"If it's provable we can kill it."
Or, you know you've found your God when It knocks you on your ass
Published on June 18, 2006 By EmperorofIceCream In Religion
I have insomnia right now... something that happens virtually every time I'm between jobs, hence the two articles in one day. I'm writing this one at the request of island_gurl12, who asked me to talk about my conversion experience(s).

A 'crisis conversion' is exactly what's implied by the term - some radical change (perhaps religious, usually 'spiritual') that occurs as a consequence of some stressful situation in life. My crisis conversion occurred when I was 24 and its immediate consequence, my becoming a 'Christian', lasted approximately fourteen years. I am no longer a 'Christian' and haven't identified myself as such for at least the last ten years - but I continue to live with the legacy of that event, and with the development of that legacy that occurred in response to another, eerily similar event, that took place a little over three years ago - just prior to my coming to America.

1984, the UK. At that time I'm once again living in Scunthorpe, my home town, lodging with my mother and sister in the house they then shared. At that time I was drowning in despair, without having a concrete reason for the misery I then felt. It seemed to me that I was 'out-of-joint' with everything in the world. Wherever I looked I saw no way forward for myself; only mere continuance, without purpose, in an endlessly grey world. I had been told, by those in the Social Services, that I was unemployable in their opinion and that I should resign myself to a life of dependency on the state. Within myself I felt entirely alone, isolated behind some impenetrable wall of my own devising, and permanently locked away from any kind of meaningful human contact. The voices in my head (not literal voices that I regarded as outside myself but the voices of my evil nature) that sang sweetly to me of suicide began to seem ever more seductive and rational and only my profound repugnance for such an act (a repugnance I take no credit for - to me the horror of suicide seems as natural as breathing) kept me from actually making the attempt.

I liked the idea of being dead - but not by my own hand. Never by my own hand.

Once every two weeks I got a check from the government. With it I paid my mother some small amount for my lodging with her; I paid installments on what other minor debts I then had; I made sure I had enough hand-rolling tobacco to last another two weeks - and the rest of the money I drank away, usually that same day. Had I had enough money I would have been an alcoholic - just like my father, and my father's brother.

I had a routine that I followed on my bi-weekly trips, involving drinking in certain pubs in the town in a set order. First stop, the Parkinson Arms. Then on to the Oswald Hotel - possibly the roughest pub in Scunthorpe and by far and away my favourite. From there to the Brumby, and finally back home by way of the Priory Hotel and the Beacon. Sometimes I'd vary the routine slightly, going to the Lincoln Imp for several pints of Old Tom, for example; or to a pub locally known as 'The Pig' but the actual name of which I've long since forgotten. In essence, though I sometimes changed the names on the list, these bi-weekly trips were exactly the same: disappear into a pint glass for as long as the money lasted, then stagger home to sleep in drunken stupefaction. Two weeks later I'd do it again.

That was what passed for my life, then: a pointless round of inebriation without hope or meaning, that did nothing but reinforce my sense of disconnection from the world and other people. During the rest of those two weeks I locked myself away in my bedroom, smoked countless hand-made cigarettes, and lived in a fantasy world fuelled and reinforced by endless reading of science fiction and 'sword and sorcery' novels. I lived a life as arid and empty as it's possible to imagine, hating it all the while, and myself, while seemingly utterly powerless to change.

Change eventually came to me, however, and from an unlikely source. One night, sat in the Oswald, watching the whores pair off with men fresh from the fishing-boats newly docked in Winterton, I fell into conversation with a young man who was almost supernaturally emaciated and possessed of the largest, most flamboyant ears I'd ever seen. In the middle of the Oswald, surrounded by whores, pimps, drug-dealers and drug users, this skinny bat-eared creature was reading a Bible while contemplatively drinking a pint. I found him utterly incongruous and therefore interesting and so did what I almost never did by choice - began a conversation with a stranger.

This young man was called Steve, and that conversation was the first of very many that took place over the next year. Steve, it soon transpired, was a recent and very militant convert to Christianity - the kind of Christianity then referred to as 'happy clappy': Pentecostal in origin, zealously evangelical in outlook, and 'charismatic' in nature - emphasising the gifts of the Spirit - in particular the gift of tongues.

