Non-conformist Christians and True Atheists

On Sundays I have brunch with my brother to discuss the last week, what goals we achieved, which ones we now have set, and have a sort of therapy session. This time he went to church with his Christian girlfriend. My brother is a diehard atheist. Not a communist, like most atheists are, but a seeker of truth with a damningly tough skepticism. Today’s lesson was on the Hebrews rejecting the thought of a prophet, and demanding a king like all the other competing empires. God took great offence to this, removed his blessings and grace, and allowed the Hebrews to suffer great losses and tribulations. My brother likened this to a father putting a child in a lake, and asking them to reach for his hand. When the child rejects the offering of help and decides to learn how to swim, the father becomes angry and throws weights on the child.

The night before I had watched a video on the Psychology of Conformity which sparked the idea for this post. His girlfriend had brought up the book The Christian Atheist by Craig Groeschel which has the basic thesis of Christians claiming to believe in God, but living a hedonistic lifestyle, ultimately making modern Christianity a form of virtue signaling. This is why I left Christianity behind, but could never leave the teachings and principles. I understood the folly of not following and striving for true virtue. I was called by many people I’ve had discussions with a philosophical Christian; not operating and living on a belief, but still walking a path seeking truth and learning how to use it in an honorable way. I had observed that most Christian churches had become country clubs, where people preen and flash how well their life is. I don’t mind if people show off their wealth, but being in an echo chamber with Stepford wives and their families will drive a single man insane. His girlfriend is a genuine Christian, she both believes and lives the gospel. I admire her for that. That path is a lonely one, along with my brother’s and mine.

In the video the discussion is about the heroism of the individual that decides to become their own person versus cultural heroism where one conforms to societal norms and adopts a role in the system set in place. It lays out a very Matrix-esk dichotomy where everyone that is still plugged into the matrix is a potential enemy to the self-empowered individual. In our talk my brother, like others we have had, he made it clear that he did not prescribe to the idea of destiny. Why should he have to walk a path cleared by god, when he could hack his own path into the wilderness? He would take much more pride in a small success that was entirely his. This is a very masculine stance: willing to take risk and danger at face value, fight entropy and darkness full on, consequences be damned. God was the one who made him, so he must understand my brother’s hardheadedness. If he were to throw him into a lake of fire he would be committing a hypocritical act on a cosmic level. His girlfriend took the stance of showing appreciation and love to her heavenly father for the grand design of the universe. To walk the straight and narrow path of virtue knowing that she would make mistakes, but could be forgiven if she simply corrected herself the best she could and continued to strive to do goodness in life. A very feminine stance.

Take notice that despite wanting to walk different paths with different mindsets, they both seek to continually better themselves. This is why they are my friends. The nonconformist Christian and the true atheist want the same transcendental goals. They have the same wants for the world; for humanity to face truth, and learn from its damnation to rise up in dignity and honor before embarking on the next grand endeavor. They both understand that there will be a hard time ahead. That sins have mounted from former generations that we have been indebted to, monetarily, materially, and metaphysically have been accumulating for a very long time. From this I have developed a hypothesis that a next great law of existence will be revealed. I will go over this in another post in the future. I would invite you to tear it apart and expose its blind spots when it is posted. The more it is assailed by scrutiny the stronger it becomes.

My stance leans closer to my brothers than his girlfriends, but it is simply this: I do not care if this is my one shot, that after this I will rot in the ground, or that after I die I will continue on a path to attain a glorious ethereal existence. Not matter what, in this life I will outsmart, have greater will than, and fight entropy, darkness, and evil. If I die and continue on, I would want whatever creator there is to put me into the most effective position to continue the battle. Like Jordan Peterson I have experienced unexplainable phenomena, like Jules (Samuel L. Jackson) in Pulp Fiction I have been in situations that I should have died, but didn’t, and yet I still only accept what can be proven, placing things that can’t be rationalized on a back burner to be approached once more information is gathered in my travels.

Ultimately I think things will become weirder, more dangerous, and power more decentralized before things are steadied and balanced. What is your opinion on that thought? What is your stance? Does it align with my brother or his girlfriend more and in what ways? I invite you to please leave thoughts and comments because I’m here to learn. I appreciate the read and am glad that you have joined the steem community.

(1)

Suggested reading: The Christian Atheist by Craig Groeschel, 4th Generation Warfare Handbook by William S. Lind, Modern Man in Search of a Soul by Carl Jung