"A Sabbatical?" or "My Anti-Testimony"
I first posted this "testimony" to the web on July 27, 2001. If you too have found Christianity specifically, or religion generally, to be less than satisfying for any reason, please consider posting your own "testimony" to this site by clicking here, or message me by clicking here.
It is invariably a shock to Evangelical Christians to come across someone who has turned his or her back on the “faith was once delivered unto the saints.” Most believers will quickly dismiss an ex-Christian by piously pointing out that anyone who turns away from Christ was never a real believer. Or, as an insider might say it, “They were never born again.” There is Biblical support for the assertion. 1 John 2:19, which addressed the problem of First Century apostates, states that: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” (KJV) (I’d like to point out here that the previous verse, verse 18, suggests that the writer also believed it was the end of history and that the Antichrist was about to appear. It seems that whoever penned 1 John was premature in announcing it to be the “last time.” He may have been mistaken in his quick judgments against those ancient infidels as well.)
For those from a Calvinistic background, the fifth petal of TULIP uncompromisingly declares that those truly chosen by God for salvation will persevere in the faith. They will persevere in the faith because God will preserve them in the faith. Or, as a Baptist fundamentalist might express it: “Once saved always saved.” For fundies, a believer gone bad was just faking salvation or is presently backslidden and will eventually return to the fold, with his or her tail between his or her legs. There are also a plethora of competing denominations that teach people can lose their salvation. To members of those denominations, a fellow believer who has fallen away might have really been saved at one time, but is now lost again. They believe it is possible to get saved, and lost, and saved again, many times, before a person's allotted lifespan runs out.
The reason for this brief essay is to share my testimony about my personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and my repentance from that relationship. What follows may unnerve some of my closer associates and will likely alienate some of my good friends. I have absolutely no desire to alienate anyone since I have already spent years as a zealous evangelical Christian, alienating dozens and dozens of people in the name of Christ. However, it is only fair to those who know me to allow them a glimpse into where I am coming from, now.
When I was very young, my parents attended a Presbyterian Church. I used to watch my father pray during the service. His eyes would close and his chin would rest against his chest. I wondered if he was asleep. At home, my mother would tell my brother and I Bible stories. I always had questions for her: “Why did God put the tree of knowledge in the garden since he knew what would happen?” I also wondered whom Cain married, if dinosaurs were taken on the ark, and all kinds of things my mother could not answer. My parents stopped regularly attending church when I was nine, but still sent my brother and me to Vacation Bible School during the summer. I was diligent to learn all the Bible lessons, stories and doctrines, earning multiple gold stars in each class. Though I do not remember it, my mother likes to tell a story that even when I was 5 years old, I would come home from Sunday School, gather the un-churched neighborhood kids together on our porch, and parrot all I had been taught that morning.
I was eleven years old in 1969. My grandmother was a staunch Baptist. In fact, she was one of the founding members of the First Baptist Church in Ashtabula Ohio, and was absolutely devoted to the place. The Church had hired an aggressive youth minister who wanted to see more young people attending services. His name was Norm, and he organized a youth rally which featured a movie produced by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. The movie's aim was the conversion of young people. My grandmother invited me to the meeting and of course I loved my Grandma, so I got a ride from my Dad and sat with her to watch the show. I don’t remember the title of the movie, but the basic plot centered on one of the male characters who accepts Christ and starts to tell his friends about it. One of his unbelieving friends makes terrible fun of the whole thing, mocks Christ, and mocks the threat of going to hell. The unbelieving friend ends up accidentally trapped in a burning barn toward the end of the film and dies horrifically, going straight to a Christless grave.
I am not sure how powerful of a flick it was, but it got to me. Before that movie, I knew about God and the Bible and Jesus, but now I realized I had no personal relationship with Christ, and I needed one. When the altar call was given to come forward and accept Christ, I did not go forward, but listened intently, memorizing the “sinner’s prayer.” Later that night, in the dark and quiet of my room, I got down on my knees confessed my sins, repented as much as I knew how, and accepted Christ into my heart. It was a mind-altering experience for me. In my mind’s eye I visualized the Creator of all physically with me in the room. I felt overwhelmed with what I believed was a personal and direct manifestation of the LORD. I cried and cried. The emotional cleansing and reality of that moment has never left me, and as I write about it now, it comes alive once again.
The very next morning, I started carrying a small New Testament to school with me. I was in the sixth grade, reading a KJV, and doing my best to understand what I could from its inspired pages. I began attending church that week, and became a regular customer at the local Christian Book Store. My paper route wages and tips found investment in books and comic book tracts by Jack Chick, which I read and distributed zealously.
After my twelfth birthday I was asked if I would like to be trained as a counselor for the new Billy Graham evangelistic movie entitled “For Pete’s Sake,” which was being sponsored by several local churches. The showings were to be at Shea’s Theater in downtown Ashtabula. I eagerly agreed and dutifully submitted myself to the counselor training by memorizing the required verses and receiving a certificate as a bona fide counselor. At the end of each night, a short salvation message was shared by one of the local pastors, followed by the traditional Billy Graham style altar call. During the course of the weekend, I was able to assist several young people from my own age group as they came forward to make decisions for Christ. Following that crusade, I was excited. I began to do street evangelism on my own. I witnessed to other kids at school, and even led a fellow Boy Scout to the lord while on a week long Boy Scout camp. His name is Phil and is presently a pastor at an American Baptist Church outside of Youngstown Ohio. I started a junior high school Bible study group, and taught the others who joined how to lead others to Christ ala Billy Graham. (“The Romans Road” with some small variations, was what Billy recommended back then.) The early 1970’s saw the height of the Jesus People Movement in the US, so naturally I became involved with other non-denominational youth study groups held at various houses around town. I was introduced to CS Lewis, Watchman Nee and other famous Christian authors during this time. I drank every word written in those books like it was water. A prolific reader even in junior high I was insatiable for more and more information.