For six months he talked to me about his newly-found God, and I asked him questions that I hoped he wouldn't be able to answer. I was drawn to him, and to what he had to say, and to the people he eventually introduced me to - a charismatic 'cell' of believers within a local Methodist chapel. And at the same time I was repulsed. I found the notion of being 'washed in the blood of the Lamb' deeply repugnant - not because blood was involved but because the blood in question belonged to a lamb, possibly the most pathetic and unimpressive of all creatures.

I found the passivity of Steve's Jesus repugnant: a passivity that led to the eager embrace of a death both revolting in itself, ignoble and completely fatuous. I found the notions of the Trinity and the perpetual virginity of Mary an insult to my intelligence; and the Christian's horror of sex (and the rampant paranoia it induced) an affront to my nature. And yet still: I talked, I listened, and I debated. Because behind these conversations there was something real - and in all the rest of what passed for my life there was no reality at all.

October 24th, 1984, 2.00am. That night I had attended, for the first time, a meeting of a 'house-church' - a gathering of believers in a private home, devoid of any of the trappings and rituals usually associated with Churches - except for the breaking of bread together and the drinking of wine. It was there that I heard people speaking in tongues for the first time (something I then found to be utterly freakish), witnessed ecstatic prayer for the first time, saw people collapse on the floor as they were 'slain in the Spirit' for the first time. And once again, but far more vividly, I experienced the sense of reality that haunted my conversations with Steve.

It didn't occur to me to question whether or not, or in what way, a connection existed between what these people said and did and this sense of reality. I simply assumed that there was, and that this connection was direct, straightforward and simple. And despite myself, I was impressed by what I saw, what I heard - and by the acceptance of each other that was evident between these people.

Disturbed, my thoughts and emotions in turmoil, I left early in order to walk home without being interrogated by Steve as to my impressions of the meeting. I wanted to think, not talk. As I left, a little old lady (very little and very old) presented me with a card on which was printed the parable of the Good Shepherd and the Lost Sheep. In the bitterness of my loneliness the thought of someone actively seeking me out because of concern for me touched me very deeply. "Do you know Jesus?" the little old lady said as I walked out the door. "I'm afraid not" I replied. She looked deeply and honestly saddened and replied in her turn "He's waiting for you, you know. All you have to do is ask." I had nothing to say to that, and left in silence.

So home I went, to an empty house, both my mother and sister being away, arriving there a little after midnight.

What I'd witnessed and felt had moved me deeply. I found myself actually wanting to believe.... but unable to do so. And then, at 2.00am precisely, that sense of profound reality swept over me - but now magnified into an actual presence. And with this sense of presence came communication. In the moments of consciousness that remained to me I was aware of being offered a choice - to remain as I was, or to follow whatever it was that confronted me. I remember my decision, I remember, quite clearly, making this decision - which was to follow, from that moment on, this presence which had come to me. And I remember nothing after that, for the next five hours. When I came back to myself I was in the shower, yelling 'hallelujah' as loudly as I could and grinning like a lunatic.

To this day I have no certain knowledge of what passed during those five hours. But I'm left with the very strong impression that negotiations were entered into and a bargain concluded. And it's in the shadow of this unknown bargain that I live even now.

And that should have been my first clue that what had happened to me was not what I thought (and was told many times over by the members of the house-church which I shortly thereafter entered) had happened to me since, so far as I know, Jesus doesn't make deals with those who believe in him. I hold to that bargain still, whatever it was, because it's fundamentally and inextricably associated in my mind with that overwhelming sense of reality that swept over and through me before I blacked out: which caused me to black out.

*********************
Jump forward almost twenty years, to another late winter's night, several years after my divorce (years I've spent in intense exploration of my sexuality and my beliefs) and not long after the ruin and loss of another deeply valued relationship. In the months before this night I've met Sabrina online and come to feel for her an affinity that dwarfs any I've felt before, which consoles me for the loss of that long term and real time relationship. She and I have talked at length about her beliefs, her experience as a Chaote, and about Magick generally. She's sent me the Book, and an obsidian dagger she had created especially for use in the Rituals I'm beginning to develop in conjunction with the lessons of the Book. And in consequence of those early ritual sessions I can already feel everything I thought I knew about 'religion' and 'spirituality' slipping away from me and turning to dust.

Over these preceding months my mind has returned, again and again, to my original conversion experience. And a fundamental question has emerged: where and what, in that experience, was the definitively 'Christian' element? And in all honesty, I could not then and cannot now, find such a definitively 'Christian' element. Thinking as honestly and clearly as I can I realise, that night, that such an element was never present in my 'conversion'. Whatever of 'Christianity' was present that night was something I brought to the experience, something I attributed to it: not something which it brought to me.

