徒。
當年﹐我主要在福音證主協會網站“知信行” www.ccfellow.org 活動。幾個基要派信徒是利用這些網站作為攻擊他們眼中信仰不純正﹑自由派﹑背道的人或者團體。
這些人有幾個﹐一個自稱 keyperson﹐但使用另外一個分身出現﹐叫 puritan﹐另外一位叫 ckachow﹐他是著名基督教基要網站「基要書室」主持﹐據說和基要派人物吳主光有親戚關係﹐是喜樂福音堂的。
有一次﹐ckachow 出文攻擊中文大學崇基學院的黃慧貞博士和宗教文化研究社。他們一向對崇基學院不懷好意﹐這次卻對黃博士和宗教文化研究社的文章斷章取義﹐而且還冒充崇基學院的電子郵件信箱。
我馬上通知了崇基學院的關瑞文博士﹐果然很快中文大學崇基學院方面就在“知信行” 出文譴責這種行為和譴責網站負責人。知信行方面很快就道歉﹐但這些基要派分子只是收斂一下﹐就故態復萌﹑變本加厲。我從這事件清楚看到這些人的刻毒﹑無恥和無賴行為。我把事件向各大基督教討論區和新聞組公開﹐引來對他們行為不恥的網友對他們譴責﹐爭論變得白熱化﹐最後逼得福音證主協會要把討論區關閉。
我在另外一個叫“周SIR網站”www.allenchow.com 也遇到相同的基要派分子﹐也和他們激烈的辯論﹑爭論﹐嚇走很多網友﹐最後網站也被逼關閉.

如此和基要派分子的辯論從一個網站不斷轉移﹐每個反天主教基要派分子所到的網站我都去和他們辯論﹐戰火不斷燒去不同網站。其中一個還貼文章攻擊葛培理博士 , 甚至有人詛咒我。那些運作網站的基督教機構終於發現﹐他們一向以為他們可以依賴的真理﹐出到真正的世界是如此不受歡迎﹑引起如此多辯論﹐他們終於害怕信徒在這些環境得不到所謂造就﹐怕信徒“跌到” ﹐他們根本無法像在教會的環境下把討論控制﹐終於一個又一個的基督教機構運作的討論區關閉。到2004年﹐只有兩﹑三個基督教機構運作的討論區仍然存在﹐但已經沒有多少人去了。
到2008年﹐基督教機構或者信徒自己開的討論區都不再開放給公眾網友登記﹐他們只給圍內基要派信徒或者友好進入﹐大家分享他們自己的東西﹐拒絕在對外開放。
人流多的基督教網站卻是由普通商業網站營運﹐版主工作由基督徒和非信徒分擔。
現在回想﹐基要派﹑福音派的所謂重生得救﹐根本不是他們宣傳的那回事。他們說得救可以獲得平安﹑喜樂﹐但其實代價是要一個人永遠好似小孩那樣無知﹑幼稚﹐甚至要他們變得反智﹑反理性。
基督教﹐特別近年香港的基督教﹐已經變得罐頭化﹑快餐化。他們只是把一套信仰要點給人﹐然後那個人只需要懂得重複這些要點﹐就是所謂得救﹐在一個人弄懂人生是什麼問題﹑他/她自己是什麼問題前﹐就提供所謂標準答案﹐要人根本就不去從內心思考問題。教會不關心那些人問題是什麼﹐教會只關注如何令更多人返教會﹐坐滿禮堂。
基督教信仰根本不需要人自己自我尋索﹑自我思考﹐基督教給一套所謂真理﹐告訴人只需要根從這些東西(其實是教條)﹑鸚鵡學舌一樣講他們的術語﹑語言﹐隨他們大圍的做法。
你人生該如何﹐在基督教其實根本不需要太多思考﹐路已經替你選好﹐答案就在聖經中﹐禱告裡面﹐就好似你去培訓一樣﹐早就提供了教材。

教會知道科學新發現是對信仰的挑戰﹐於是就製造了一堆所謂護教材料。這些都是順著基督教不科學﹑非理性的所謂思路而編寫的偽科學材料﹐而其中﹐中信 , 海外校園﹐都是愛宣揚這些偽科學材料﹐讓信徒以為用這些東西就可以反駮進化論等。
平安福音堂﹑香港神的教會﹐都是這些極端基要派代表。不少浸信派教會路線也非常基要﹐好像我最後返的那家﹐牧師是說他絕對的相信地球是六日創造的。
這些教會﹑機構﹐把一切對基督教不利的事實都過濾﹑或者選擇性地扭曲來符合他們的信仰框架。

