How Christians Try to Co-opt the Language of Skepticism

The idea of "deconstruction" is naturally threatening to Christians. In recent years, many former believers started coming out and talking about how they re-evaluated their faith and gave up traditional Christian belief or even belief in God. This seems to imply that Christianity doesn't stand up well to open inquiry, so naturally Christian speakers are going to have a motivation to counter this narrative. In today's video we'll watch Gavin of "Truth Unites" set out to do that. He tells his own version of a deconstruction story, but he does so with the stated goal of showing that deconstructing your faith can lead to STRONGER Christian belief.
Original Video: • Spiritual Deconstructi...
STUFF ABOUT ME AND WHERE TO FIND ME
My Patreon: / prophetofzod
My Facebook: / prophet-of-zod
My Twitter: / prophet_of_zod
My Email: [e-mail]
My mailing address:
PO Box 773024
Eagle River, AK 99577
MUSIC CREDITS
The opening and closing theme is based on "The Game is On" by @RossBugden (The song is royalty/copyright free and intended by the composer to be freely used by others. Any copyright claims made on the music are fraudulent).
The arrangement used in this video was created for use on this channel by @FireflyProductions - Links at campsite.bio/c...
Website: www.prophetofzod.com (Still under construction, but you can find a little merch and an incomplete set of links to my back library)

[@jonnowds]

Just another retread of the ol’ “Hey, I used to be an atheist too, I was SOOO mad at God for a while…” 🙄

[@Darius-kl3jk]

😂

[@blacbraun]

I was really mad at the Easter Bunny for a long time but now it's my god. (Thanks for the eggs Lord!)

[@NA-vz9ko]

🐰 🙏

[@theclyde950]

Haha mad that he wants himself to completely take over a moral argument. Lord of the flies anyone

[@Szriko]

To be fair, that's 99% of atheists. They're always so angry. At women, at themselves, at each other, at god... It's a self-destructive world view, and very sad.

[@jonr9467]

If you consciously limit your deconstruction's scope it's because you KNOW how fragile your belief system is.

[@trafficjon400]

Yes' its a dammed if we do and dammed if we don't. a frustrating thought of nothing after life hits harder than the big bang for many possibly coming sooner than we think. 🙄

[@LukeSumIpsePatremTe]

Sadly most people don't care if what they believe is true.

[@ReluctantApostate]

I hear what you're saying but disagree. Deconstructing always has a limit. What is being deconstructed? For some of us it's about finding what is true (what is valid and reasonable to accept) which is at the core of all our beliefs and unravels everything. But for someone like him it's not deconstructing his belief or religion and whether it's true or valid, but rather investigating aspects of it that he's challenged by given his experience. The difference to me is sincerity. There certainly may be a part to some people that are afraid to look closely at the core aspects of their religion, but my experience shows it's actually the opposite and that they couldn't fathom their faith bring untrue, and becomes as fundamental or commonsense to their understanding as gravity, and so gets ignored. Identifying our own biases and assumptions are inherently difficult.

[@LukeSumIpsePatremTe]

​@@ReluctantApostate He likes to use the term deconstruction to mislead himself and his audience. Redefining terms to make it seem like he is actually being intellectually honest. I guess I agree that he can do no better. But instead of defending himself and his boneheaded ideas, I pity him. What an intellectually bankcrupt coward.

[@gayasparagus]

Perhaps subconsciously.

[@REAVER117]

"I've deeply deconstructed my faith and evaluated the alternatives." also "Evolution is just the strong devouring the weak." I'm gonna press X...

[@Jcs57]

Yeah his complete mischaracterization of evolution was a red flag. I suspect his journey was a short trip through the hallowed halls of the Discovery Institute for a heaping helping dose of misinformation and pseudoscience.

[@hackman669]

Tripping on drugs 🍄

[@david2869]

At least he did say he wasn`t a scientist. However, he didn't listen to any scientists, either!

[@gothboschincarnate3931]

the weak are meat, that the strong do eat...i could yawn a story about the 1st time i met ole Georgie...or a story about the worst nightmare i ever had...

[@canwelook]

Darwin never described evolution as survival of the fittest. It is better described as the survival of the adequate. To pass on genes the only prerequisite is being sufficiently adequate in that context to survive to reproduce.

[@mbs8001]

He sounds like someone who had doubts, realized he was wrong about some things, got really scared and then looked to Christian apologetics as the facts to reassure himself. Been there, done that….Worked for about 5 years lol. Works for others for life.

[@manatwilight8434]

This ^

[@Darius-kl3jk]

worked for me for a couple months, god only knows my elation when I THOUGHT that x y & z arguments reassured my faith

[@Jcs57]

As someone who endured 17 years of compulsory indoctrination attempts that did not work I lack the context to understand how someone gets _constructed_ in the first place. Even as a kid my parents said I absolutely rejected gods, gremlins, ghosts, or Santa claims, opposite of the Christian claims of everyone is born with a innate knowledge of god I apparently came fully equipped with a bullshit detector.

[@anegrey]

Yep, spent ages 17 through 20ish doing this. In high school I used to go to the Borders books and read a little of an atheist philosopher's book, get scared and go back and read some CS Lewis to calm myself down. My last stronghold was NT Wright, whom I read freshman year of college. Then I gave up my faith because my atheist physics major friend had way better arguments than I had. But I almost got argued back into it reading Kierkegaard's "Sickness Unto Death". Lots of back and forth before I finally decided I was tired of the whole thing and other points of view were more compelling.

[@Byrvurra]

This guy's a pastor right? Then he has even more um material persuasions for finding a way to maintain his faith than the average person.

[@nadirku]

The fact that Gavin name dropped William "I don't think there is anything wrong with killing children if god commands it" Lane Craig as his "authoritative expert" for discussing the "Moral Argument" seems like something that has aged especially poorly...

[@bass-tones]

William “Low Bar Bill” Craig.

[@goldenalt3166]

The moral argument has always claimed the Bible as the moral source. Craig admitting to the biblical view hasn't change that.

[@Isaac-hm6ih]

​@@goldenalt3166Yes, he just didn't try to hide it.