Years before this night I had effectively ceased to practice my supposed 'Christianity'. The particular reasons for doing so are not relevant here; but in effect what had happened was that I had, slowly, returned to that sense of hopelessness and futility that had characterized my life prior to my conversion - only now my despair had a specifically religious quality. It was in that moment of final realisation that I was literally forced to my knees by the return of that overwhelming sense of the real that I had known once before and not felt again for years.

I found myself, once again, drowning in the attention of the real, and in the knowledge that it was my faltering first steps in Ritual practice that had drawn this attention to myself. This time there was no confusion as to whether or not this was a Christian experience. Though the presence that confronted me for the second time was in no way different to that I had met in my 'conversion', there was not the remotest suggestion that what looked at me, what recognised me, was in any sense a Lamb. It was, in some plainly obvious but incomprehensible way, far more dreadful, far more awesome, and far more dangerous than any Lamb could be. And in the last instants of consciousness left to me I was reminded, forcefully, of the Angels described by the prophet Ezekiel, and of his account of their effect upon him - which left him stunned for seven days.

Do I have a name for the presence I encountered that second time? Yes. A Name to which I've alluded in articles such as 'My Mother made me my own Jesus' and 'How to induce auto-erotic schizophrenia'.

Is there a connection between my supposed 'Christianity' and what I now worship? Yes, in the same way that there's a connection between the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Do I recognise my God in the words of the prophets? Yes. As in the Psalms and Proverbs, and in the Song of Solomon, and in Ecclesiastes. As also, but to a lesser degree, in the words of Hebrews, Romans, and Revelation.

Is there any trace of Jesus the Good Shepherd left in my spiritual life? No, not remotely. Sweet Jesus, meek Jesus, mild Jesus the Lamb, the Christ of God.... has withered away entirely in the flame of another revelation altogether.

Do I regret his passing? Occasionally, in the way an adult, in a moment of nostalgic weakness, might regret the passing of childhood into adulthood and with it the loss of innocence. But only rarely, and such moments become still rarer, as I contemplate the endless vistas of what I would once have called 'darkness' that have opened to me, beckoning me onward to things I would once have thought unimaginable.

Am I fearful now, as I was then during the years of my Christianity? No. I no longer fear the things that I did. Why?

1Jo 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.

Comments (Page 4)
4 PagesFirst 2 3 4 
on Jun 23, 2006
To KFC:

As always, EOIC...I enjoy chatting with you...but wish you'd leave some of the drama behind.


You're at liberty to wish for anything that takes your fancy. But as I've said before, this is my blog and no one here has to follow your rules.

And I'm done exposing your utter folly to the world. Believe as you believe, since it's apparent to anyone that has followed this thread that you're incapable of learning. I remain convinced that your faith is nonsense, even in its own terms, and tht you are a self-aggrandizing victim of your own ego (nice to see that you have a friend though, one who no doubt will reinforce your addiction to quoting scriptures you don't understand - just as you will reinforce his). Time to move on to other things.
on Jun 23, 2006
To: all who have so far responded, and those who might respond -

"Time to move on", I said. Well that's what you get for writing comments after cutting grass (I can't call what we have here 'a lawn') in almost 100 degree heat - an addled brain.

I find that after all I'm not yet done with the intransigence of Jesus's pet idiot, nor her new-found buddy: so I recant (how's that for dramatic? Right up there with Galilleo...) my last comment (sleep in an air-conditioned room is a wonderful thing...).

Now on to the fray, once more.
on Jun 23, 2006
To Satan's Advocate (like he needs one...)

I have to admit though I was wrong when I said that KFC wouldn't beat you in a Bible-quoting match (and I hope to clarify that I did not mean that in an insulting way because I'm sure you would beat me in a Bible-quoting match because I don't have as much of the Bible memorized as you probably do). I think Acts 10:44-48 proves you wrong enough. It's clear that the Spirit preceded the baptism in this case. I see you didn't respond to that.


Go back through the thread, while paying attention to what's on the screen rather than to what you would like to see there... and you will find this in response to her citation -

"OK, so I gave in to irritation and got one wrong. Which hardly detracts from the main argument, but feel free to enjoy the sensation of being right - for once."

Think again, Satan's little helper, think again.