而且﹐在教會裡面﹐信徒是被教導在他們人生際遇裡面看到所謂神那個帶領的手﹐或者weaving hands。可是﹐人生際遇是非常不定﹑無常﹐是充滿隨機發生的事情﹐事實上要人在無常的事件去尋找所謂一個帶領﹐是等同要他們在浩瀚如沙海的沙漠尋找一顆特別的沙粒﹐是沒有任何可能﹐因為這個帶領的手根本不存在。於是﹐信徒要在任何的挫折﹑失敗去猜想所謂上帝給他們的屬靈功課﹑上帝給他們的信息﹐於是你就看見信徒不斷的美化他們的痛苦﹑感謝上帝給他們試煉等等﹐或者他們只想到來生復活﹑天堂﹐拒絕去活在當下面對問題﹐或者變態地說﹐中共迫害法輪功學員是神開福音門的安排﹗
而無論發生的事情是多麼不合理﹑不公義﹐基督徒的反應必須是說那是出自他們口裡面全知﹑全能﹑全善的神﹐我們是要猜想神那個奧秘的計劃是什麼﹐總之神就是為人而做的。要是你說你不明白﹑質疑﹐就得面對教會裡面充滿論斷﹑批判的眼光﹐被認定是信心不足﹑信仰有問題等等。想想這種要人不聽﹑不理會自己感受﹐只為滿足教義﹑教條框架的做法﹐是如何折磨人心﹑扭曲人性﹗

我最初也拒絕去承認這種想法的幼稚﹑自欺和扭曲。於是我要壓抑自己內心真實的感受﹐甚至要心口不一去符合基督教圈子的游戲﹐我大部份關愛我的都是信徒﹐故此我不願意因為我內心對這些信條的不同意而損害這些關係﹐在網上我可以毫無顧忌的和其他信徒爭辯﹐可是如果面對的是自己教會的朋友﹐我就不可以了。

在網上﹐我用了4年時間去追擊那些反天主教的基要派信徒﹐我用 Google 搜尋一切反天主教的字眼﹐然後就去他們活動的網站跟他們打對台。
我提及一個叫keyperson, 又名“Puritan” , “John Knox”, MandM, 的基要派信徒。他總希望一些基督教論壇站穩陣腳後宣揚他的反天主教材料﹐在“知信行” 年代他反天主教的聲音最大﹐自命信仰純正﹑非常相信自己是對的。他有一個網站專門放他的反天主教材料。
最初和他討論﹐他看來是頗斯文﹐甚至充滿愛心﹐但當他一個又一個反天主教的觀點被擊破的時候﹐他就開始失控。
在“知信行” 年代剛好發生天主教神父侵犯兒童事件﹐為了要人不注意他反天主教論點的謬誤﹐他開始不斷貼有關醜聞的新聞。
我看準了他相信基督教是不會有這種醜聞的弱點﹐就在網上收集不同基督教牧師性醜聞﹐一次過貼了40篇給他看。這些基督教有的性醜聞果然對他造成非常大的打擊﹐結果他沉寂了一段日子。
第二次我在一個台灣網站遇到了他﹐辯論有關聖經正典形成的過程﹐結果我的材料令他無話可說。
我繼續貼出基要派信徒改信天主教的見證﹑有用不同聖經部份證明所謂唯獨聖經﹑唯獨信心都缺乏聖經根據。當時我曾經認真考慮改信天主教﹐因為我給天主教的崇拜所吸引。

經歷與基要派信徒論戰後的反思
和基要派信徒網上論戰的日子﹐我從觀察他們的言行開始明白了他們的心態和思路﹐也親眼看到基要派心態如何可以敗壞一個人的人格。我看到福音派和基要派﹐在信仰核心週邊的事情﹐可以看來很尊重學術﹑邏輯﹑討論﹐不過﹐如果涉及他們奉為正統的信條﹐他們就必定放棄學術誠信﹑變得反智﹐目的就是保護他們的信仰。