Reggie Kirk, my Boy Scout Master, recognized my thirst for more spiritual enlightenment and invited me to his church, the local Assembly of God, where I learned I needed the Baptism in the Holy Spirit to be a complete Christian. I attended one Sunday night when, providentially, the topic being discussed was that very doctrine. I went forward during the altar call to receive the “Baptism” and kept those poor people there long after the service ended as I pleaded with the Almighty to grace me with the Holy Ghost and tongues. Finally, after two hours of eye watering, knee hardening prayer, and some helpful coaching from a woman who stood with me, I babbled a few syllables. Everyone pronounced proudly that I had indeed received the Holy Spirit. Now, as a full-fledged tongue-talking Jesus person, I went full steam into making a difference in the world for Christ.
My parents, who at best were only nominally religious, viewed my obsessive enthrallment with church-stuff as disconcerting and worrisome. My mother, knowing I loved to read, decided to introduce me to her understanding of reality which was embodied in the writings of Edgar Cayce. My mother was a Reincarnationist. I rejected her teaching, witnessed to her unceasingly for the next 25 years about the love of Christ, and read everything published concerning the psychic Cayce. My grades suffered terribly in junior high, as I could not see any value to secular learning. I viewed the world as passing away, valueless compared with heavenly knowledge with eternal relevance.
As puberty became more influential in my thought processes, I struggled terribly with the hormonal demands of my body verses the tenets of the Church concerning any sort of sensual pleasure. Jesus taught that it is just as sinful to have any sort of lustful thought, as to actually act on any of them. I found adolescence very difficult on my thought life, finding myself in a perpetual war with guilt. I agonized over my sexuality, begging God to deliver me from temptation, to no avail. It was depressing.
I began to distinguish myself in music during this time, receiving nothing but positive feedback on my performance. By the time I was 14, I was being hired to play trombone semi-professionally. It was fun. I had begun finding inconsistencies in the Bible when I noticed numerous contradictions between various number citations in the Old Testament. Then I was confused by the multiple conflicting details in the resurrection stories in the Gospels, as well as in Paul’s version. One of the biggest contradictions I could not rectify was whether or not Judas threw his money into the temple and hanged himself or bought a field and fell headlong into it. I wrote to an evangelistic radio ministry out of Richmond Virginia, asking for direction about these apparent problems. I was only thirteen and they responded to my cry for help with a short note. Instead of an intellectually satisfying apologetic, they merely admonished that some things could only be answered through the eyes of faith. I pretty much got the same answer everywhere I went. Regardless, I continued to attend Baptist Church on Sunday mornings, Assembly of God on Sunday nights, and various home study groups during the week. Then, the summer before entering High School, the Baptist church hierarchy decided to fire the youth minister. He had held an all night youth rally event at the church. The geriatric power people in the church thought his tactics to lure young people to church were inappropriate, so they brought the issue to vote and that settled the matter. He was there one week and gone the next. During the same time period, the Pastor of the Assembly of God church was caught having an affair with one of the lady members. Both he and the woman were married to other people, so when the affair was discovered, he resigned and left the church. I still wonder how long that had been going on. My growing dissatisfaction with the church’s inability to answer my Biblical questions, my budding musical career and the hypocritical church politics worked together to help me fall away from Christianity for a time. My grades in school improved immensely. I finished High School early, in the top 10% of the class. I auditioned for the Air Force Band, was accepted, and as soon as I turned seventeen, I left for basic training in San Antonio.
As the years went by, I continued to have an interest in the Bible, studying textual variants and translation problems. I had several years of revival, when I buried my questioning and simply emulated the faith of a little child, trusting that though I could not understand many things, God knew what he was doing. Eventually, I would get a headache from such pious mind games and find myself drifting again. I spent years in and out of Charismatic meetings where healings were performed as well as Words of Knowledge, messages from God, and rousing sermons proclaiming the imminent return of Christ. The emotional feeling of those early charismatic events was like a drug high.
During these up and down spiritual times, I swung between being fanatically zealous, to totally apostate. I comforted myself on my lack of consistency by reasoning that at least I was not lukewarm. In the next few years I belonged to several different Baptist Churches and several different Charismatic Churches in succession. I was married, had a son, got divorced, remarried and had two more children. In my thirties, I finally hit bottom and decided I would simply dig in, buy books like crazy, and study until I got all my answers.