[@marcomoreno6748]

​@@goldenalt3166 has it though? The "moral argument" from theists is like usageof the term "faith" by theists. Ask four of them and you got five different answers. That's the biggest problem. There's as many gods, as many "biblical moralities" as there are pews. Everyone has their own little version of god and the bible they interpret vs what'scoming down the pulpit. To neurotypical people this doublethink resides in peace. I blame my autism for not being able to sleep with these incongruencies.

[@Isaac-hm6ih]

@@marcomoreno6748 Being autistic myself, I've never been able to properly understand religion. I sometimes put it down to actually taking the claims seriously.

[@Kingpin1880]

This guy deconstructs like how I did my homework; learn the bare minimum necessary to convince the ignorant that I did it, and then carry on doing what I wanted to do without actually doing the homework. I'm so glad that my dad knew enough to call me out on my BS.

[@Amoebatirith]

"Don't deconstruct your actual faith, just the bad parts." Well how can you tell which parts are the bad unless you test it all? Plus, as most people say when they start deconstruction, if my faith and the things I believe in are true, then they should stand up to scrutiny.

[@starfishsystems]

But ANYTHING that appeals to faith as its epistemic basis is in for some serious trouble. And when someone continues to refer to their entire religious worldview as "faith" ... well, that person is either not engaged in honestly investigation, or is so badly confused that any substantive effort at investigation is doomed to fail.

[@craigsmith1443]

_if my faith and the things I believe in are true, then they should stand up to scrutiny._ And they do in the case of Christianity, as long as our 'scrutiny' is honest and complete.

[@rik80280]

“There’s a guardrail” … is super telling. Everything else is weird and shaky and doesn’t hold up, but rest your hand here and ignore the crumbling ground underneath of you.

[@trafficjon400]

ya' underneath of you? this has been happening no different but actually more died daily in the millions over a 1000 years ago and a lot by Slavery. less are actually dying comparing. nothing shaking like the past except people might live a bit longer depending on location health. world war 1 then WW -2 Came about 50 years after! soo' a war should be coming by the history clock! looks like World war 3 we hope not. things in a way may look better but its the way it happens when the big one hits with out enough notice will be catastrophic what ever it is it loves death suffering.

[@samuelbrown3405]

"What if, instead of this shaky ass 3000 year old rope bridge, we went with the solid one that was built with science and modern materials?" "COMMIE!!!! DEMON!!!!"

[@SapientCephalopod]

This "Deconstruction" narrative reminds me of a scene in the Jim Carrey movie "Liar Liar". Opposing counsel presents evidence. "I object" - Lawyer (Jim Carrey) "On what grounds" - Judge "It's devestating to my case" - Lawyer The behavior of some "Christians" is making it hard for him to defend his faith.

[@UlexiteTVStoneLexite]

If only they would actually stick to their standards and not lie

[@stanleyhyde8529]

​@@UlexiteTVStoneLexite But they can't move the goalposts if they pick a standard and stick with it. How are they supposed to do apologetics this very important key to almost every argument?

[@hackman669]

Loved that movie and "The Mask!"😂

[@TheLithp]

"STOP BREAKING THE LAW, ASSHOLE!"

[@LOwens-xf8yo]

One of Carrey’s best.

[@solomonverrico]

If he actually tried to deconstruct his faith, it's like he did that thing where you cling to the side of the pool and slowly make your way to the deep end, but when the bottom dropped enough he rushed back to the shallow end, jumped out and ran for the nearest shower so he could get his hair wet enough to act like he really went swimming. There's just no way to make that sound poetic.

[@omnikevlar2338]

Oh my days! perfect analogy! And it describes very well the fear that it shows amongst the tribe of people. We have to be aware of these as fellow apes how much evolution can drive our behavior. It was definitely a weird experience and still is that we are playing this game of evolution after coming out of fundamentalism Christianity.

[@NoodleKeeper]

Damn. That IS a good analogy. He basically deconstructed his culture only. With just the tiniest dip into the faith.

[@Ponera-Sama]

Saying that you want to deconstruct "the bad things about the faith, but not the faith itself" is like setting up a campfire and saying you want to burn "the flammable parts of the firewood, but not the wood itself".

[@trafficjon400]

Something with no anecdotal evidence is a myth full of fallacies and why confusion and frustration is so apparent in honest begging Believers who never got the promises is the big spiritual problem. People believers Christians went deep nocked begging for mercy!!!! no answer and the irony of it saying knock and i'll answer became very frustrating is why many are starting to become skeptical is the soul apparent truth.

[@stevewebber707]

To only deconstruct the "bad parts" denotes a presupposition of what is right and wrong, before examination. I would call what he did, at best reformation.

[@LuisGonzalez-oy3ku]

I would call it presuppositional cherry picking, which is contradictory to legitimate deconstruction. But, I agree with your general assessment.

[@FredHarvey779]

Gavin was not asking questions, but worried about others asking questions! He went looking not for truth but for answers to those questions that could reinforce his desired belief. Thanks again PoZ!

[@TheLithp]

I hate to say it, but I think there's a distinct possibility this was entirely strategic & he chose the term "deconstruction" as a way to drag people in the process of leaving the faith back in.

[@trafficjon400]

@@TheLithp Then his faith is based on his dishonesty, to falsely store something that has nothing but a belief with no anecdotal spiritual evidence.

[@andrewolson5471]

This sounds more like a disassociation from problematic people than an honest deconstruction of belief.

[@hackman669]

Whatever sleep 💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒😑😪💤😴🙄😒

[@tim-climber84]

I feel like the one defining aspect of deconstruction is the willingness to go wherever the journey takes you. The only guardrail I’d encourage is keep empathy for others along the way

[@CharlesPayet]

100%. When you realize that that intellectual honesty has to come first, regardless of the consequences, that’s what I would call the beginning of “true deconstruction.”

[@choo-choo4922]

Thank you for actually acknowledging that Christianity and religion are inherently flawed and worth deconstructing. I get sick of hearing otherwise good atheist creators having to caveat and kowtow to religion as if it is a good or reasonable position. The "I don't care what you believe, its your behavior not your faith" argument is the biggest flaw in so many progressive atheist's thinking. I do care what other people believe, and people should believe true and helpful things. Your beliefs effect your behavior.