最初他們是很溫和與有禮﹐好似從前拿聖經上門傳福音那些人一樣﹐滿面笑容。他們給人看到是正直﹑正派的一面。不過﹐要是你把他們奉為至高的信條一個個打倒﹑反駮得體無完膚﹐他們內心既知道自己錯﹐卻又不願意放棄他們投資了大量時間﹑感情的信仰﹐他們就會進入一個意識形態的惡性循環﹕
a) 我是上帝揀選而且得救的
b) 因為上帝揀選我﹐我是可以從上帝得到真理
c) 因為以上兩點﹐我不會錯
d) 他們是不信﹑背道﹑異端﹐絕對沒有真理
e) 所以就是不信﹑背道﹑異端提出了充份事實﹑證據﹑論證﹑誠實的討論﹐他們仍然都錯﹐因為他們沒有神
f) 因為我有神﹐我信神﹐就是我說謊﹑提出謬論﹑不誠實討論﹐只要是維護神的真理﹐我仍然是得救
g) 只要我維護真理﹐就證明我是神揀選的

類似的思路給基要派信徒或者福音派信徒強烈動機去不擇手段﹑用越來越陰險狡詐的手法﹐自己毀去個人的人格誠信﹑學術誠信﹐避免自己認錯要自尊受損害。

於是他們人格崩潰虧損﹐不能夠像聖經教導去愛仇敵﹑去溫和對待對手了。

他們的行為模式幾乎次次一樣﹐貼虛假的事實 (例如反天主教的大部份都不正確) ﹐然後抹黑人﹐或者用其他方法打擊對手。如果在討論區﹐就註冊多個戶口變成分身﹑製造好似很多人支持他們一樣。如果他們是有權限刪文﹑鎖戶口﹐他們一定會毫不猶疑使用﹐和專制政權打擊異見一樣﹐然後就講出他們版本的所謂事件真相。

張國棟在新書“論盡明光社”, 羅列了香港一個基督教組織用類似的方法﹐打壓教內異見﹐把他們稱為偽信徒。

基督教宣揚仁慈﹑愛﹑和平﹑公義﹐卻每每落在腐敗之中﹐為什麼﹖因為他們宣稱存在的神根本不存在﹐當他們選擇基督教而不選擇真理﹐腐敗是意料之中。

有一次﹐我遇到 Puritan / Keyperson﹐在台灣網站不知他如何取得版主權限。我當然就難逃刪除戶口的命運。他除了刪除我的帖子﹐還把辯論的經過歪曲﹐完全顛倒。Puritan 在裡面的順利令他相信自己有比我大的權限﹐是神的保守祝福﹐網站回復正常﹐他眼裡面離經叛道的文字都不見了﹐只有純正信仰的東西和造就﹐於是他就感到所謂平安﹐縱然他手段卑劣不正﹐他也因為結果符合了他的意識形態而感到自己是對的。不過﹐原來的版主回來﹐把討論區關閉﹐Puritan 的夢想就破滅了。我肯定 Puritan 受到了很大的打擊。


虛擬世界外﹐明光社也同樣操控了在教會信息的流通。有關同性戀成因﹑是否可以改變性傾向﹐都宣揚不符合事實的東西。但因為他們已經有如香港華人教會的正統﹐任何人對他們的做法﹑見解表示異議﹐都被質疑他們信仰的純正性和對神的忠誠﹗張國棟等一些希望理性處理同性戀問題的信徒﹐都是他們的眼中釘。

這就是基督教的黑暗面﹐面對異見﹐如果他們是有權力或者力量去打擊異見﹐他們會毫不猶疑去打擊異見。所謂愛仇敵是當他們打擊你之後才看見的。
與基要派論戰後﹐我變成了溫和﹑中間路線的福音派﹐我也不再相信那些傳統的護教材料﹐例如達爾文信耶穌﹑多數科學家是信徒之類。我有時候甚至在討論區也帶頭踢爆信徒這些謊言﹐令那些信徒非常尷尬。同樣﹐當基要派攻擊天主教﹐我跳出去維護天主教﹐把那些基要派的言論反駮的體無完膚﹐終於給人封為「大淫婦」。
有些信徒出於善意勸告我﹐說﹐比起永生和天堂﹐那些什麼科學事實等﹐都微不足道﹐我為何要出力維護這些事實﹑難道永生不夠﹖
我看那些所謂善意勸告﹐其實是一種糖衣毒藥﹕他們認為為了所謂永生﹐謊言﹑卑劣手段都可以容忍。我無法接受這種觀點﹐也因此與教會和其他信徒越走越遠。