My second wife and I were deeply involved in an English speaking Assembly of God church while living in Japan. We ran the music ministry, the bookstore and participated in English evangelism at a local Japanese speaking Assembly of God. Once again, my inquiring mind reared its ugly head and put me at odds with the church. For years I had accepted the Pentecostal teaching that all Christians must speak in tongues to demonstrate they had been baptized in the Holy Spirit. I had also accepted the harsh Arminianism preached there. As I began to study John Calvin, Matthew Henry, John Bunyan, Matthew Poole, Charles Spurgeon, Martin Luther and a host of other teachers from the past, I began to realize that there was a whole other gospel of which I was completely ignorant. I questioned the pastor of our AG church on some of these matters. He did not answer any of my questions, assuring me that God would comfort my heart as to the truth of the Assemblies’ teachings in time. He responded to my inquiry by removing my wife and I from all our leadership responsibilities until such time as we came to peace with the issues I brought up. He said if I were to remain in leadership with doubts on various Pentecostal doctrines, it would cause confusion for the congregation. Of course we were welcome to stay and attend the services, he said. We left the church that day. I started a home Bible study where we studied such things as Romans 9, Ephesians 1, and other strikingly Calvinistic chapters, without forcing any dogmatic conclusions. It was well attended. I led that group into street evangelism in Japan, passing out tracts at train stations and other public areas. I wrote letters to Christian leaders all over the world, soliciting their input on various doctrinal issues and spent a small fortune on books, studying the reformed theologians who lived prior to this century’s “charismania”.
I retired from the Air Force, left Japan and started over again in the town where I grew up. My parents and other relatives were apprehensive of my resettling near them, since they knew I was a religious fanatic. We attended, and even joined, several churches over the next few years, trying to settle in with the local evangelical, non-charismatic Christians. We wanted to find acceptance, and learn sound doctrine. As I learned more, and leaned more toward the Reformed Faith, I was made aware that I was living in adultery with my present wife. This was because my previous marriage did not end with a scriptural divorce. One counselor advised me that I should leave my present wife and live celibate in order to obey Christ’s commands. Failure to leave my present wife was considered continuous adultery in this Reformed denomination. This made no sense to me. Can one grievous sin be offset by committing another, I wondered? Should I really abandon my wife and two children because I blew it on my first marriage? I also discovered that any illusions I might have of ever being in any kind of leadership in any Reformed church, was out of the question. Divorce and remarriage was treated, except under the narrowest of scriptural scrutiny, as if it were more unforgivable than murder. The husband of one wife was the badge of acceptance required above all. Of course I still had questions. That, apparently, is a bad thing, as it did nothing but set me at odds with pastors and congregants alike. We finally found a Reformed Baptist Church in Pennsylvania, which accepted my past miscarriage of wedlock and we attended for several months. Originally the church had been an Independent Baptist Church and quite Arminian in theology. They had made the switch to Calvinism in soteriology, but remained Darbyite in eschatology. The primary preoccupation they seemed to have was with such important topics as head coverings for women and hating homosexuals. If the pastor was questioned in private concerning even the smallest detail of his teaching, the next service would be laced with personalized rebuke and condemnation pointedly aimed at the doubting inquiries and directly at those mouthing them. We left that church too.
We found another church some 35 miles away from our house that seemed promising. This church had been very charismatic originally, but had found deeper meaning in the teachings of R.J. Rushdooney. They had made a complete 180-degree turn toward Reconstructionism. I was totally unfamiliar with this brand of Christianity, so we stayed there for over three years. In that time we experienced and were taught a whole new brand of Christianity. Waving the Westminster Confession as the flag of truth we were encouraged to be filled with anger against sin, against worldly politicians, and to be fiercely aggressive political activists, so we might gain temporal power and obey Christ’s command to go into the entire world. “Discipling the Nations” was their clarion call. When the assistant pastor raised money to go and publicly support a civil war in a small African country, in the name of Christ, we finally knew it was time to leave that arena too. During the three years we were there, not one person became our friend. Everyone was too busy condemning pietism, marching and campaigning, and supposedly changing the world for Jesus.
Since leaving that church, I have spent the last couple of years reading other materials. Books by disillusioned Christians, pastors and others who find religion generally, and Christianity specifically, lacking in truth has become my books of choice. I have come to accept my initial adolescent doubts about the Bible. It was not simply rebellion, but the seed of good common logic and sense. I no longer claim to have all, or many, of the answers to life as I once claimed when my fanaticism expanded to full bloom. Since I have had to accept the fact that my theology has been wrong time and again, even though I supposedly had the Holy Spirit guiding me, it is quite unlikely that I have ever been totally right on much. I have changed my foundational beliefs several times as my religious self-education has evolved. I can’t say that I am content to be stagnant even at this juncture of spiritual understanding – I reserve the right to once again change my mind. Surely, if God could make a mistake and repent of making man, I can acknowledge error and repent of making a god and any decisions about my belief in it.
What do I believe now? Like I said, I am not sure. I suppose that makes me an agnostic. At this point, that is the most intellectually appealing position for my tortured thought processes. It allows me the freedom to keep an open mind while absorbing all the viewpoints without completely immersing myself in any of them. You might consider it an R&R from mind control, or perhaps I simply want …………, a sabbatical.
Dave
That is what I said then, and for the most part I would not change a thing. However, as my mind has cleared from the constant programming or self brainwashing I willingly subjected myself to, I have upped the "Anti", you might say. While I really cannot credit or blame anyone else for the positions on religion I have held, I find that much of the feedback I am receiving from this site implies that I have rejected Christ because of how people treated me. I regret I have written in such a way so as to mislead some on this point. Though I indeed was treated poorly by the bulk of Christians I know, I do not hate or dislike any of them. Neither did I leave the faith solely because of their behavior. I endured trials like that for nearly 30 years, and though unpleasant, it did not discourage me from my commitment to Christ. I remained stalwart for years, reasoning, as many of the people who write me, that Christians may be imperfect, but they are forgiven, and Christ is not like them, and so on. The main point I had hoped to accomplish in reiterating a few of the unpleasant experiences I had with the "chosen few" was to show that there is nothing supernatural going on in the lives of Christians. We are taught that the Holy Spirit is within us, transforming us, quickening us, destroying our sin nature, putting to death the "old man" and on and on ad-nauseam. The simple truth is: it is not true. Christians are absolutely no different than any one else. They do not have GOD ALMIGHTY in their bodies, making them into new creatures. Oh, sure, many resist temptation and endeavor to live a pure, moral life, but their thoughts continue to trouble them, and have to be resisted until death. Anyone who claims otherwise is a lying fool.
