ANCIENT ECHOES PODCAST: WHY I NO LONGER BELIEVE IN GOD (JESSUP PA)

BY: JERIC YURKANIN

As my questions about Christianity grew, I found myself paying closer attention not only to religious beliefs but also to religious institutions. One of the things that stood out to me was how often religion became connected to power, influence, status, and money. This does not mean every church is corrupt or every pastor is dishonest. Many religious leaders are sincere people trying to help others. However, history shows that religion, like politics and business, can become a tool for gaining influence over large groups of people.

Throughout history, religious institutions have often held enormous power. Kings sought approval from religious authorities. Governments partnered with churches. Religious leaders influenced laws, education, social norms, and public opinion. In many societies, questioning religious authority was not simply a disagreement. It could result in punishment, exclusion, imprisonment, or worse.

This historical relationship between religion and power made me wonder whether some religious systems survive not only because they are true but because they are useful. Institutions that provide authority, social control, and group identity often become deeply embedded within societies. Once established, they can continue for generations regardless of whether their foundational claims are true.

One observation that influenced my thinking was how often religious leaders seemed to speak with confidence about things they could not actually know. Throughout history, countless individuals have claimed that God spoke to them, revealed a message to them, gave them a vision, or told them what to teach others. Sometimes these claims led to positive outcomes. Other times they led to manipulation, division, financial exploitation, or even tragedy.

The challenge is that there is often no reliable way to verify such claims. If a pastor says God told him something, how can anyone independently confirm it? Followers are often expected to trust the authority of the speaker. In many cases, questioning these claims is discouraged because it is framed as questioning God himself rather than questioning a human being.

This dynamic creates opportunities for abuse. A leader who sincerely believes God speaks through them may become overconfident in their own conclusions. A dishonest leader may intentionally use claims of divine authority to gain influence. In both situations, followers may struggle to separate the voice of God from the voice of a human being.

Another issue that stood out to me was the financial side of religion. Churches require funding. Buildings must be maintained. Staff must be paid. Programs cost money. None of these realities are inherently problematic. Every organization requires resources to operate. The concern arises when financial incentives become intertwined with religious claims.

History contains countless examples of individuals becoming wealthy through religion. Some televangelists own mansions, private jets, luxury vehicles, and large financial empires. Prosperity gospel teachers often promise financial blessings to followers who donate generously. Critics argue that these systems frequently enrich leaders more than the people supporting them.

Again, this does not describe every church. Many churches use resources responsibly and help their communities. However, the existence of financial incentives raises legitimate questions. When someone’s income depends on convincing others that they possess spiritual authority, skepticism becomes reasonable.

The prosperity gospel provides one of the clearest examples of this issue. Followers are often told that financial giving demonstrates faith and that God will reward generosity with prosperity. When blessings come, the teaching is celebrated as successful. When prosperity fails to appear, followers are often told they lacked faith, patience, or obedience. The system tends to protect itself regardless of outcomes.

What troubled me was not only the money itself but the psychological mechanisms involved. People facing hardship are often desperate for hope. Someone struggling financially, emotionally, or physically may be particularly vulnerable to promises of divine intervention. In those moments, religion can become a marketplace where hope is bought and sold.

Another factor that influenced my thinking was observing how often religious leaders seemed reluctant to admit mistakes. In science, theories are revised when evidence changes. In many professions, errors are acknowledged and corrected. Religious leaders sometimes do this as well, but often there appears to be strong pressure to preserve authority.

History contains countless failed prophecies, inaccurate predictions, and mistaken teachings. Yet many leaders continue attracting followers even after being proven wrong. The explanations may change, the timeline may shift, or the interpretation may be revised, but accountability is often limited. This pattern made me wonder whether preserving authority sometimes becomes more important than pursuing truth.

The issue becomes especially noticeable when examining end-times predictions. For generations, religious leaders have claimed that specific events signaled the immediate return of Jesus. Books have been written. Sermons have been preached. Followers have reorganized their lives around these predictions. When the predictions fail, new explanations emerge, and the cycle continues.

What fascinated me was that many followers remained loyal despite repeated failures. This suggested that emotional investment, identity, and trust in authority often outweigh evidence. Once people become deeply committed to a belief system, changing their minds can feel extremely difficult.

I also noticed that religion often benefits from what psychologists call confirmation bias. People remember the predictions that seem accurate and forget those that fail. They remember the prayers that appear answered and overlook the ones that do not. They remember the coincidences that reinforce belief while ignoring the countless events that do not fit the narrative.

This tendency is not unique to religion. It is part of human nature. However, religion often provides powerful frameworks that encourage believers to interpret events in ways that reinforce existing beliefs. Over time, this can create the impression of overwhelming evidence even when alternative explanations exist.

Another observation that shaped my thinking was how often religious institutions adapt after cultural shifts occur. Positions once defended passionately are later abandoned. Teachings once presented as certain are reinterpreted. Moral positions evolve. Yet many believers speak as though the faith has remained unchanged throughout history.

This pattern appears in debates about slavery, segregation, women’s roles, science, and numerous other issues. When social attitudes change, religious interpretations often change as well. To me, this suggested that religion may frequently follow cultural developments rather than lead them.

One of the most difficult questions I began asking was whether religion sometimes reflects human desires more than divine revelation. People desire certainty. Religion offers certainty. People desire justice. Religion promises ultimate justice. People fear death. Religion promises life after death. People desire purpose. Religion provides purpose.

None of this proves religion is false. However, it raises the possibility that religious beliefs may persist partly because they satisfy powerful psychological needs. The fact that a belief is comforting does not necessarily mean it is true.

Over time, I found myself becoming more interested in motivations than doctrines. Why do people believe? Why do leaders preach? Why do institutions survive? Why do followers remain loyal despite contradictions and failures? The answers often seemed deeply connected to ordinary human motivations: belonging, status, identity, comfort, hope, fear, and meaning.

This realization did not make me cynical about every religious person. Many believers are sincere, compassionate, and motivated by genuine concern for others. However, it did make me more cautious about claims of divine authority. Human beings are capable of self-deception, exaggeration, wishful thinking, and manipulation. Those tendencies do not disappear simply because someone is religious.

Ultimately, studying the relationship between religion, power, money, and human motivation led me to a broader conclusion. Before accepting extraordinary claims about God, miracles, prophecy, or divine revelation, it is important to examine the human systems surrounding those claims. History repeatedly demonstrates that human beings are capable of creating powerful institutions, inspiring narratives, and deeply held beliefs without supernatural involvement.

That does not prove that God does not exist. It does suggest that many aspects of religion may be better understood through history, psychology, sociology, economics, and human behavior than through appeals to the supernatural alone.

For me, the more I examined those human factors, the more religion appeared not as a unique exception to human nature but as one of the most powerful expressions of human nature itself. Understanding that became an essential part of my journey from certainty to skepticism and from unquestioned belief to ongoing inquiry.