可惜﹐這正是很對信徒的心態﹐永生重於一切﹐就算是說謊也不打緊。


同性戀者權利的爭議
在網上與基要主義者激烈論戰的日子﹐也因為同性戀者問題引發另外一輪的罵戰。

基要主義者對同性戀者的敵意和憎恨令我非常震驚。在其中一個論壇﹐就是影音使團的 iShare﹐一名同性戀者信徒分享他的生活﹐福音派和基要派信徒對他非常不滿﹐極力阻止他發言。我是一個很堅持言論自由的人﹐對他們阻止那位同性戀者信徒發言的做法極力反對﹐令很多原本和我友好的福音派信徒很憤怒﹐結果 iShare 在那次的大罵戰裡面引發了版主一次清版﹐此後該版掙扎一些日子後一厥不振。我和那位受到針對的同性戀者信徒成為朋友。

二○○五年﹐香港政府就性傾向歧視推出條例草案(SODO”, “Sexual Orientation Discrimination Ordinance” ﹐《性傾向歧視條例》)﹐在基督教內引發新一輪的論戰。
帶頭的明光社﹑維護家庭聯盟﹑性文化學會(其實來來去去這些組織的核心人物都是同一伙人﹐下稱「明光社陣營」)從美國的右派基督教引入了他們的立場﹑觀點﹑信息﹐在報紙刊登大幅廣告﹐用大量非科學﹑不確實的資料攻擊同性戀﹐也扭曲了歐美發生的同性戀爭取權利個案 , 我當然在《時代論壇》上面發表已經﹐也和很多基要派﹑福音派信徒爭論。我在時代論壇發表的文章﹐都給同性戀權益組織引用﹐因為我再次打中了「明光社陣營」要害﹕缺乏實質證據﹑扭曲或隱瞞事實等。

那年﹐我認識了一位對不認同「明光社陣營」手法的牧師。他屬於那種 seeker-sensitive﹐反對採取敵我矛盾事手段的牧師。他希望教會放下針對性﹑抹黑性的手法對待同性戀者﹐於是在《明報》和《時代論壇》發表文章﹐表達對「明光社陣營」手法的牧師的異議。很不幸﹐原來「明光社陣營」中來自教會的代表﹐和這位牧師是同一宗派。這位牧師的批評大概被那些「明光社陣營」中的人認為令宗派尷尬﹐最後他被自己的教會逼令離開。整件事情﹐涉及的教會和宗派都黑箱作業﹑企圖瞞天過海﹐但當那封飭令離職信被公開﹐顯示當時那教會根本是在撒謊﹐宗派總會和合謀撒謊。整個福音派對這個教會公然撒謊的行為採取沉默的態度﹐沒有指責﹑沒有討論﹐一切希望不了了之。

在當時論戰過程中﹐我審視了不少有關同性戀的資料﹐我開始相信﹐同性戀頂多是一種生理的狀態﹐並非道德上本然的錯誤。後來我更加發現﹐原來同性戀和精神病﹐在教會操縱的黑暗時代﹐是被當是鬼附的結果﹐後來才一併歸納為精神病﹐當中是沒有任何實質的科學研究結果支持的﹐因此﹐七﹑八十年代﹐全球各地的心理學﹑精神科學會都把同性戀從精神病﹑心理病的名單剔除。
這些不同的事件改變了我對聖經的看法﹐我不再認同「聖經無誤」﹐也否認同性戀是罪﹐也拒絕用所謂單純信心接受聖經和基督教的教導。
放棄其他基督教的東西﹐例如神跡﹑創造論﹑復活﹐對我來說只是遲早的問題。

我也和福音派一刀兩斷﹐變成了自由派基督教信徒。

基督教如何轉移視線(Red herring)
我初信基督教﹐接受栽培的時候﹐是有一本冊子給初信者。裡面每章都講一個基督教題目﹐例如人的墮落﹑救恩等。每章精心設計所謂討論題目﹐然後就提供了基督教的標準答案﹐附加聖經一段或多段的句子作為支持。
這些初信栽培材料﹐其實是給宗教門外漢與缺乏批判思維的人一個看來整齊有序﹑條理分明的信仰系統﹐讓讀的人以為自己真的找對了(初信的人﹐那時候仍然比較興奮﹑對信息接收很開放﹐同時你會發現﹐福音派﹑基要派傳教對象都是少年人﹐甚至有些打算連小學生也向他們傳﹐目的是看中了他們不會批判的特性﹐容易推銷他們的信仰)
我自己學習了批判思維﹑邏輯思維﹐慢慢發現這些預先包裝的信仰往往充滿「乞求問題」﹑「循環論證」﹑「隱藏假設」等謬誤。
要是我們倒過來不去採用那些初信信徒材料﹑不去灌輸那些信仰道理﹐而是要人直接從聖經裡面找到那些所謂基督教真理﹐結果就肯定不一樣﹐因為聖經的矛盾足以令那些基督教說是真理的東西一一推翻。
因此﹐基督教福音派﹑基要派要確保生產信徒是按照他們的規格出來﹐一定會使用灌輸的手法。信徒被提供了事先消毒了的材料﹐也從來沒有機會對比聖經矛盾﹑錯誤的地方﹐因此除非好像我在網上接觸大量資料﹑和非信徒接觸﹐令我不得不面對﹐否則我必定繼續蒙在鼓裡。
早期我面對非信徒挑戰﹐我理所當然採用基督教的護教材料去解釋聖經表面矛盾的部份﹐但當我開始懂得邏輯辯証思維﹐我發現那些所謂護教﹐都是 "學術玩弄", "舞文弄墨" and "轉移事先".