Now, of course someone is going to give me one of the stock theological answers to this puzzle, such as, the sin nature will never be destroyed until death. Or they might say that we are never perfectly sanctified in this life. There are plenty of well-rehearsed answers, all with supporting Bible verses, and interestingly, many of those bland explanations contradict one another, depending on the denominational bent of the various unharmonious voices. I readily admit that I have never been anything more than a layman. I have no official seminary or theological schooling to adorn my walls. I have, however, read extensively from the writings of Charles Spurgeon, Charles Hodge, Matthew Poole, Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Martin Luther, John Calvin, R.C. Sproul, the historic Confessions of Faith, commentaries without number, The Sword of the Lord, Charisma Magazine, Bill Bright, Frank Morrison, Hendricks, etc.
Listing all my reading is possible, but I only mention the books I can see from my computer desk. If I were to go to the basement, I would recite dozens of other well known authors in Christendom. I owned a Dake Bible and I own an old Geneva Bible. I have a reprint of Tyndale's original English New Testament. I was, and am, highly interested in the Christian faith. Does all this reading make me the authority? No of course not, but it was not only emotional dissatisfaction which led me to my present position. The more I studied the Christian faith, its history, how it has mutated and evolved over time, I began to realize that I was not being intellectually honest with myself. How can “the truth once delivered” change so much over the course of 2000 years if GOD ALMIGHTY was running the show? For example, Arminianism was heresy to Protestants when the Bible was published in English. Now it is the Calvinists who are held in disrepute.
Chances are that many of the Christians who read the mentions of Calvinism, eschatology, soteriology, etc., have no idea what I am talking about. That is another topic that contributed to my first suspicions that Xtianity is a false lie: the striking ignorance and loathing for learning that is rife in the Christian community. Claiming to love god with all their hearts and souls, yet reading His Word, memorizing it, studying theology to better understand HIM, is quite beyond most, if not nearly all Christians. Finding anyone who understands the history of Christianity prior to Darby's Dispensational gospel is nearly impossible. I would try to strike up conversations about theological and historical topics that were churning in my mind only to find blank stares in the Christian's faces to whom I would address myself. Now, that would be understandable if I were addressing novices, or baby believers, but the blankest stares would come from the pastors themselves. One pastor actually admitted to me that he found if very difficult to study the Word of God. He found study of theology very dry and boring and emphasized to me that Christ was relational, seeking a living relationship with his children, not living in dry books but living in beating hearts. Oh, how pious sounding! No doubt some reading this now have heard such tripe, and maybe some even heard their spirit bear witness to them that, yes that is true, Christ desires a relationship with us. To this nonsense I say that since Christ and his Dad are not talking in any other conventional way except through the words of Scripture in these last days, how is it I can hear His voice, unless I immerse myself in His WORDS? How is it I can say I am filled with the Holy Spirit, I love GOD more than all, I am being made into a new creation, and yet still find studying Christianity to be dull? The answer is simple of course. It is dull, and it is dead. There is no living Spirit indwelling believers, and only the compulsive, people like me, have the natural drive to totally focus on boring stuff.
Finally, finding no answers to my questions, I read the books of such people as Thomas Paine, Mark Twain, Dan Barker, Charles Templeton, Austin Mills, James Randi, Richard Dawkins, and a host of others. I began to see that there was a whole world of Freethinking Ex-Christians, and NON-Christians out there, people who were fairly invisible to the general public, especially the Christian general public. My mind was opened to reality, and is continuing to be opened to reality, as the myths and gods of my youth are abandoned to be replaced by reason.
I do not consider myself an agnostic anymore, finding fence sitting untenable. I could say I am now an evil Atheist, or I could use the softer sounding title of Freethinker. For now I will simply call myself an Ex-Christian, though there is more to it than being an ex something or another. I no longer believe in any gods or goddesses, they are all primitive imaginings reflecting an escape from fear and ignorance. There are many things we do not know about the world and the universe at large, but not knowing the how’s or why’s of things does not predispose us to believing in a giant Sky Daddy, or Tri-Daddy, or whatever.
None of this proves or disproves Christianity, I realize, but the purpose of this paper is to show the thinking processes that led to my de-conversion.
It is invariably a shock to Evangelical Christians to come across someone who has turned his or her back on the “faith was once delivered unto the saints.” Most believers will quickly dismiss an ex-Christian by piously pointing out that anyone who turns away from Christ was never a real believer. Or, as an insider might say it, “They were never born again.” There is Biblical support for the assertion. 1 John 2:19, which addressed the problem of First Century apostates, states that: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” (KJV) (I’d like to point out here that the previous verse, verse 18, suggests that the writer also believed it was the end of history and that the Antichrist was about to appear. It seems that whoever penned 1 John was premature in announcing it to be the “last time.” He may have been mistaken in his quick judgments against those ancient infidels as well.)