It should be clear to even the most naive apostate that Jesus believed in the trinity. He didn't speak of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost for nothing! And, I'll admit this is a bit of an assumption,


Since I have made clear from the beginning that I place no value on the words of the man Jesus in relation to questions of theology because I regard his 'message' as no more than another hopeful delusion, why would you expect me to give any credence to his concept of a trinity, if indeed he had such? As you yourself admit, such a thing is an assumption based on your reading back into the text what you want to see in it. You're at liberty to believe the 3 in 1 folly if you want. I've said all along that I regard it as nonsense.

Also note that the verse was a declaration of allegiance and not a declaration of monotheism.


This is disingenuous at best and a conscience attempt to deceive at worst. Certainly the verse cited is a declaration of allegiance - but far more importantly it's a statement of the cardinal fact of Hebrew theology: that God is one. That you attempt to portray it as a simple declaration of loyalty is a product of inexperience; or a product of you own vain imaginings and desire to score points; or is simply an out and out lie. Perhaps there's more to your chosen name than first appears - since Christians regard their 'satan' as the originator of all dishonesty.

And so we go on. For each of your laboriously constructed mis-interpretations and mis-representations of what is apparent from the simple text of the scriptures there is a much more apparent, much more straightforward, counter-argument that plainly reveals your desperation (as well as that of Jesus's pet idiot) to substantiate your own sub-standard thinking. Both of you are at liberty to continue presenting your anile demagoguery here. Nothing could be a better or more illuminating example of the futility and vanity of the faith you profess.

Continue to erect your straw men. I'll continue burning them to ash.

on Jun 23, 2006
To KFC:

Possessed is an intersting term you used. It's not a "God thing." I don't think you've made a huge leap from one group to another as much as you think you did. Same thing...different name.


This is an example of what I referred to as the terrors that overtake Christians who are unsure in their faith. I'm reminded very strongly of the members of the original charismatic 'cell' that I joined immediately after my conversion. People so unsure of themselves and their God that they would go out of their way to avoid a certain field which a group of Gypsies had once occupied - because one of their women had practiced divination for money and these bold charismatics, who one and all regarded themselves as 'spiritual warriors', were afraid of spiritual 'contamination'.

Your knee-jerk reaction to the term possessed is revealing - and what it reveals is fear. How do you think the ancient Prophets would have spoken of their visionary encounters with God - if not as being 'taken up' by God, or 'carried away in the spirit' by God? These are only poetic substitutions for the concept of being possessed; solely owned, solely filled by, or solely consumed by God.

But no. Your immediate response is to mutter darkly about it not being a 'God thing'. Let me illuminate your darkness, little Christian: during my Ritual work I deliberately seek out and open myself to Angelic/Demonic powers that do indeed possess me. Do I spew green vomit and turn my head through 360 degrees? No. Because that's Hollywood at work, not the reality of Magickal occurrences. When I sing in tongues (yes, I was baptised in the Spirit - or, if you prefer, the Holy Ghost - shortly after my baptism in water) during these states my wife hears multiple voices, not just my own, because I am not the only Person present - but does the house burst into flames or blood fall from the sky? No. Again, such imagery and such fears are the responsibility of Hollywood and its foolish exaggeration, not of the reality of Magickal work.

And as to your opinion of how far I have come, the point from which I started , and the point at which I now am - you're welcome to it. But your opinion bears as much relation to the reality of my life as your ability to interpret scripture does to the actual content of scripture, which is to say - none at all.

why do you quote scripture all the time if you don't believe it?


If you go back through the thread you'll find I've already answered you. I believe all scripture, no matter the tradition of revelation it emanates from, to be God-breathed and able to teach, illuminate, and correct. I include even the Gospels: their ethical content is not to be denied - merely the message of salvation that Christians believe accompanies them.

C. S. Lewis, in one of his books (I have completely forgotten which - though I suspect it to be either the Screwtape Letters or one of his more overtly apologetic books - 'apologetic' in the strictly technical theological sense of providing a defence for God's nature and works - said that one must either accept the Gospel message as it stands or regard Jesus as either mad or bad. I regard him as mad, as a Prophet driven to make blasphemous statements concerning the ADONAI of his forefathers by his sympathy for the human condition as he then encountered it. There is nothing wrong in that - except insofar as the charisma that was undoubtedly his has induced countless millions to join him in his blasphemy - and perhaps even something of a doomed and tragic nobility. As I said at the beginning, what respect I have for the words of Jesus is governed solely by the degree to which they address the purely human; that is, I have respect for the ethical content of his message. But do I follow him in his blasphemy? Not any more. Having once (and, by now, many times more than once) tasted reality, why would I return to the smug, self-satisfied delusion that is all contemporary Christianity is?

