I basically grew up and was a believer for as long as I can remember. I didn't have that 'turning from sin' conversion story because for the entirety of my life, I had basically abhorred sin and tried to practice what I believed to be righteous living. Perhaps because that is my sorry, unlike many believers I became someone that "majored in minors" and tried to be very analytical and "doctrinally sound" from a young age. I always yearned for a deeper knowledge and understanding and felt that I should be able to back up my beliefs with solid reasonable arguments and proof that I was correct. For years the status quo that I had went unchallenged, (at least in my mind) as I felt I could and had always "defended the faith" well and proved my points when discussing issues of faith with those that had opposing beliefs (many who believe today likely feel this way as well I'm sure).
Things started changing as I found that many that disbelieved the scriptures also analyzed them and were able to break them down in an unbiased way not reflecting the preconceptions of their particular brand of faith. That challenged me to do the same and surprisingly I came to many of the same conclusions that they had. I went from a very fundamental view of heaven/hell, the soul/spirit, and premillennialism to a view of Heaven/Hell and the soul that was more in line with 7th Day Adventists and JW's than my own denomination. After that and more intense study, I found that my understanding of the scriptures was more in line with what partial preterists believed than what was being taught at most churches I knew of.
So over the course of a 3 or 4 year period I went from a "Hell, fire, and brimstone" advocate to somewhat of a Partial Preterist that believed, unlike most Preterists that a literal return of Jesus and resurrection of the saints had taken place way back in the late 1st century and that man was a living soul that died completely at death as opposed to man having a living soul that lives on beyond the grave.
In the midst of all of that, I was still a stance Bible believing Christian advancing the sola-scriptura mantra for all to see and hear. I had become subconsciously skilled at rationalizing the irrational in order to mask some of the issues that many found problematic with the scriptures. My tipping point was when I finally realized that the Bible in fact did have some real issues and errors that could not be rectified without having to change or ignore many scriptures. Such issues include Luke's account of Stephen's speech in Acts 7 where Stephen, a man filled with and speaking through God's Holy Spirit errantly discussed various Old Testament stories. In addition there is also the big issue of Jesus not fulfilling many of the Messianic prophecies mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures and having NT writers depict things as Messianic that had no Messianic connotations in the Hebrew Scriptures. Also, there was the issue of Jesus apparently (I say apparently due to there being no historic documentation of such a major human event) NOT returning in the 1st century as was proclaimed by him and his disciples. Finally, and this may seem like a small issue to some, but the issue of when Jesus was born and the contradictory records of Luke and Matthew as it pertains to this really caused me concern. Luke has Jesus being born when Quirainous (sp ?) was governor of Syria and during the time of a census, which if correct would have had to occur at or around the year 6 CE. Matthew has Jesus being born during the life and reign of Herod the Great who happened to die in the year 4 bc. These accounts are irreconcilable and force one to conclude that either Matthew or Luke's account is wrong, or both are wrong.
If we must pick and choose what is right, how can we know what if anything in scripture is right? Because of this I could no longer honestly affirm that the scriptures inerrant or divinely inspired, and I had to come to grips with the idea that my entire faith was based on believe in 2000 year old writings of men that were not writing God-given and inspired words, but rather writers that wrote from the point of view of their beliefs, prejudices, opinions, and limited knowledge. In view of the apparent inconsistencies of the scriptures, it TOTALLY has shaken my faith and caused me to be doubtful of any hope that I had acquired through faith in the scriptures. If the scriptures cannot be trusted, then what reason is there to believe that they are correct about Jesus, eternal life, etc.?
I do not believe that Jesus is God manifest anymore for reasons listed above as well as various other reasons. Paramount among them is because many passages of scripture speak out against such even being a possibility. For the most part in the scripture's depiction of Jesus it shows readers that Jesus was God's Anointed huMAN as opposed to a GodMAN. I used to believe and for a while WANTED TO continue believing that Jesus' resurrection happened and made it possible that I too will one day be raised to a life without end under the peaceful reign of Jesus and his Bride within the all-encompassing universal Kingdom of Heaven. But my want to, the evidence, and the facts do not equate; so I had to face the realistic possibility/probability that no reality that I hoped for existed in reality. And as time passed, I have learned to better cope with what I once felt to be a sad reality, as just the reality of the human experience I get to partake in.