這就好像有人告訴你﹐有個美麗聰明的公主﹐懂得超過40種語言﹐智商200﹐能演奏所有樂器﹐長生不死﹐永遠不老。正常的人一定問﹐她住那裡﹐我想親自見見她﹐欣賞她美妙的才能。但那些跟隨她的人只是不斷給我看所謂她的作品﹑她做的東西﹑帶我去看她住的堡壘﹑王宮﹑別院﹐要我欣賞裡面的收藏品﹐不斷兜圈子﹐卻怎樣也不給我去見她本人。

同樣﹐基督教接近二千多年的歷史﹐基督教那些看來博大精深的教義﹑基督教的文化﹑基督教藝術﹐都只是帶人兜圈子﹐甚至有些人創作古怪的靈修書籍﹐例如倪柝聲那些根本語焉不詳﹑不著邊際的空話﹐令人以為基督教很高深莫測﹐其實仍然是避開最關鍵的問題﹕這神存在嗎﹖


就算是比較著重學術探索的神學院﹐也不敢逾越地去探討這個關鍵問題。如果你去探討﹐回答的人不會正面回答你﹐而是索問你所謂的屬靈狀況﹑審問你的信仰立場等等﹐都是轉移視線。

這就是我最終變成自由派信徒的原因。

自由派信徒的年代
我參加了一個小小的自由派信徒小組﹐大概一個月見一次。 . 發起者有見香港基督教太基要派﹑太福音派﹐部份像他和我的信徒﹐無非在那些教會聚會﹐希望給這些信徒另外的選擇可以參加宗教活動﹐而不受排擠。他希望好像美國的Unitarian Universalist﹐包容不同信仰的人。

我的小組認為聖經是人的作品﹐裡面有的是對人有益的教導﹐有些是錯誤的。那些錯誤是出於作者對科學﹑人文知識的缺乏認識。例如﹐大洪水其實不是原本「創世記」有的﹐這故事是在公曆前六百年左右才被加入「創世記」裡面。
福音派和基要派用的是學術扭曲﹑自欺手法去面對聖經的矛盾錯誤﹐這裡我們根本可以自由的批判聖經﹐我們相信信仰不是一些信條﹐而是我們如何對待終極關懷﹐ultimate concern﹐這個關懷能夠隨時代需要﹐為人類幸福而調節﹐不需要是死後復活﹑救恩﹐而多是關注今日﹑現在人類面對的問題﹐例如貧窮﹑不公義等。
我們對事情沒有任何標準答案﹐我們相信用簡單的原則﹐討論裡面尋求一些結論和看法。福音派和基要派根本不容許這種做法。我們相信人可以經驗靈性﹑聖化﹐而不需要基督復活﹑基督活著﹐這些僅是宗教符號。
我們相信聖經所載部份的道德教導並非全部合理﹐例如不許女子講道。很多都是出自過去社會對某些人的壓迫或者誤解﹐例如把精神病者說是鬼附。教會操控了這些千多年﹐令認真的研究﹐例如精神病﹑同性戀都無法客觀進行﹐因為教會早已經把它們定性了﹐拒絕了任何科學發現的新證據。

自由派基督教認為聖經有神話色彩﹐但有好的地方。神話部份是一些符號﹐它們轉化成為宗教的儀式。宗教儀式對人心理可以產生很激蕩的效果﹐因為它們盛載很戲劇化和感人的情節。