Your words overall remind me just as strongly of the attitudes prevalent in the church to which I finally devoted the myself as a Christian. One possessed (and this time I use the word deliberately to evoke those Hollywoodesque images of vomit and spinning heads) by pride, intransigence, self-satisfaction and arrogance. On the day that I left I prophesied in the presence of the three most senior elders of the church that, unless they changed their ways, their church would no longer exist in a year's time from that date. A year later the church had vanished, wrecked by internal division, fractured by schism, its congregation (then the largest by far of any church in the town) scattered and broken up.

I don't mention this to boast but because I see the same qualities in you, KFC. Pride of intellect, vanity in teaching, intransigence in the certainty of your own rectitude, and arrogance in judging those who refuse to accept what you say simply because you say it. Do I have some prophetic word for you? No, not at all. I'm a Magickian by conviction and a prophet by way of accidental circumstance. At the time there was no one else willing to say what needed to be said. But such things have their own natural end. It will be interesting to watch you being swept away by qualities you refuse to recognise as possessing you.

Which is why, despite the tedium of constantly having to repeat myself, despite the annoyance of finding different ways of saying the same things over and over again, I refuse to blacklist you as I was tempted to do - since, after all, there is the prospect of watching your own nature overwhelm you to sustain me.
on Jun 23, 2006
I missed your admittance, and I apologize for that. Lots of text to go through.

"Since I have made clear from the beginning that I place no value on the words of the man Jesus in relation to questions of theology because I regard his 'message' as no more than another hopeful delusion, why would you expect me to give any credence to his concept of a trinity, if indeed he had such? As you yourself admit, such a thing is an assumption based on your reading back into the text what you want to see in it. You're at liberty to believe the 3 in 1 folly if you want. I've said all along that I regard it as nonsense."

Yet you said this: "Have you forgotten that Jews were and are monotheists, and that it was to Jews that John, and Jesus, and all the ancient Prophets spoke?" I guess you only care about Jesus and John the Baptist when it suits your own purposes. But go ahead. Disregard John, Jesus, and all the Christians who were Jews. Disregard the Wisdom of Solomon too if you like.

"This is disingenuous at best and a conscience attempt to deceive at worst."

Make more of it than it is then. Deny the evidence of the composite unity that is God in the rest of the OT. I must say that I overestimated you. Then again, I should've known that you weren't as smart as you think you are when you were defending your wife's claim that the Gospels were written in 300 A.D.

"Continue to erect your straw men. I'll continue burning them to ash."

Wow. Talk about a pot calling kettle black!

"Time to move on to other things."

The first wise words you spoke. This is becoming senseless. Still, it was a nice bout. I enjoyed using Google productively once again.
on Jun 23, 2006
To: Satan's Advocate (like he needs one...)

Your apology is accepted. It was a minor point (but what's life without minors or points?) and you responded with a modicum of grace - which I appreciate.

I guess you only care about Jesus and John the Baptist when it suits your own purposes.


This is yet another of your transparent attempts at diversion. I don't care about either of them at all in terms of the theology you have read into the scriptures concerning them - which I have consistently denied has any validity. Their testimony, in theological terms, is not valid - therefore I take no account of them whatsoever, other than as regards the ethical content of the scriptures involved. Don't try and berate me for not doing what I have consistently said I will not do - you make yourself ridiculous.

Deny the evidence of the composite unity that is God in the rest of the OT.


I see no such evidence. You see it because you read back into the text what you want to see there - just as tentmaker did - since it's essential to Christianity as form of thought that its foundations be made manifest in the OT. And trust me, I shall continue to deny the trinitarian nonsense wherever and whenever unthinking dogmatics such as yourself present it to me.

At some point it becomes necessary to recognise that this is a logomachia, a struggle over essential meaning where such meanings are irreconcilably opposed. I don't doubt that Jesus's pet idiot will continue to bombard with her ineffable opinions, and I suspect that you will too. But any one of intelligence can see that, if that occurs, there will be nothing further added to the debate. Instead what will occur is a holding pattern of statement and counter-statement based around the main issues of contention.

Such things can be amusing, so I shall continue demolishing the nonsense you and KFC post here - until we all three grow too bored to continue.
4 PagesFirst 2 3 4