Growing up in America, and even more so, the South, and being one of the few kids who

doesn’t

attend church every Sunday or has Christian ideology instilled in them by their parents can be

confusing when everyone around you makes it seem like a universal truth of life. Despite this,

I’m appreciative of my experiences with Christianity, as they provided me the opportunity to

witness up close this culture (and the counter of it), allowing me ample time to think, discuss,

question, and form opinions about it.

As I started to reach my tween years, I stopped feeling like I was in a bubble of one belief system

and began to see the nuance in thoughts and religious practice that resulted from living in a

liberal city in a conservative state. In addition, I witnessed peers who grew up strongly Christian

begin to form their own opinions about it as they grew older. Although I do have some

knowledge in terms of what Christianity can look like from different sides and in different

circumstances, I am very much still learning. From my very humble viewpoint, here is what I’ve

concluded so far (although subject to change):

God was once a real person long ago that represented a light for people and acted as a sort of

moral guide, causing others to see them as an all knowing, high and mighty figure. In my

opinion, I don’t think that this person is magic in any way or even the God people speak of today,

but just somebody pure and good enough (and who saw the same in others) to be the basis for a

character used to teach lessons and bring hope. People often feel lost in life without having

someone to look to for direction, so when someone confident, charismatic, and knowledgeable

steps up, people can’t help but be drawn to them. Hitler is a prime example of this phenomenon,
although an extreme example with horrible effects, as well as a person I don’t believe represents

what God wants for the world.

I assume this God, whoever they may be, wouldn’t have expectations of anyone other than to be

kind, open minded, and accepting and that they would be very accepting and without prejudice

themself, hence the reason they are regarded highly enough to be worshiped by so many. Despite

that, I feel as though this person wouldn’t require to be worshiped, and that if their followers felt

the need to do this, again, out of the need to seek guidance from someone and do something

tangible with that feeling, that they would be satisfied with simply influencing universal love,

light, and a moral standard in the world.

I am wholeheartedly for freedom of religion, as long as it’s not used as an excuse to belittle,

persecute, or force anyone to do something or fit into someone else’s box. This does not mean

that people need to be religious to be a good person. Goodness can come from whatever

motivates you, whether it’s faith, love, or pure good will derived from a responsibility to uphold

your moral duty. This is apparent in so many non-religious and highly regarded people, including

the famous philosopher Aristotle, who believed that “men create gods after their own image.”

I believe that members of a religious tradition like Christianity should have an institution to go to

to gain community if desired, but that it not be required of them to attend it. The importance of

having an institution in the first place is to give members a place to discuss and find truth and

eradicate error with each other. Isolation breeds extremist thinking because nobody is there to

counter your beliefs, as witnessed at its extremes in cults. However, being in a bubble of
like-minded people can create community while creating close-mindedness, religious pressure,

or a forced way of life, so being mindful of those circumstances is just as important.

I feel it’s vital for individual members of a religion to only hold themselves and not others to

their own standards, as well as for the religion to allow members to be completely free to

worship how they please. I’ve seen firsthand how strong Christians can stray away from their

religion because of how it’s enforced and having trauma caused by the toxicity of the

institution’s rules and expectations. How an individual best connects with God should be

encouraged, as long as the end goal of finding enlightenment from that religion is met. If you

force a person to do something the way you do, they might not love it or connect with it as much

as you want, and isn’t that the goal?

I believe that diverse opinions within a religious tradition, such as Christianity, should be met

with an open mind and a willingness to discuss, so that ideas are allowed to be shared and

explained rather than immediately demonized. While this hope might be idealistic, I feel it

should be the goal of religious institutions, as even making the smallest steps toward it can be

impactful. Some of these steps include allowing everyone to be able to define their own

individual beliefs and practices within one religion (as long as they’re not dangerous beliefs)

because only each person knows how they can best serve and connect with their God/faith. This

should be something that the greater religious institution encourages because it allows people to

create a deeper connection with their religion, rather than trying to connect with it through

other’s guidelines.
This is uncommon in traditional religious circumstances, as there is usually a central authority

that wants to be able to easily control the religion’s believers and who is worried that if people

practice that faith on their own, they will lose that power. Allowing people to guide themselves

and influence each other rather than one single person influencing everyone makes religion more

of a learning experience. Additionally, broad intellectual, spiritual, and ethical diversity should

be encouraged within one religion because it allows it to reach more people and helps to avoid

bias and oppression being furthered within the faith as a result of never interacting with people

that are different.

I feel as though members of a religious tradition should not view those of other religious

traditions as bad people, but rather people who have interpreted faith differently. They don’t have

to like their opinion, but they shouldn’t discriminate or force their own religion upon them

because of it. Religious people should only teach their faith to others if others would like to be

taught, but never by using force or propaganda. Letting people be attracted to a religion for what

it is and giving them the space to inquire if they want to know more will lead to a more devoted

and true following of that religion. Although many Christians believe they’re told to spread their

faith no matter what, doing it in forceful or manipulative ways leads to little good and could

tarnish the religion’s reputation.

Finally, I believe that Christians should be open to learning from others in order to broaden their

views. Ultimately, this will better allow them to contextualize their religion from an outside

perspective and avoid being stuck in a cultural and ideological bubble. Modifying one’s beliefs

in light of other religions is unnecessary and should even be discouraged (unless doing so course
corrects oppressive/bigoted beliefs), as religious diversity is vital for avoiding negative

stereotypes and biases and encouraging respect of those with different beliefs. From the

Holocaust to Muslim genocide in China, history has shown countless times why this is so

important.

Ultimately, my ideas about Christianity and other religious traditions might be overly hopeful,

and might be easier said than done, especially coming from the perspective of someone on the

outskirts of religion. Despite this, I feel as though my beliefs aren’t without reason, and overall,

represent the idea that religion can be spun and manipulated in such a way that highlights the

worst in people, but also has the ability to do the opposite if members of that religion can make

conscious decisions that allow for it.