正統基督教信徒認為﹐屬靈經驗是神秘而不可當成純是道德原則﹐但當我了解更多﹐我發現這些經驗其實是一種人類對美的感應﹐好像我們看見美麗的大自然﹑美麗的藝術﹑美好的詩詞﹑偉大的樂曲﹐都引發了和宗教情感相似的經驗﹐這些都不需要神的存在可以引發的。宗教只是加上了一個事件發生的元素﹐有如 drama﹐有如電影。很多人可以因為一部電影或小說改變了他整個人。歸根結底﹐基督教﹐是人類想像下建構的成品。

我曾經認為﹐我既然做了23年信徒﹐這已經是我的身份﹐我不需要一下子放棄﹐只需要不再當基督教裡面那些不合乎科學的為神話便可﹐甚至做一個所謂 social Christian﹐即返教會只為見朋友﹐喜歡那些聚會就去那些﹐不需要同意教會教導的一切。甚至我也考慮成為無神基督教信徒(真的﹐有部份人把基督信仰的神那個部份去掉﹐只留下耶穌的道德教訓)

後來我發現所謂無神基督教根本是一種逃避﹐宗教本身就是一種對靈性﹑人生處理的雛形方法﹐它靠神秘﹑不理性的教導引發人跟隨﹐人以為自己掌握一個穩定﹑肯定﹑恆久不變的幫助自己﹐其實只是虛無。









科學﹕最終令我釋放的鑰匙
我除了看邏輯批判思維的書﹐也回到我的最愛 - 普及科學。我在中國公幹期間常去內地大間的書城跑﹐買很多科普書籍﹐因為實在太便宜了﹗

這些科普書籍令我再次對放下已久的科學產生興趣﹐也最後令我把基督教最基礎的信條放棄﹐完成了我離開基督教﹑開始我無神論人生。


與方舟發現者的罵戰
二○○五年影音使團公佈他們在土耳其亞拉臘山發現方舟遺骸﹐表示要籌巨大款項﹐是數以千萬﹐去進行方舟發掘﹑研究。

當我研究他們的聲稱﹐很快發現裡面根本沒有任何具體證據。我很憤怒﹐他們簡直當信徒是羊牯﹐只是拍攝幾個洞口的鏡頭﹑說拋石頭入去有空洞回音﹐發現一些所謂有洞的石頭以為就是錨石 (那些其實是當地基督徒建立的神壇﹐shrines) 。他們一點具體證據都沒有拿出就要信徒出錢﹐拍電影要信徒包場。
我和其他對此事情不滿意的信徒在《時代論壇》有發表意見表示異議﹐開始了和基要派﹑福音派另外一次論戰。
影音使團網頁載的發現方舟材料﹐裡面的都是抄其他地方的材料﹐全部都偽造和錯誤﹐連臭名遠播的Ron Wyatt 的材料都用 (他聲稱發現出埃及記裡面法老沉在海底的戰車) 。我發出公開信指出了他們網頁的錯誤﹐他們不得不把有關材料抽起﹐不過也是靜靜的做。我還逼得他們另外為此而開的討論區關閉

有關討論區的版主因此很憤怒﹐向討論區會員發電子郵件攻擊我作為報復。

我和其他反對影音使團這種浮誇做法的信徒最終引發基督教其他聲音﹐令影音使團不敢玩這種狼來了的籌款。

事件裡面﹐很多牧者都出來支持影音使團﹐還相信他們發現方舟。我很出奇﹐這些牧師是用什麼思維﹐今日如果大家問他們為何當日出來 endorse ﹐他們會如何答呢﹖

人類﹐以至宇宙來源的再思
辯論方舟時候我接觸了很多有關大洪水﹑地球年齡的資料﹐我開始注意到地球年齡﹐所謂 old Earth的問題﹐正是直接打擊聖經可信性的關鍵。方舟﹑大洪水根本不可能發生﹐聖經所載方舟的描述﹐尤其是它體積﹐根本不能夠在水航行﹑浮起﹐地球也不可能發生這次滅絕所有生物的水災。我於是問﹐地球來源﹑宇宙來源的問題﹐我想﹐如果連創世記都錯﹐耶穌的降生﹑復活等﹐豈不也更加可疑﹖