[@ziploc2000]

Affect verb Effect noun

[@Isaac-hm6ih]

Some religions can be fine, in my opinion. Ones which aren't in conflict with reality, using symbolism and speculation to tentatively add things. But for example anything involving approving of an infinite hell is... morally problematic, even if many people manage to mostly not believe it on a daily basis.

[@Uryvichk]

@@ziploc2000 Technically, "effect" is also a verb. In verb form it means "to cause or bring about." As one could argue that one's beliefs cause or bring about one's behavior, "effect" could be grammatically cromulent in that sentence.

[@TheLithp]

@@Isaac-hm6ih I don't think there's any such thing as a religion that isn't in conflict with reality. To me, the defining feature of a religion is belief in the supernatural, which is inherently opposed to reality as the evidence indicates. If it's just symbolic traditions, then I wouldn't even say that's a religion anymore for the same reason I don't think of it as religious to celebrate Christmas. If, on the other hand, the symbolism is being used to make speculations about reality, why would we suspect that we could learn anything about reality through "symbolism"? It's true that science uses speculation, even thought experiments which are kind of analogous to symbolism, but it's in a very specific way where the idea is to search for evidence. Not all religions are equally dogmatic, but I don't see how any can survive a search for evidence that continues to pull up absolutely nothing without the believer having their proverbial thumb on their mental scale.

[@PamelaMerrittadk]

@@TheLithpReligions are designed to escape reality. Star Trek, Star Wars, Sun Worship... All have their fans and their Canon.

[@mainecoonmami]

I fully expected my deconstruction to do that for me. It didn’t. It wouldn’t if a person took the journey seriously. HE REMODELED HIS FAITH.

[@spliter88]

Same, it's a pretty scary tipping point where you realize deconstructing your faith is not leading you toward stronger faith and actual evidence for got, but instead toward the inescapable conclusion that god's nor real.

[@schen7913]

"I didn't know apologetics well. Now I do".

[@goldenalt3166]

Also, "stories are powerful ways to convince people."

[@DarkWizardPrince]

What if I am wrong. Yep the ol fear of hell.

[@johnpro2847]

the fear aspect is their big stick..but is it realistic for a sympathetic god who claims he made humans.Lucky it is just made up ..amen

[@jedsithor]

I take the opposite view. I wish I was wrong. I fear non existence (I know, I won't exist to fear it when I'm dead but that doesn't help me now lol). I wish I could believe that there was an afterlife so that I could go on living. I'd rather go to hell (I'd be running the place within a week) than not exist at all. Unfortunately, the laws of nature don't seem to be in my favour.

[@marcomoreno6748]

What if you're wrong.... and Cthulhu drives you to eternal insanity.

[@charlesbrowne9590]

I swear there ain’t no heaven And I pray there ain’t no hell But I ain’t gonna know by livin’ Only by dyin’ gone tell.

[@brianm6337]

"What if I'm wrong..." After seeing the way the world is, and who is making the world hell- If I'm wrong- I don't wanna be right, for my own sanity (or what little is left).

[@SapientCephalopod]

Demolition of faith has to be complete before a skeptical worldview can be constructed. Anyone who truly abolishes faith must find a new basis for their epistomology, and if the new basis is skepticism it would be impossible to revert to any religious worldview which requires faith.

[@philm7758]

I don't know about that. Skepticism is a process, which means it is never complete. Requiring completeness then becomes a double standard, from which you hold skepticism exempt, which would be faith...

[@taylorlibby7642]

I have problems with the idea of "complete" in this context, and I guess I have problems with the word "impossible" in almost any context. ; )

[@RPruett78]

@@philm7758 I was trying to figure out how to get this idea across, and then I read your comment. Nicely said.

[@RPruett78]

My second thought was the use of the word demolition. Deconstruction and demolition are two different things. Deconstruction allows you to take your beliefs apart piece by piece and see if there are any valuable insights that can be applied in a useful way outside of religious practice. Demolition leaves a pile of destruction where little to nothing can be salvaged and repurposed elsewhere in life.

[@emilybixler3166]

That also kinda assumes a similar life path to you. I grew up christian, *and* the basis to the epistemology I was raised with was skepticism. My parents were Christian, but they were also science teachers. Asking questions and exploring outcomes was always a part of finding the truth for me.

[@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr]

Yeah like when I thought about how this God constantly kills everyone by people group, operates based on threats, and loves slavery, I was like, oh yeah? I'm even MORE a lover of that guy.

[@hackman669]

You're a mean on Mr. Grinch 😊

[@michaeloud6044]

“I’m going to deconstruct this house” *adds a wrap around porch * “Damnit!” 😂

[@hackman669]

What😂

[@aralornwolf3140]

Darn Porches, they keep appearing.. it's a conspiracy!

[@michaeleldredge4279]

I think he deconstructed in the same way my young child "broke their leg" by walking into a table. Yes, they went through something and it was painful, but they didn't have the experience that they think they had.

[@NA-vz9ko]

Great analogy.

[@emma-pd8ce]

this is the type of “deconstruction” I did when I was a child and was absolutely terrified to reach a conclusion that would cause me to lose belief in Christianity, so I agree with you that this is not deconstruction in the way that most people use the term. I empathize with what I perceive as his need to keep those intellectual fences up so he doesn’t go “out of bounds” because it’s so scary to truly, openly interrogate what you believe. I would go through the standard apologetic arguments over and over again, knowing what conclusion I needed to and wanted to reach, and then shove my dissatisfaction with those arguments, the counter arguments that would come to my mind, and my additional questions back down as best I could (until the next time my doubts became unbearable and I had to do my OCD-fueled apologetic mental rituals again). After doing that from ages 7-17 though, I eventually got to a point where I couldn’t bear to stay in those mental fences anymore. As terrifying as it was, I had to let myself question my faith with an openness to any answer I found. For me, continuing to try to soothe myself with the pat, trite answers I’d heard over and over again became emotionally and intellectually untenable. It doesn’t seem like he’s reached that place where he’s actually willing to have his beliefs be wrong, though I appreciate his semi-openness on evolution and aversion to Christian nationalism. I hope he’s able to move past those thought-stopping mental barriers that evangelical Christianity has reinforced for him and really start looking into more of these questions. It does feel somewhat intellectually dishonest, intentionally or not, to talk about deconstruction when you’ve only partially disassembled certain areas of your faith with the full intention to immediately put it back together the same way again. Given how much Evangelicals seem invested in debunking deconstruction stories or tarnishing the reputations of ex-Christians, I do wonder if they’ll use a story like this to point at ex-Christians and say “see? You can have doubts and still remain a Christian like this guy, so you must have left for other reasons.” At the same time, I’m glad he’s encouraging people to even mildly question their beliefs and hold them slightly more loosely instead of steering completely clear of anything that could be even kind of close to deconstruction.