For those from a Calvinistic background, the fifth petal of TULIP uncompromisingly declares that those truly chosen by God for salvation will persevere in the faith. They will persevere in the faith because God will preserve them in the faith. Or, as a Baptist fundamentalist might express it: “Once saved always saved.” For fundies, a believer gone bad was just faking salvation or is presently backslidden and will eventually return to the fold, with his or her tail between his or her legs. There are also a plethora of competing denominations that teach people can lose their salvation. To members of those denominations, a fellow believer who has fallen away might have really been saved at one time, but is now lost again. They believe it is possible to get saved, and lost, and saved again, many times, before a person's allotted lifespan runs out.
The reason for this brief essay is to share my testimony about my personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and my repentance from that relationship. What follows may unnerve some of my closer associates and will likely alienate some of my good friends. I have absolutely no desire to alienate anyone since I have already spent years as a zealous evangelical Christian, alienating dozens and dozens of people in the name of Christ. However, it is only fair to those who know me to allow them a glimpse into where I am coming from, now.
When I was very young, my parents attended a Presbyterian Church. I used to watch my father pray during the service. His eyes would close and his chin would rest against his chest. I wondered if he was asleep. At home, my mother would tell my brother and I Bible stories. I always had questions for her: “Why did God put the tree of knowledge in the garden since he knew what would happen?” I also wondered whom Cain married, if dinosaurs were taken on the ark, and all kinds of things my mother could not answer. My parents stopped regularly attending church when I was nine, but still sent my brother and me to Vacation Bible School during the summer. I was diligent to learn all the Bible lessons, stories and doctrines, earning multiple gold stars in each class. Though I do not remember it, my mother likes to tell a story that even when I was 5 years old, I would come home from Sunday School, gather the un-churched neighborhood kids together on our porch, and parrot all I had been taught that morning.
I was eleven years old in 1969. My grandmother was a staunch Baptist. In fact, she was one of the founding members of the First Baptist Church in Ashtabula Ohio, and was absolutely devoted to the place. The Church had hired an aggressive youth minister who wanted to see more young people attending services. His name was Norm, and he organized a youth rally which featured a movie produced by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. The movie's aim was the conversion of young people. My grandmother invited me to the meeting and of course I loved my Grandma, so I got a ride from my Dad and sat with her to watch the show. I don’t remember the title of the movie, but the basic plot centered on one of the male characters who accepts Christ and starts to tell his friends about it. One of his unbelieving friends makes terrible fun of the whole thing, mocks Christ, and mocks the threat of going to hell. The unbelieving friend ends up accidentally trapped in a burning barn toward the end of the film and dies horrifically, going straight to a Christless grave.
I am not sure how powerful of a flick it was, but it got to me. Before that movie, I knew about God and the Bible and Jesus, but now I realized I had no personal relationship with Christ, and I needed one. When the altar call was given to come forward and accept Christ, I did not go forward, but listened intently, memorizing the “sinner’s prayer.” Later that night, in the dark and quiet of my room, I got down on my knees confessed my sins, repented as much as I knew how, and accepted Christ into my heart. It was a mind-altering experience for me. In my mind’s eye I visualized the Creator of all physically with me in the room. I felt overwhelmed with what I believed was a personal and direct manifestation of the LORD. I cried and cried. The emotional cleansing and reality of that moment has never left me, and as I write about it now, it comes alive once again.
The very next morning, I started carrying a small New Testament to school with me. I was in the sixth grade, reading a KJV, and doing my best to understand what I could from its inspired pages. I began attending church that week, and became a regular customer at the local Christian Book Store. My paper route wages and tips found investment in books and comic book tracts by Jack Chick, which I read and distributed zealously.
After my twelfth birthday I was asked if I would like to be trained as a counselor for the new Billy Graham evangelistic movie entitled “For Pete’s Sake,” which was being sponsored by several local churches. The showings were to be at Shea’s Theater in downtown Ashtabula. I eagerly agreed and dutifully submitted myself to the counselor training by memorizing the required verses and receiving a certificate as a bona fide counselor. At the end of each night, a short salvation message was shared by one of the local pastors, followed by the traditional Billy Graham style altar call. During the course of the weekend, I was able to assist several young people from my own age group as they came forward to make decisions for Christ. Following that crusade, I was excited. I began to do street evangelism on my own. I witnessed to other kids at school, and even led a fellow Boy Scout to the lord while on a week long Boy Scout camp. His name is Phil and is presently a pastor at an American Baptist Church outside of Youngstown Ohio. I started a junior high school Bible study group, and taught the others who joined how to lead others to Christ ala Billy Graham. (“The Romans Road” with some small variations, was what Billy recommended back then.) The early 1970’s saw the height of the Jesus People Movement in the US, so naturally I became involved with other non-denominational youth study groups held at various houses around town. I was introduced to CS Lewis, Watchman Nee and other famous Christian authors during this time. I drank every word written in those books like it was water. A prolific reader even in junior high I was insatiable for more and more information.
Reggie Kirk, my Boy Scout Master, recognized my thirst for more spiritual enlightenment and invited me to his church, the local Assembly of God, where I learned I needed the Baptism in the Holy Spirit to be a complete Christian. I attended one Sunday night when, providentially, the topic being discussed was that very doctrine. I went forward during the altar call to receive the “Baptism” and kept those poor people there long after the service ended as I pleaded with the Almighty to grace me with the Holy Ghost and tongues. Finally, after two hours of eye watering, knee hardening prayer, and some helpful coaching from a woman who stood with me, I babbled a few syllables. Everyone pronounced proudly that I had indeed received the Holy Spirit. Now, as a full-fledged tongue-talking Jesus person, I went full steam into making a difference in the world for Christ.