我繼續的研究證實了我的看法﹐聖經在歷史﹑科學不但不是無誤﹐而且有很多錯誤﹐根本不符合科學事實。創世記只是很多民族對天地出現的集合。

信徒在教會學習有關聖經的東西﹐都是舊而漠視新發現的材料。在考古﹑進化﹑生物﹑宇宙學﹑天文﹑物理等發現﹐對聖經古卷的研究﹐都顯示聖經﹐例如摩西五經﹐是一部經歷千多二千年演化的集合作品﹐摩西五經完成的年日是在摩西傳統死亡的那年後近一千年才定稿﹐其他作品也是不同人根據一些人物故事加以潤飾﹑夸大而創作﹐很多事情根本未必有發生﹐例如以色列人離開埃及﹑或者他們在迦南地的戰事﹐都是夸大其詞的故事。

這些夸大其詞的作品﹐目的當然是顯示他們所信的神是多麼厲害。

創世記的創造次序也不符合科學事實﹕植物在太陽出現前就有﹐那麼沒有陽光﹐植物沒有光合作用如何存活﹖大洪水﹐450英尺方舟﹐單用木材建造﹐也不可能﹗


此外﹐有關智慧設計論Intelligent Designs 和進化論Evolution的爭論﹐也讓我接觸很多這些論點﹐如果生命起源﹑宇宙起源純屬自然律﹑自然力量推動而非一個神的有意識舉動﹐那麼﹐一切基督教的東西﹐例如處女生子﹑基督復活﹑末日﹑神跡都不需要理會﹐因為基礎的神都已經被證明不存在。

只要看聖經記載耶穌降生的日期﹐其明顯的矛盾已經令有關記載完全不可信。就算耶穌是一個歷史人物﹐他肯定不是神。福音書記載的明顯出入顯示﹐這些耶穌降生的描述是後來的創作﹐用來令耶穌變得神化﹐只是他們沒有想過千多年後會給人拆穿。

其他﹐例如大希律屠殺孩子﹑耶穌復活的矛盾記載等﹐都是明顯的錯誤﹐根本如果是根據真實發生的事情﹐這種錯誤是絕對不會出現。出現這種錯誤是因為兩個作者是分部根不同的所謂信徒的道聽途說來描寫﹗

再說進化論﹐其實過往那些護教標準材料﹐即那些反對進化論的東西﹐我也發現是錯誤和不合理的﹐只要參考方舟子和其他有關的討論﹐就知道基督教如何對達爾文的作品和其他進化論作品斷章取義。

只要去 infidels.org﹐richarddawkins.net﹐www.xys.org 就不難發現﹐基督教那些反駮進化論文章全部是垃圾。

生物是進化而來﹐已經是科學界公認的科學事實﹐背後的理論﹐進化論只是細節上仍然需要找進一步的發現來確定﹐因此進化的理論﹐進化論是會隨新的發現修改的﹐但那些發現仍然是證明生物是進化而來到證據。
有一部是科學家方是民﹐筆名方舟子的書﹐裡面羅列了不同反駮基督教所謂創造論的文章﹐此外我也推薦 Richard Dawkins 的書本﹐例如 The God Delusion

不再回頭
二○○七年﹐我仍然參加基督教聚會和活動﹐我參加了葛福臨布道大會詩班。

我當時仍然不甘心放棄基督教﹐在測試我信仰的極限點﹐當大會越來越接近﹐我也看更多更多有關科學的材料。我最後要問題一個問題﹐我們生存的宇宙﹐是否從無到有﹑由一個智慧者創造呢﹖
結果思索下我已經發現一些謬誤﹕
(一)我們假設了宇宙﹐裡面的時間物質能量﹐是從無而來﹐即曾經有一個“無” 的時候
(二)既然有“無” 的時候﹐就需要被造﹗

又是 begging the question。為何不問﹐我們的宇宙起初是怎樣﹐而非一開始就假定一切是“沒有” 呢﹖
由此可見﹐基督徒是習慣了先有答案才反問的思維。

我閱讀有關現代宇宙學﹑物理的文章﹐發現原來宇宙從來不是一個真正的真空﹐也發現物質是能夠從所謂無產生 -- 虛擬粒子可以從能量自行產生。
而且﹐如果宇宙是物質﹑時間等是從來都存在﹐根本就不需要創造﹐神也不存在。物理學家量度宇宙的能量﹐發現裡面是一個常數。再加上我研讀 Richard Dawkins 介紹的東西﹐我已經非常肯定﹐神根本不可能存在。
到了這個地步﹐我知道我已經是無神論者﹐我不可以欺騙自己﹐我沒有出席葛福臨的大會。