[@IheartDogs55]

I don't think Gavin understands deconstruction.

[@Kelley_X]

It’s stories like this that make me believe that indoctrinating children is a form of child abuse. The harm it can cause in some is horrific. I hope you are in a good place now, and thank you for sharing.

[@TheSkepTick]

Put a disclaimer on holy books that the contents may not actually be factual, and we'll save a LOT of trouble in the future...

[@megawonszrzeczny9]

I bet that there will still be some geniuses who decide that the author was forced to put that disclaimer there against their will and believe the contents anyways 😂😂😂

[@hackman669]

I read a book 📖 about a trip I took. I could read 📚 anything.😂 Reading rainbow 🌈

[@wilhelmschmidt7240]

As long as the religious texts are kept in the fiction section where they belong I see it as adequate, but a disclaimer in the book would be handy for unaware people that might come across it away from a library or book store.

[@stevenwagner8734]

I began deconstructing at a young age when I realized three different stories, being when the woman who looked at her home town being destroyed and was thus turnt into a pillar of salt, the story of samson and how he was basically given a pass on each of his "Sins", divine commands given that he disobeyed, only punished after the fact, then Job, who was punished for... absolutely no reasoning. The conclusion that I came to was that you can be punished for whatever, whenever God had enough of your shit, or just cause he wants to, with no lesson to be gleamed from it. In all these examples... what was the lesson? What did the person learn when they experienced these punishments? And it never sat right with me.

[@AdamKlownzinger]

If you feel the need to put guardrails on just how far you’re willing to deconstruct your ideology for the history of the entire world that ultimately you would like to see everybody adopt, out of fear that removing those guardrails might destroy your faith, maybe your ideology for the entire world isn’t strong enough to withstand a total deconstruction, and is not worthy of your faith nor anybody else’s.

[@atticmuse3749]

Also survival of the fittest is not about being "fit" as in "physically fit" (though that does play a role), it's about being fit to reproduce, that's it. The individuals with higher reproductive fitness will pass on their genes successfully.

[@elgozk]

Came here to say this. I hear the phrase used so often, but almost always incorrectly.

[@Leith_Crowther]

“Survival of the population that reproduces the most, not to be confused with survival of individual members within that population,” doesn’t roll of the tongue so easily.

[@canwelook]

Survival of the adequate

[@Julian0101]

"Survival of the barely passing"

[@determinedhelicopter2948]

"Survival of the best fit" is the terminology I think is a lot better.

[@BattleF08]

Gonna have to agree with PoZ here. This preacher is just using "Deconstructing" where he means "Looking up apologetics when you have questions, to guide you back to the faith"

[@thing1thing2themediamaniac43]

I don't think that Lee Strobel was ever a real skeptic

[@rembrandt972ify]

Whatever gave you that impression? It was Lee lying his ass off over and over again, wasn't it? 🤣

[@thing1thing2themediamaniac43]

​​@@rembrandt972ify Nor was Jay Warner Wallace a real skeptic. He supposedly converted to Christianity during his career as a Cold Case Homicide Investigator. But I think he was a Christian prior

[@ThinkitThrough-kd4fn]

@@thing1thing2themediamaniac43 They both stole that scam from Josh McDowell.

[@Nocturnalux]

Given his timeline of conversion is shaky- apart from everything else- I agree.

[@trafficjon400]

Jack was a trick climbing that bean stock but God dammed him from reaching his house because he loved him.🤔

[@firebornliger]

It is, perhaps, ironic, that I have never seen a Christian argue in good faith.

[@gjhartist3685]

Well they can't. They have to start these conversations with the intent of converting the other person. There is no reason they would be objective and open-minded when they already have the "truth," and believe that their purpose is to proselytize that truth outward.

[@Julian0101]

I have, but they dont last long, either arguing or as christians.

[@KuroKitsune101]

I feel like my tendency to doubt people who 'deconstructed' and came out the other side a Christian comes from the fact that I tried to do that, and desperately wanted to maintain those beliefs. Yet I just couldn't do it. I'm aware that it's very biased of me, and I understand that where I failed it's possible another succeeded. But then I hear this guy talk about his experience and I am reminded not of my deconstruction, but the many times I reevaluated my faith before that. The two experiences are very different beasts with experiences that look similar when outside of it all. But really; one breaks apart everything you know, from your identity to how you interpret the world. The other zooms into the kind of christian you'll be. One of these tore my world into shreds and left me to rebuild everything from the ground up. The other was me seeking answers to a very specific question, and while those times were difficult in their own ways- they feel like walks in the park compared to my deconstruction/deconversion.

[@Eric_01]

As a former believer, current atheist, I've watched a ton of debate videos. I've watched Craig several times, for hours, and I've never even been remotely intrigued by his arguments. In general, he just lands on "therefore God" and Pascal's Wager. I shocks me that anyone that does not already align with Xtianity could ever be swayed by anything I've ever heard a single apologist argue. I've never even had a "hmmmm" moment or felt a twitch from my former beliefs.

[@Jcs57]

Once you can casually distinguish claims presumptions, assertions from proof or evidence apologetics simply collapses.

[@IheartDogs55]

The longer I am an atheist (ex-xtian), the more preposterous my former beliefs become to me. [edited for extra word added in error]

[@nordos]

I am pretty sure that apologetics are not to convert someone, but to keep someone froom deconverting

[@Eric_01]

@@nordos Agreed. That's all they can accomplish, anyway.

[@PROtoss987]

Just realising that "a God" is not "Jesus" makes it all sound silly. But you'd need to be really gullible (like I was) to buy any of that.