I treasured my faith, I lived by my faith, and I defended my faith to the nth degree until it became clear that my faith was baseless, not founded upon reality, and would provide me with nothing more than a hope of a future that is not guaranteed, verifiable, and perhaps not even realistic. In the end what has been lost is the hope and expectation I once carried inside my heart. Regaining that hope has no bearing on the reality of anything, so as Paul said, "I count everything but loss" for the cause of knowing truth.
Things started changing as I found that many that disbelieved the scriptures also analyzed them and were able to break them down in an unbiased way not reflecting the preconceptions of their particular brand of faith. That challenged me to do the same and surprisingly I came to many of the same conclusions that they had. I went from a very fundamental view of heaven/hell, the soul/spirit, and premillennialism to a view of Heaven/Hell and the soul that was more in line with 7th Day Adventists and JW's than my own denomination. After that and more intense study, I found that my understanding of the scriptures was more in line with what partial preterists believed than what was being taught at most churches I knew of.
So over the course of a 3 or 4 year period I went from a "Hell, fire, and brimstone" advocate to somewhat of a Partial Preterist that believed, unlike most Preterists that a literal return of Jesus and resurrection of the saints had taken place way back in the late 1st century and that man was a living soul that died completely at death as opposed to man having a living soul that lives on beyond the grave.
In the midst of all of that, I was still a stance Bible believing Christian advancing the sola-scriptura mantra for all to see and hear. I had become subconsciously skilled at rationalizing the irrational in order to mask some of the issues that many found problematic with the scriptures. My tipping point was when I finally realized that the Bible in fact did have some real issues and errors that could not be rectified without having to change or ignore many scriptures. Such issues include Luke's account of Stephen's speech in Acts 7 where Stephen, a man filled with and speaking through God's Holy Spirit errantly discussed various Old Testament stories. In addition there is also the big issue of Jesus not fulfilling many of the Messianic prophecies mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures and having NT writers depict things as Messianic that had no Messianic connotations in the Hebrew Scriptures. Also, there was the issue of Jesus apparently (I say apparently due to there being no historic documentation of such a major human event) NOT returning in the 1st century as was proclaimed by him and his disciples. Finally, and this may seem like a small issue to some, but the issue of when Jesus was born and the contradictory records of Luke and Matthew as it pertains to this really caused me concern. Luke has Jesus being born when Quirainous (sp ?) was governor of Syria and during the time of a census, which if correct would have had to occur at or around the year 6 CE. Matthew has Jesus being born during the life and reign of Herod the Great who happened to die in the year 4 bc. These accounts are irreconcilable and force one to conclude that either Matthew or Luke's account is wrong, or both are wrong.
If we must pick and choose what is right, how can we know what if anything in scripture is right? Because of this I could no longer honestly affirm that the scriptures inerrant or divinely inspired, and I had to come to grips with the idea that my entire faith was based on believe in 2000 year old writings of men that were not writing God-given and inspired words, but rather writers that wrote from the point of view of their beliefs, prejudices, opinions, and limited knowledge. In view of the apparent inconsistencies of the scriptures, it TOTALLY has shaken my faith and caused me to be doubtful of any hope that I had acquired through faith in the scriptures. If the scriptures cannot be trusted, then what reason is there to believe that they are correct about Jesus, eternal life, etc.?
I do not believe that Jesus is God manifest anymore for reasons listed above as well as various other reasons. Paramount among them is because many passages of scripture speak out against such even being a possibility. For the most part in the scripture's depiction of Jesus it shows readers that Jesus was God's Anointed huMAN as opposed to a GodMAN. I used to believe and for a while WANTED TO continue believing that Jesus' resurrection happened and made it possible that I too will one day be raised to a life without end under the peaceful reign of Jesus and his Bride within the all-encompassing universal Kingdom of Heaven. But my want to, the evidence, and the facts do not equate; so I had to face the realistic possibility/probability that no reality that I hoped for existed in reality. And as time passed, I have learned to better cope with what I once felt to be a sad reality, as just the reality of the human experience I get to partake in.
I treasured my faith, I lived by my faith, and I defended my faith to the nth degree until it became clear that my faith was baseless, not founded upon reality, and would provide me with nothing more than a hope of a future that is not guaranteed, verifiable, and perhaps not even realistic. In the end what has been lost is the hope and expectation I once carried inside my heart. Regaining that hope has no bearing on the reality of anything, so as Paul said, "I count everything but loss" for the cause of knowing truth.