最後我在二○○八年二月公開離教﹐三月向朋友透露我不再是基督徒的消息。

我回頭想﹐為何我可以留在基督教這麼久﹖因為﹐人希望有安全﹑恆定的環境﹐也希望有一群穩定的朋友﹐多年在基督教我已經有一群朋友﹐所以就算後來我技術上已經不是正統信徒﹐我也不願意離開。離開的初期是有擔懮﹑焦慮﹐但慢慢我發現我以後不需要維護一個本然矛盾的信仰系統﹐我卻感到無比的釋放。

我的靈性道路沒有停止﹐但基督教不是答案。我繼續用開放態度﹐用事實﹑邏輯審視﹐而不掉進今日宗教徒的陷阱﹐就是以為自己找到答案。

成長﹐得到心靈滿足﹐就是不要懼怕去未知的領域探索﹐就算探索要令自己放棄過去的信念﹐只要那是令自己得到幸福快樂﹑釋放和自由的﹐那是值得的。


適應
宣佈離教後的適應﹐我開始體會一些信仰﹑信條如何可以扭曲思維。

基督教信仰的應許﹐例如死後的復活﹑復活後世界沒有苦難﹐都令我們渴望﹑並且竭力保護這個信仰﹐因為這個結果是我們希望要的。我們看我們希望看見的﹐我們希望解決世上面對的苦﹐或者逃避他們﹐基督教是這種逃避的場所。

我們害怕變動﹑不穩定﹐也不願意相信大自然是那麼機械化﹑無情的﹐因此就把人的感情投射去大自然﹐最終就給自己製造了神。但更加吸引不代表它是真實的。
福音派﹑基要派最喜歡把世界發生一切事都說成出自神的作為﹐例如二○○四年南亞大海嘯﹐他們說是神懲罰信奉異教的印尼﹑印度﹑泰國等﹐卻不知道原來很多廟宇都沒有損毀。
福音派﹑基要派也會用傳福音去合理化他們不當的行為﹐因此﹐那些充滿錯誤虛構信息的福音材料他們到現在仍然厚顏無恥的繼續用﹐縱然已經一次一次給人指出裡面的謬誤。

這些行為﹐不是直接證明神不存在的證據﹐卻是引發我思考基督教信仰真偽的導火線。

結語
我的故事肯定傷了很多我的基督徒朋友的心﹐令他們震驚。可以的話﹐我當然希望繼續維持友誼﹐不過我也知道很多會把我當是陌路人。個別的也許會企圖把我挽回﹐不過我相信他們是白費心機。

幸運是﹐我仍然認識其他不同朋友﹐離開基督教給我的自由﹑釋放﹑快樂是難以形容的。

附錄﹕

基督徒一系列為了保護信仰而踐踏學術﹑公然說謊的行為和有關網站
要學懂什麼叫厚顏無恥不難﹐看看以下這些基督教宣揚他們信仰可以採取的卑鄙手段﹕
1 Sir David Attenborough 是BBC 一系列自然科學節目的老牌主持人﹐曾經在電視分享說他不時收到「創造論者」信件辱罵他宣揚反基督教的科學。一家基督教福音派管理的荷蘭廣播電臺還明目張膽地把他的一個節目私自剪接﹐刪剪了所有與進化和進化論有關的鏡頭和Sir David 提及進化論的對白﹐甚至在部份對白用人配音改掉原來的說話(例如﹕ Sir David's 原來對白為 "We will look at the lives of our closest relatives," 被改成"we will look at the monkeys."﹐另外一處﹐原來對白是70 million years ago, something happens," 變成"a very long time ago something happens". ) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth ... 0/02/scihist102.xml
2 「拆字神學」﹐不但在海外華人教會蔓延﹐有人居然把這些東西翻譯為英文 http://www.answersingenesis.org/Docs/388.asp ﹐連同外國人一起強姦中華文化﹐真希望漢字學者群起表態﹐阻止這種學說流行。

到現在﹐我未看見任何基督教教會有勇氣公開﹑指名道姓地譴責這些踐踏學術﹑公然說謊的行為。
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹

回復 53# 的帖子

Please check email.
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
中文版的見證已刊在>這裡<。
支持鼓勵每位離教者 › 閹割神父 刻不容緩 ‹
回復 61# Guest from 113.252.177.x


    其實離教就是突破自己的限制啦,真不明白為何不離教。
回復 66# Guest from 113.252.177.x


    你看過本網的離教見證後,就知道離教並不容易。
返回列表
高級模式 | 發新話題
B Color Image Link Quote Code Smilies
換一個