[@HarryNicNicholas]

this was a good episode in that it emphasises that religists are TOLD what to believe rather than coming to inarguable conclusions themselves - he is TOLD to believe the adam and eve story, he can't arrive at the conclusion it is true himself. in fact how would you arrive at adam and eve in an empirical way?

[@SapphWolf]

Really?! The man claims to have deconstructed his faith and he apparently didn't even consider the question: "Are there objective moral truths?" That's usually one of the first big concepts that falls when people deconstruct because it is rather foundational to a lot of other things Christians believe. If you're not inspecting the foundations to make sure they're built on rock and not sand then can you really say you thoroughly examined your faith?

[@robinharwood5044]

Most moral philosophers think that there are objective moral truths, and a lot of those philosophers, and perhaps most, are atheists.

[@manatwilight8434]

Yeah, this dude basically changed denominations, and called it deconstruction, which is laughable at best. I mean, props on him for leaving the young earth BS behind, but still, it’s hardly a real deconstruction of your faith, when you completely ignore facts, and blindly follow apologetics the moment things start getting uncomfortable.

[@grapeshot]

Yes my BS detector needle is very deep in the red.

[@hackman669]

Red, white and blue. Colors of a Hugh. 🇺🇸🌎What should I do?😅

[@gerardgauthier4876]

Christianity has open my eyes in one crucial way. It has demonstrated(to me) how easy it is to deceive the masses(and I include myself in that observation). Once you understand how easy it is to become a 'happy clappy' , you start building a defense against people selling the happy juice.

[@istvansipos9940]

"Morality. Therefore: A genocidal magic dude created the universe. With magic. Then, with some more magic, the same dude manipulated all the evidence, so that our best and brightest cannot even consider magic. All hail the genocidal trickster lawrd" The leaps and jumps all these people make... Sad.

[@kirielbranson4843]

I think you are right in what happened. There is no way a person sincerely investigating these things would land on the most common apologist misunderstandings and/or lies about evolution, biology, and other scientific fields. I am constantly disappointed in the retread of these topics that point to either the theist being a liar, grifter, or really gullible by believing that apologists are honest and knowledgeable about the subject. Those peddling this have been corrected over and over and continue to repeat their version of the science or ideas. It is like they think everyone they encounter is lying about science or doesn't understand it as well as they do.

[@jenna2431]

"Two seasons of doubt...." Nah, my guy didn't hang with it long enough. It's not doubt, to me. That's way too mild a descriptor. It's standing on the crumbling edge peering into what appears to be an bottomless abyss. The ground beneath your feet rumbles and surges and shatters. And there's...nothing to grasp and no air to scream into. And then...you land...somehow in the same place you plummeted from, but the colors are brighter, the sounds sweeter, and you know you're free.

[@riseofdarkleela]

that's beautiful! that idea is bound to work itself into a song somewhere...

[@CharlesPayet]

Beautifully put! For me, I remember an author a couple decades ago describing it like setting out into the blazing hot desert with zero supplies, knowing that it’s still a better choice than the place of bankrupt ideas where I was, but with no idea where I would come out, or if I would. But then I found the first small oasis, and there I found a map to several others, and then each one lead to more and bigger ones, until I eventually realized the desert was far behind.

[@noracola5285]

For me it was like I ran face first into a stage set, knocking it down.

[@noracola5285]

For me it was like I ran face first into a stage set, knocking it down.

[@reversefulfillment9189]

He didn't stray far from the farm. 😅

[@adamplentl5588]

He never left the barn.

[@hackman669]

He grows Marijuana in his yard.😂

[@wilhelmschmidt7240]

Just in immediate answer to the title question, yes. Lying for your own interest is a common passtime with most religions.

[@wilkimist]

I've watched a few of his videos and come away with him not wanting to evaluate his religion from it's core or to understand the clear negatives. It's more "you got a question, here is an apologetic, now quiet that question."

[@martifingers]

It still surprises me how apologists (and it appears Gavin is exactly that) seem incapable of practising humility. He manages to display ignorance about evolution , physics , historical method and philosophy while at the same time implying his intellectual journey was an arduous and challenging endeavour.

[@PatrickWDunne]

Just wanted to let Prophet of Zod know that I really appreciated his performance as Baylan Skoll in Ahsoka

[@CharlesPayet]

Dang, you’re right! He could be an awesome person to recast the character!

[@darwinskeeper421]

Sadly, Baylan Skoll was the best thing in Ashoka.

[@DJ_Sycottic]

I don't think I've ever watched a video by an atheist and thought "they are lying" but I can't even think how many videos by theists I've watched and thought "that's a lie". It's crazy how much they seem to lie. You always see the "I spoke to an atheist and he said ........" and then say something that atheists never say. It's so sad that they have to be so dishonest. But all religions are a lie so I suppose it's not surprising....

[@ianchisholm5756]

'I went on a brave journey but never let go of the guardrail.'

[@LuisGonzalez-oy3ku]

Accurate, succinct assessment of Gavin's purported 'deconstruction'. As someone who's currently reevaluating my Christian faith of over 45 years, I can attest personally and posit more broadly that a main reason Christians don't genuinely scrutinize or deconstruct their faith is fear of what may result from the process (apostasy). That's both sad and pathetic, because if religious faith is reasonable and rational, it should be able to withstand rigorous scrutiny, i.e., truth shouldn't fear examination.

[@ianchisholm5756]

@@LuisGonzalez-oy3ku I hope your search works out for you.

[@WillPhil290]

I love how you have the humility to extend that olive branch... Like MAYBE he's not being dishonest... Maybe he's going through the same thing a lot of Christians do... I'm not so charitable... I think he's full of it. Not because that's what I want to be true... He just reeks of "I'm a pastor, I've doubted my faith and I returned to the faith because everything led me there..." Crap... He's basically discount Mike Winger without the extraneous crap... He's not convincing, at all... But I really appreciate you giving this guy the benefit of the doubt

[@EnglishMike]

Christianity is the Ortlund's family business. Gavin's father and grandfather were both pastors and involved in outreach ministries. He has three degrees in religion, and has been a theologian, a pastor, and an apologist. In other words, there is virtually no chance that he would ever properly deconstruct from the Christian faith. If nothing else, it would utterly upend his life and career, and we are all naturally resistant to making such decisions.