My parents, who at best were only nominally religious, viewed my obsessive enthrallment with church-stuff as disconcerting and worrisome. My mother, knowing I loved to read, decided to introduce me to her understanding of reality which was embodied in the writings of Edgar Cayce. My mother was a Reincarnationist. I rejected her teaching, witnessed to her unceasingly for the next 25 years about the love of Christ, and read everything published concerning the psychic Cayce. My grades suffered terribly in junior high, as I could not see any value to secular learning. I viewed the world as passing away, valueless compared with heavenly knowledge with eternal relevance.
As puberty became more influential in my thought processes, I struggled terribly with the hormonal demands of my body verses the tenets of the Church concerning any sort of sensual pleasure. Jesus taught that it is just as sinful to have any sort of lustful thought, as to actually act on any of them. I found adolescence very difficult on my thought life, finding myself in a perpetual war with guilt. I agonized over my sexuality, begging God to deliver me from temptation, to no avail. It was depressing.
I began to distinguish myself in music during this time, receiving nothing but positive feedback on my performance. By the time I was 14, I was being hired to play trombone semi-professionally. It was fun. I had begun finding inconsistencies in the Bible when I noticed numerous contradictions between various number citations in the Old Testament. Then I was confused by the multiple conflicting details in the resurrection stories in the Gospels, as well as in Paul’s version. One of the biggest contradictions I could not rectify was whether or not Judas threw his money into the temple and hanged himself or bought a field and fell headlong into it. I wrote to an evangelistic radio ministry out of Richmond Virginia, asking for direction about these apparent problems. I was only thirteen and they responded to my cry for help with a short note. Instead of an intellectually satisfying apologetic, they merely admonished that some things could only be answered through the eyes of faith. I pretty much got the same answer everywhere I went. Regardless, I continued to attend Baptist Church on Sunday mornings, Assembly of God on Sunday nights, and various home study groups during the week. Then, the summer before entering High School, the Baptist church hierarchy decided to fire the youth minister. He had held an all night youth rally event at the church. The geriatric power people in the church thought his tactics to lure young people to church were inappropriate, so they brought the issue to vote and that settled the matter. He was there one week and gone the next. During the same time period, the Pastor of the Assembly of God church was caught having an affair with one of the lady members. Both he and the woman were married to other people, so when the affair was discovered, he resigned and left the church. I still wonder how long that had been going on. My growing dissatisfaction with the church’s inability to answer my Biblical questions, my budding musical career and the hypocritical church politics worked together to help me fall away from Christianity for a time. My grades in school improved immensely. I finished High School early, in the top 10% of the class. I auditioned for the Air Force Band, was accepted, and as soon as I turned seventeen, I left for basic training in San Antonio.
As the years went by, I continued to have an interest in the Bible, studying textual variants and translation problems. I had several years of revival, when I buried my questioning and simply emulated the faith of a little child, trusting that though I could not understand many things, God knew what he was doing. Eventually, I would get a headache from such pious mind games and find myself drifting again. I spent years in and out of Charismatic meetings where healings were performed as well as Words of Knowledge, messages from God, and rousing sermons proclaiming the imminent return of Christ. The emotional feeling of those early charismatic events was like a drug high.
During these up and down spiritual times, I swung between being fanatically zealous, to totally apostate. I comforted myself on my lack of consistency by reasoning that at least I was not lukewarm. In the next few years I belonged to several different Baptist Churches and several different Charismatic Churches in succession. I was married, had a son, got divorced, remarried and had two more children. In my thirties, I finally hit bottom and decided I would simply dig in, buy books like crazy, and study until I got all my answers.
My second wife and I were deeply involved in an English speaking Assembly of God church while living in Japan. We ran the music ministry, the bookstore and participated in English evangelism at a local Japanese speaking Assembly of God. Once again, my inquiring mind reared its ugly head and put me at odds with the church. For years I had accepted the Pentecostal teaching that all Christians must speak in tongues to demonstrate they had been baptized in the Holy Spirit. I had also accepted the harsh Arminianism preached there. As I began to study John Calvin, Matthew Henry, John Bunyan, Matthew Poole, Charles Spurgeon, Martin Luther and a host of other teachers from the past, I began to realize that there was a whole other gospel of which I was completely ignorant. I questioned the pastor of our AG church on some of these matters. He did not answer any of my questions, assuring me that God would comfort my heart as to the truth of the Assemblies’ teachings in time. He responded to my inquiry by removing my wife and I from all our leadership responsibilities until such time as we came to peace with the issues I brought up. He said if I were to remain in leadership with doubts on various Pentecostal doctrines, it would cause confusion for the congregation. Of course we were welcome to stay and attend the services, he said. We left the church that day. I started a home Bible study where we studied such things as Romans 9, Ephesians 1, and other strikingly Calvinistic chapters, without forcing any dogmatic conclusions. It was well attended. I led that group into street evangelism in Japan, passing out tracts at train stations and other public areas. I wrote letters to Christian leaders all over the world, soliciting their input on various doctrinal issues and spent a small fortune on books, studying the reformed theologians who lived prior to this century’s “charismania”.
