It was a process which started because of my line of work, which forced me to see every day the kind of pain which people can impose on one another, and gradually morphed into a realization that even the perpetrators, although they had to be removed from society for the safety of others, might have been only partially responsible because many had social, and more importantly mental and psychological deficiencies or disorders which might have been an accident of genetics and life experiences.
During one decade of my life that combined with a series of terrible events affecting not only my family, but also close friends and, to some extent, me as well.
I could not reconcile that with the existence of an omnipowerful, omnipresent, and loving God. Now, I recognize that some people accept the idea of a creative godhead but believe that once having created the world "God" left evolution and humanity to their own devices. I find that completely unsatisfying. So was the bromide my priest(s) gave me that it's a mystery and we can't presume to understand it. I eagerly picked up a copy of that bestseller, "Why do good people suffer", to which I would add, why do children suffer through no possible fault of their own, and there were no answers there either.
As I've said before, my sense of justice and fairness is an integral part of my nature. So is a belief in the intellect and power of human understanding, prideful though that may be. It is indeed a cliche, but also profoundly tragic, that the world is not fair. Furthermore, if God didn't want us to understand all of these things why give us an intellect at all?
So, faith comes into conflict with both of my "animating" characteristics, if you will.
I don't know if you've ever read any of Elie Wiesel's work. I don't presume to equate the suffering I've seen at close hand to the suffering people experienced during the Holocaust, or put my intellect on a par with his, but I recognize my feelings in his. He is irretrievably sundered from God even though he profoundly misses Him.
I used to accept the science and religion at the same time and used the same explanation that these religious writings are merely a reflection of a nature that represents something figural and that these words are not meant to be taken literally. It was a lame excuse but it worked.
When I started doing historical research and it kinda irked (deep down) because those other fake religions seems to very similar or better to say just a different variant of what have now in religion and later a recent check of religious text completely pushed me away gradually. It was something I saw but did not acknowledge immediately (because I did not want it to be true) but rather gradually.