[@LuisGonzalez-oy3ku]

Spot on!

[@davidschneide5422]

"Sobriety made me an uncontrollable drunkard"

[@zach2980]

The way they put people on pedestals is sorta what’s wrong with Christianity in general.

[@canwelook]

And not just pedestals. Authoritarian rule.

[@OceanusHelios]

Your analysis is brilliant.

[@hackman669]

Yes, Count Dooku makes ani retesting point 😊

[@user-ce8lr3ff6v]

Gavin is a professional salesman, selling his brand of religion. I've seen this technique of attempting to rebrand "deconstruction" to a process of rebuilding faith, used by other apologists that were a bit more transparent about what they were doing. Kind of an SEO goal... add rebuilding faith content to deconstruction searches. He has managed to gain the ire of Ken Ham, so kudos there.

[@ziploc2000]

I just watched some NonStamp Collector videos. The gameshow about bible contradiction is particularly good, with the two contestants giving opposite answer based on the bible and both being correct.

[@JaniceLHz]

He made some terrific videos. I may have to go watch his overwhelmed Noah again ...

[@corvinredacted]

Deconstruction is about zooming in on your faith and examining the details-- really putting it under the microscope and refusing to ignore all of the little cracks. Gavin appears to have done the opposite. He mentions a few problems that concerned him (though mostly just Christians acting badly, which is just about the shallowest issue with the claims of Christianity, imo) but then, instead of digging deeper and addressing those problems directly, he retreats to the most top-level arguments he can find, like the Kalam. Once he's accepted that argument and--in his words--committed to it, the rest doesn't matter. If God is real, everything _must_ have a good explanation, so there's no point in looking closer. He already _knows_ what the conclusion will be.

[@NielMalan]

The main problem is that this pastor has been listening to deconstruction stories rather than reading a book on the process of deconstruction. Deconstruction is a technical term used in psychotherapy to help people manage changes in their perspectives. Some people who lost their religion went to therapy, was guided through a deconstruction process, and then made videos about it. In this way the word escaped into the wild, and it's quite likely that many people who use the word "deconstruction" to describe their deconversion did not actually go through a deconstruction process. This pastor then listened to those stories and then thought he knew what deconstruction was. In the words of Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

[@ziploc2000]

The "bad" bit about faith is believing things that are not true, which is almost all of it. It's OK to still be kind to people if that's part of your "faith". But he did start honestly, he's honestly worried about people deconstructing. Because $$$s.

[@Isaac-hm6ih]

Just from this video, I think assuming money to be a major factor is a premature assumption. I had the impression he believes that people being his religion is the best thing *for them*. I think he deconstructed some peripheral elements of his religion and wants to help other people to come to the conclusion he assumes is the better one. Since he "has experience with what they're going through". In short, I don't think there's enough evidence to assume greed her. Although it's definitely possible.

[@Kelley_X]

@@Isaac-hm6ihguess you missed the part where he referred to “my book”. To me, it sounds like he is definitely attempting to profit from this “experience” a la Lee Strobel and J Warner Wallace.

[@ziploc2000]

@@Isaac-hm6ih Not necessarily greed. He's a pastor, that probably means his main source of income is his religion. Christianity puts the food on his table. There are thousands of clergy around the world facing the fact that they've realized their religion is BS, but have no skills to earn a living any other way. They have a choice, keep peddling the BS, or try to get out and find another way to cover their expenses. People like Ed Raby get out and retrain, oiften taking a financial hit along the way. People like this guy look for ways to prop up their crumbling beliefs, like Low Bar Bill's pearls of wisdom.

[@bradypustridactylus488]

Well, I never characterized my process of rejecting Mormonism as "deconstruction," probably because postmodernism at the time was a rage that I found troubling and insipid, and the buzzword "deconstruction" triggered me. But, by what is discussed by the word here, it was not the intellectual process I went through anyway. I was working on a question far removed from religion, and when I found myself forced to confront its implications regarding religious dogma, I had to follow those implications. It was like deconversion sneaked up behind me and bit me on the ass.

[@jedsithor]

Out of curiosity, when you moved away from Mormonism, was it purely an examination of religious dogma or did you start looking at things like Joseph Smith's history etc?

[@bradypustridactylus488]

@@jedsithor Every one of my ancestors had already converted to Mormonism by 1840, ten years after Joseph Smith founded the church, so that can of worms was the last issue I tackled. The dominoes fell more or less in the following order: body/spirit dualism, the afterlife, “objective” morality, God the father, Jesus Christ, the scriptures, the Mormon Church, and last, Joseph Smith. Of course, intellectually, everything collapsed with the first. Still, emotionally, one tries to salvage what they can of their heritage.

[@lindatheheathen]

Really enjoyed the Paulogia nod 😆

[@QuintarFarenor]

When he said "for my book" I knew that he is a lying grifter like all the other apologists.

[@hackman669]

Magic 🎩 Book 📖 😂

[@ColinWrubleski-eq5sh]

The deceptive word "grifter", conceived in the very bowels of Hell by the very embodiment and personification of evil, automatically discredits anyone brazen enough to wield it...!

[@ColinWrubleski-eq5sh]

And to sweepingly condemn "all the other apologists" in that fashion is another self-indictment...

[@QuintarFarenor]

@@ColinWrubleski-eq5sh Oh I don'T mind. I have no qualms to sweep all apologists as grifters, liars and control freaks. So much so that if you call yourself an apologist then I demand from you proof that you are not a liar, grifter, etc. as that is my base assumption. Also it's not like not all apologist sweep atheists as some thing or the other, so why can't I?

[@artemisia4718]

There’s a perfectly good word for when a religious person disagrees with the political direction his religion is taking and wants to change that: Reformation. He’s worried about appearances, not the veracity of the core beliefs.

[@soyevquirsefron990]

The design argument is one of the least compelling. What are the odds that we’d exist in a universe that allows us to exist? 100% that’s the least surprising thing ever. It’s like finding my dog in my kitchen and being shocked that either the multiverse spawned infinite dogs or god did it. it would be Miraculous if we found ourselves in a universe where we COULDN’T exist

[@jenna2431]

What did he actually deconstruct? Mea culpa. I must have blinked.