I retired from the Air Force, left Japan and started over again in the town where I grew up. My parents and other relatives were apprehensive of my resettling near them, since they knew I was a religious fanatic. We attended, and even joined, several churches over the next few years, trying to settle in with the local evangelical, non-charismatic Christians. We wanted to find acceptance, and learn sound doctrine. As I learned more, and leaned more toward the Reformed Faith, I was made aware that I was living in adultery with my present wife. This was because my previous marriage did not end with a scriptural divorce. One counselor advised me that I should leave my present wife and live celibate in order to obey Christ’s commands. Failure to leave my present wife was considered continuous adultery in this Reformed denomination. This made no sense to me. Can one grievous sin be offset by committing another, I wondered? Should I really abandon my wife and two children because I blew it on my first marriage? I also discovered that any illusions I might have of ever being in any kind of leadership in any Reformed church, was out of the question. Divorce and remarriage was treated, except under the narrowest of scriptural scrutiny, as if it were more unforgivable than murder. The husband of one wife was the badge of acceptance required above all. Of course I still had questions. That, apparently, is a bad thing, as it did nothing but set me at odds with pastors and congregants alike. We finally found a Reformed Baptist Church in Pennsylvania, which accepted my past miscarriage of wedlock and we attended for several months. Originally the church had been an Independent Baptist Church and quite Arminian in theology. They had made the switch to Calvinism in soteriology, but remained Darbyite in eschatology. The primary preoccupation they seemed to have was with such important topics as head coverings for women and hating homosexuals. If the pastor was questioned in private concerning even the smallest detail of his teaching, the next service would be laced with personalized rebuke and condemnation pointedly aimed at the doubting inquiries and directly at those mouthing them. We left that church too.
We found another church some 35 miles away from our house that seemed promising. This church had been very charismatic originally, but had found deeper meaning in the teachings of R.J. Rushdooney. They had made a complete 180-degree turn toward Reconstructionism. I was totally unfamiliar with this brand of Christianity, so we stayed there for over three years. In that time we experienced and were taught a whole new brand of Christianity. Waving the Westminster Confession as the flag of truth we were encouraged to be filled with anger against sin, against worldly politicians, and to be fiercely aggressive political activists, so we might gain temporal power and obey Christ’s command to go into the entire world. “Discipling the Nations” was their clarion call. When the assistant pastor raised money to go and publicly support a civil war in a small African country, in the name of Christ, we finally knew it was time to leave that arena too. During the three years we were there, not one person became our friend. Everyone was too busy condemning pietism, marching and campaigning, and supposedly changing the world for Jesus.
Since leaving that church, I have spent the last couple of years reading other materials. Books by disillusioned Christians, pastors and others who find religion generally, and Christianity specifically, lacking in truth has become my books of choice. I have come to accept my initial adolescent doubts about the Bible. It was not simply rebellion, but the seed of good common logic and sense. I no longer claim to have all, or many, of the answers to life as I once claimed when my fanaticism expanded to full bloom. Since I have had to accept the fact that my theology has been wrong time and again, even though I supposedly had the Holy Spirit guiding me, it is quite unlikely that I have ever been totally right on much. I have changed my foundational beliefs several times as my religious self-education has evolved. I can’t say that I am content to be stagnant even at this juncture of spiritual understanding – I reserve the right to once again change my mind. Surely, if God could make a mistake and repent of making man, I can acknowledge error and repent of making a god and any decisions about my belief in it.
What do I believe now? Like I said, I am not sure. I suppose that makes me an agnostic. At this point, that is the most intellectually appealing position for my tortured thought processes. It allows me the freedom to keep an open mind while absorbing all the viewpoints without completely immersing myself in any of them. You might consider it an R&R from mind control, or perhaps I simply want …………, a sabbatical.
Dave
That is what I said then, and for the most part I would not change a thing. However, as my mind has cleared from the constant programming or self brainwashing I willingly subjected myself to, I have upped the "Anti", you might say. While I really cannot credit or blame anyone else for the positions on religion I have held, I find that much of the feedback I am receiving from this site implies that I have rejected Christ because of how people treated me. I regret I have written in such a way so as to mislead some on this point. Though I indeed was treated poorly by the bulk of Christians I know, I do not hate or dislike any of them. Neither did I leave the faith solely because of their behavior. I endured trials like that for nearly 30 years, and though unpleasant, it did not discourage me from my commitment to Christ. I remained stalwart for years, reasoning, as many of the people who write me, that Christians may be imperfect, but they are forgiven, and Christ is not like them, and so on. The main point I had hoped to accomplish in reiterating a few of the unpleasant experiences I had with the "chosen few" was to show that there is nothing supernatural going on in the lives of Christians. We are taught that the Holy Spirit is within us, transforming us, quickening us, destroying our sin nature, putting to death the "old man" and on and on ad-nauseam. The simple truth is: it is not true. Christians are absolutely no different than any one else. They do not have GOD ALMIGHTY in their bodies, making them into new creatures. Oh, sure, many resist temptation and endeavor to live a pure, moral life, but their thoughts continue to trouble them, and have to be resisted until death. Anyone who claims otherwise is a lying fool.
Now, of course someone is going to give me one of the stock theological answers to this puzzle, such as, the sin nature will never be destroyed until death. Or they might say that we are never perfectly sanctified in this life. There are plenty of well-rehearsed answers, all with supporting Bible verses, and interestingly, many of those bland explanations contradict one another, depending on the denominational bent of the various unharmonious voices. I readily admit that I have never been anything more than a layman. I have no official seminary or theological schooling to adorn my walls. I have, however, read extensively from the writings of Charles Spurgeon, Charles Hodge, Matthew Poole, Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Martin Luther, John Calvin, R.C. Sproul, the historic Confessions of Faith, commentaries without number, The Sword of the Lord, Charisma Magazine, Bill Bright, Frank Morrison, Hendricks, etc.
