Christian deconstruction can be a confusing term because of the different contextual uses. Broadly, Christian deconstruction refers to the act of a Christian questioning or “deconstructing” beliefs. Some people see this as a movement, while others like myself see deconstruction as either a path to relinquishing Christianity or a way for Christians to dilute the less toxic aspects of their faith. I am not a fan of Christian deconstruction because many deconstructionists remain Christian while rejecting the parts of the faith they find unsavory.
Many deconstructionists also remain Christians, go to church, and act like Christians, but worse yet, become more irrational than traditional Christians. Picking apart religion for what works and doesn’t forms an arbitrary belief system just as prone if not more prone to irrationality since no consistency underlies the belief system. This form of Christian deconstruction is a problem because the person remains a Christian complete with much of the polluted thinking formed from this religion.
Christian deconstructionists redden my bullshit thermometer’s top, which I have discussed in the past as a form of Christian manipulation or double-talk. However, deconstruction’s ambiguousness also leads to other more meaningful interpretations. In the following video from Genetically Modified Skeptic, the host discusses deconstruction as questioning Christianity which preceded leaving the religion. More than just presenting a process of doubt, this video clarifies the cause of the many biases people hear during and after deconstructing Christianity. Our host also uses in-group bias as the cause of biases and even compares these with atheists who commit the same fallacy. This video presents two important concepts of determining and justifying bias in the context of deconstruction.
People deconstructing or doubting their faith can become confused by in-group biases and not meaning to worsen the confusion, but there is a point about bias to consider.
When is a bias justifiable?
Though well-articulated in the video, fear of bias’s fallacies can back an atheist into a rational, harmful corner. I am not empathetic to Christians because they control most of the resources in the world and their religion has profoundly and negatively impacted millions of people, including themselves.
Are there Christians who are not racists? Sure. Are there Christians who are not self-serving? Sure? Do they count compared with their racist, self-serving brethren? Absolutely not. The proof of this reveals in their unwillingness to fight their more racists and corrupt elements. How many Christians protested Trump’s decision to reduce LGBTQ rights? How many Christians are on the front line opposing the overturning of Roe vs. Wade?
They are negligible.
The ‘good’ Christians support indirectly or directly their more corrupt brothers and sisters. As someone vying with faith, viewing Christians suspiciously just makes good sense. Does this advice go for all religions? No, because not all religions are so duplicitous. Buddhists don’t seem to care whether you believe in their faith or not and certainly are not supporting creationism and laws that empower racists and bigots. The same goes for Judaism.
What about Islam?
Christians love pointing the finger at Islam, and besides being a red herring, Islam presents a geographic issue. The Christians in the United States are the problem because they control society, not the Islamic people of the Middle East or America. If you are Islamic and questioning your faith, there are plenty of atheists who can support your inquiry if Christian Pollution is too Christian-focused.
If you read this article and question Christianity, holding Christianity in contempt is not a fallacious sin. You wouldn’t be investigating, doubting, or deconstructing Christianity if something about the religion didn’t spur your angst. Trying to be empathetic towards Christianity may ultimately lead you back and deeper into the religion hurting you.
Photo by Pisit Heng on Unsplash