[@Leith_Crowther]

Basically, evolution might be happening

[@EnglishMike]

Gavin believes Pascal's Wager is so powerful that it is only rational for non-believers to act as though Christianity is true in the hope that it will help them truly believe one day. He speaks softly and sounds reasonable, but in the end his apologetics are no deeper for it.

[@jonasfermefors]

The part that makes me mistrust him from his opening statement is "I'm a pastor". It makes the likelihood of this being "his truth" less likely than it being his apologetic that he thinks can reach doubters.

[@The-Doubters-Diary]

I've been hearing these stories for years. Isn't there a christian author whose whole gig is that he was trying to disprove the bible and that made him a believer??? I think he wrote a book called "A Case for God" or something.

[@user-uu2cj9ct3j]

I think you are looking for “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel. I can’t tell you how many times Christians have tried to ram it down my throat.

[@Herschel1738]

Lee Strobel "The Case for Christ". A friend asked me to read it. I read it on the way to Texas for the eclipse, (Sadly - lots of clouds, very little eclipse.) and realized I had read it decades ago. Note that it was written many years after he did his search for "the truth about Christianity" & his conversion. He reconstructed the process by interviewing major popular Evangelical apologists & asking each one a question about some major Biblical claim (ie could Jesus have survived crucifixion?). I found Strobel & the apologists more than a little disingenuous. Strobel gives the impression that he is recounting his own deconversion process. He isn't. He is creating a platform for Evangelical apologists to present their apologies. Issues by doubters are shot down, but none are ever interviewed; and often their arguments are straw-manned. But their "whiffling & waffling & the Bible must be true" impressed Strobel, because, by the 3rd interview, he was sold on Christianity - again! i wasn't.

[@fred_derf]

J Warner Wallace. As disingenuous a person as they come. The book you're likely thinking of is _Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels._ I think the subtitle should be more like "A failed homicide detective just blindly accepts the stories in the bible", but that's just me.

[@fred_derf]

There is also the book _The Case for God_ by Karen Armstrong but I don't know anything about her.

[@The-Doubters-Diary]

@@Herschel1738 Yes, Lee Stobel. What a piece of work!

[@everettyoung9325]

Well that was a thoroughly enjoyable 55 minutes!

[@mikebeagley]

Today’s sermon is what I imagine other folk go through when questioning their faith. The sermon will be presented as a first person account to make it more relatable.

[@Devious_Dave]

Very insightful, thanks. Gavin may have believed he was deconstructing but a real investigation into his beliefs would've involved free thought which couldn't happen due to his self-imposed limitations.

[@tyho1230]

All he did was trim the Christianity shrubbery, and he definitely didn’t cut off any large branches. A leaf here and there, with the occasional twig getting snipped was all the trimming his little ol’ honeysuckle could handle.

[@MinaOmega]

Wellspoken, clever, funny, and still a handsome silver fox. This was enjoyable. It was fun to do this with you. Thank you.

[@adamc1966]

I love how the "first cause" is always the God that they believe in 😂. Its never some pagan god that was worshiped before xtianity 😂

[@riseofdarkleela]

or "the gods" or "the elementals" or "the nature spirits" lol

[@jedsithor]

I'm an atheist but I think a reasonable case can be made for a creator being. All that's required is a being capable of creating the universe. That's it. No religious doctrine, no purpose. It could be a divine being, it could be some kid in his basement loading up "Universe Simulator" on his computer, we don't and probably can't know. I don't think any of that is likely but it's not impossible. But it's a pretty big leap to go from "the universe had a creator" to "Jesus died for your sins." Most theists when they debate this sort of stuff don't even fully make a case for a base-level creator before jumping to their particular theology.

[@adamc1966]

@jedsithor the belief you are talking about is Deism. This is the God in the founding documents of the USA but fundies don't want to know that 👍

[@adamc1966]

You are talking about Deism. I consider myself a "none" until there is evidence of any creative entity 👍

[@autonomouscollective2599]

@@jedsithor My issue with your “creator being” is the unspoken assumption that there was just _one_ creator. Why not two? Or three? Heck, you can even make it a design by committee. Saying just one creator (even when you don’t believe in such a being) falls into the monotheistic trap. A Christian, for instance, can argue that the god (singular) you don’t believe in is THEIR god. When you use gods (plural) it dilutes their argument.

[@happytofu5]

So in my opinion this behavior is a great example of how faith is executed. You hear something, like the word "deconstruct" and you don't dig deeper. You take it on a feeling level and apply it to your own circumstances. Whenever I see christians talk about "deconstructing", they always seem to mean "get rid of" (as in disassemble and throw in the trash), not analyzing the parts of it. In religion, you don't analyze. You associate and go with what feels right.

[@DarkAlkaiser]

I think this guy just misunderstands what is meant by deconstruction, he seems rather earnest in his ignorance. Still largely hidden away in his echo chamber.

[@mikesparrow3807]

I thoroughly enjoy Zod’s delivery! One smart son-of-a-gun!

[@hackman669]

Yep, smart nice guy.😊

[@CharlesPayet]

28:48 Right here, the guy gives up the real story. He still thinks the Gospels are reliable historical sources? HA! He clearly hasn’t even tried to investigate the foundations of the Bible. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

[@CharlesPayet]

39:15 and with every sentence after that, the only crap he offers is standard apologetics. One after another. I pretty much figured you you were doing heavy-handed foreshadowing early in the video, @ProphetofZod, but I was hoping maybe I was wrong. Nope.

[@mrdontgothere]

46:05 I absolutely LOVE the way you put that. Bravo. My favorite: "We don't make 'survival of the fittest' our goal because of the theory of evolution any more than we make falling down our goal because of the theory of gravity."

[@Zahaqiel]

I mean the point where he says it should be about "deconstructing the bad parts of your faith, but not your faith" is a pretty "Pastor" thing to say. More so than the laypeople, preachers view other Christian sects as kind of the same enemy as non-believers. They're people who _want_ to be Christian but are _wrong_ and their wrongness can infect and trick you! Like non-believers want to trick you! And a pastor's job is to prevent you from going to one of those other sects, and keep you aiming at their particular dogmatic angle. So more so than anyone else, a pastor is going to have an eye towards doctrinal purity. I suspect if a non-preacher was attempting this, they wouldn't have put that idea up front. They might have come to it at the end with a "I've improved my faith!" (because always claiming their dogmas are the correct ones, even if they're going to change their opinion next week and the new thing will be the correct dogma, egocentric views of dogma are the go-to move), but I don't think they'd have necessarily started with that as a self-identified goal. Basically, unless the pastor says that they're prepared to leave the faith entirely if it doesn't hold up... brace for some propaganda and butt-covering.

[@ApostateSublime]

These videos (and Zod’s personality and take on things in general) have quickly become something that I very much look forward to these days.

[@seraphonica]

ironically, this doubting he describes is what I see when believers doubt their specific church, then decide to go to a different church. end result? the trail of smoke behind him that he himself describes.

[@tbstoller]

I don’t care whether this pastor “deconstructed” in a way that others find meaningful. I am thrilled that he made a video talking about his experience, because he just made it acceptable for other Christians to examine THEIR doubts. He’s “let go” of some things, so they feel that they can too-and they may not go back. Right now, deconstructing would mean the loss of his livelihood, I understand that he may decide to back away. Closely evaluating your beliefs can be a slow process and I’m interested in where he’ll be in five years.

[@Kelley_X]

Did you miss the part where he mentioned “my book”? Sounds like he is hoping to follow along the lines of Lee Strobel and J Warner Wallace.

[@flowingafterglow629]

Wait a minute - he acknowledged the Lord, Liar, Lunatic, Legend problem and still thinks it is relevant? So he must somehow rule out the Legend part? I wonder how?

[@Zacpack91]

He’s not deconstructing, he’s just remodeling.

[@EatHoneyBeeHappy]

51:05 Gavin says "the most diverse religion" as though it's a strength, but the fact that Christianity is so splintered is a testament to Christianity being whatever the Hell people want it to be, not a testament to it being true. A non-Christian doesn't even have to do any work, we can just let the Christians explain why the other Christians are wrong.

[@kenharness1417]

When i deconstructed, i did exactly what Gavin claims. I had questions about the faith and so i began examining those things and cut them out in order to strengthen my faith. However, the more i looked, the more questions i had, until tthere were way too many questions and i could no longer sweep them under the rug.

[@chadmccoy8032]

I’m clueless about science and it didn’t help me believe in gawd.

[@hackman669]

Science 📚📖📙📘🎒📚📖📙📘🎒📚📖📙📘🎒📚📖📙📘🎒📚📖📙📘🎒📚📖📙📘🎒📚📖📙📘🎒📚📖📙📘scaler

[@eefaaf]

46:37 "Making falling down our goal because of the theory of gravity" had me laughing out loud. Great analogy.

[@BattleF08]

If his understanding of Evolution is "The strong survive, the weak perish" then clearly he's never learned even the basics of Evolution. Only the caricature of it painted by religious circles.

[@Kattlarv]

Tbh... it really feels like it boils down to "Trust me, your father is a *wonderful* person. He is kind, good, perfect. - Can I meet him? - NO! You can *never* meet him! EVER!" Like, yeah... nothing suspicious here. Just *need* to keep people in a bubble and never expose them to the outside.

[@victoriaconly-oe7qb]

Almost spat out my coffee when he said “individual human rights”.

[@Cat_Woods]

Odd coincidence: Just yesterday I started having videos come up in my feed from "deconstructed" Christians who stayed Christian. I guess the KZbin algorithm decided it was a trend I'd be interested in. I even kind of was, in the sense that I watched a video with interest and even appreciated the improvement in the guy's viewpoint. But of course, they land on places that are still bonkers and if you refer to that or express anything outside their remaining box, they tell you to get lost. So I think they can take important steps that I don't want to invalidate, but they remain insecure and unkind to others, because what they still believe is still essentially abhorrent and cruel.

[@JWK1101]

I'm really happy that Paulogia's "because the bible tells me so" jingle has become "a thing" in counter-apologetics.

[@OceanusHelios]

The whole point of him coming out and doing a video on his alleged deconstruction is to attempt to head other people who are Christians off at the pass if they might decide to deconstruct their religion.

[@IheartDogs55]

That's my opinion, too. I can't read his mind, though, so perhaps he believes he really did a deconstruction.

[@Oswlek]

For me, the biggest flaw with design is the idea that an all powerful designer should be able to create life under any conditions. The fact that things need to be "fine tuned" at all is an argument _against_ their god!

[@jovenc4508]

Also the idea of "complexity" goes against the design idea because when you design something you don't want it to be complex, you want it to be as effecient as possible.

[@Will-xf3qe]

I really can't understand how anyone can find the cosmological moral design fine tuning ect arguments convincing

[@hackman669]

Puff the Magic Dragon 🐉 lived by the Sea😂

[@crow-dont-know]

I love that you're also using the "For The Bible Tells Me So" jingle

[@namelastname8393]

I didn't watch the original video, so correct me if I'm wrong. But one thing that irritated me is that I kept waiting for the moment where he would begin to specifically talk about why the Bible is true. But he never did. All the way , he just argued for some entity that is both the source of the universe and the source of morality. Even if I agreed with all his arguments, WHY should I then conclude that the Bible (with all its additional claims, many of which are clearly false, such as Noah's ark) is true?

[@knkn5049]

Me: so where is deconversion/deconstruction story? Zod: Exactly!

[@ChokeArtist411]

Per the Ravi thing, I think the reason he was shook up about it, has more to do with the idea that real Christians “bear fruit”, and he perceived Ravi to do that. But because it seems Ravi was not a “true Christian”, this throws the idea of spiritual discernment into a tailspin.

[@JB_Emerson]

This was a very real thing for me. If abusive a-holes can hide in plain sight for decades while being adored by the masses, what good is the Holy Spirit? It couldn't let ANYONE who could do something about it know? What good is it?

[@IheartDogs55]

​@@JB_EmersonMy husband left for the same reason.