Listing all my reading is possible, but I only mention the books I can see from my computer desk. If I were to go to the basement, I would recite dozens of other well known authors in Christendom. I owned a Dake Bible and I own an old Geneva Bible. I have a reprint of Tyndale's original English New Testament. I was, and am, highly interested in the Christian faith. Does all this reading make me the authority? No of course not, but it was not only emotional dissatisfaction which led me to my present position. The more I studied the Christian faith, its history, how it has mutated and evolved over time, I began to realize that I was not being intellectually honest with myself. How can “the truth once delivered” change so much over the course of 2000 years if GOD ALMIGHTY was running the show? For example, Arminianism was heresy to Protestants when the Bible was published in English. Now it is the Calvinists who are held in disrepute.
Chances are that many of the Christians who read the mentions of Calvinism, eschatology, soteriology, etc., have no idea what I am talking about. That is another topic that contributed to my first suspicions that Xtianity is a false lie: the striking ignorance and loathing for learning that is rife in the Christian community. Claiming to love god with all their hearts and souls, yet reading His Word, memorizing it, studying theology to better understand HIM, is quite beyond most, if not nearly all Christians. Finding anyone who understands the history of Christianity prior to Darby's Dispensational gospel is nearly impossible. I would try to strike up conversations about theological and historical topics that were churning in my mind only to find blank stares in the Christian's faces to whom I would address myself. Now, that would be understandable if I were addressing novices, or baby believers, but the blankest stares would come from the pastors themselves. One pastor actually admitted to me that he found if very difficult to study the Word of God. He found study of theology very dry and boring and emphasized to me that Christ was relational, seeking a living relationship with his children, not living in dry books but living in beating hearts. Oh, how pious sounding! No doubt some reading this now have heard such tripe, and maybe some even heard their spirit bear witness to them that, yes that is true, Christ desires a relationship with us. To this nonsense I say that since Christ and his Dad are not talking in any other conventional way except through the words of Scripture in these last days, how is it I can hear His voice, unless I immerse myself in His WORDS? How is it I can say I am filled with the Holy Spirit, I love GOD more than all, I am being made into a new creation, and yet still find studying Christianity to be dull? The answer is simple of course. It is dull, and it is dead. There is no living Spirit indwelling believers, and only the compulsive, people like me, have the natural drive to totally focus on boring stuff.
Finally, finding no answers to my questions, I read the books of such people as Thomas Paine, Mark Twain, Dan Barker, Charles Templeton, Austin Mills, James Randi, Richard Dawkins, and a host of others. I began to see that there was a whole world of Freethinking Ex-Christians, and NON-Christians out there, people who were fairly invisible to the general public, especially the Christian general public. My mind was opened to reality, and is continuing to be opened to reality, as the myths and gods of my youth are abandoned to be replaced by reason.
I do not consider myself an agnostic anymore, finding fence sitting untenable. I could say I am now an evil Atheist, or I could use the softer sounding title of Freethinker. For now I will simply call myself an Ex-Christian, though there is more to it than being an ex something or another. I no longer believe in any gods or goddesses, they are all primitive imaginings reflecting an escape from fear and ignorance. There are many things we do not know about the world and the universe at large, but not knowing the how’s or why’s of things does not predispose us to believing in a giant Sky Daddy, or Tri-Daddy, or whatever.
None of this proves or disproves Christianity, I realize, but the purpose of this paper is to show the thinking processes that led to my de-conversion.
Comments
Great site! I read your anti-testimony and was amazed how similar it was to my own experiences growing up! My parents dragged me along a very long and painful trek - first in the "Charismania" movement, in its various forms from established old fashioned fire and brimstone red in the faced pentacostal AG preachers to the vinyard and everywhere in between (one pastor said god would strike dead anyone who dared leave the church...I'm still here, guess he was a little off). After that they plunged headfirst into Calvinism ( via the OPC, and PCA) at which time my dad got the notion he was called to the ministry and went to seminary(Westminster Theological Seminary to be precise)....meanwhile in all this, I tried it all out with them...I said the sinner's prayer, I was a Royal Ranger scout, I memorized the bible verses and sat through morning, afternoon and evening devotions after every meal, prayed before school (I was homeschooled k-12), I tried to speak in tongues, experience everything they did, but through it all the emptiness of the words I was mouthing and the pathetic attempts I tried to put forth to gain their approval and love seemed more and more unreachable. They drafted me and my sisters into passing out tracts, and arguing with JW's and mormons (who actually are even more insane than Christians, if thats possible). In my teens, as my parents began drifting from the hard-line reformed movement (right about the time when they were confronted with issues such as headcovering and psalm-only singing - I absolutely put my foot down once and for all when they were talking about banning christmas, no presents, fuck that!)I taught VBS and sunday school, meanwhile struggling increasingly as any sexually repressed teenager does with religious mores clashing against hormones...I debased myself time and time again before a god who didnt seem to be hearing me, who wouldnt take away the urges I was told would damn me, who did nothing in regards to the fact that I was lonely, out of touch with anyone my age, sheltered and dying to actually just be normal - and around this time, my parents plunged into yet another new wierdness - my dad became the self-ordained pastor of a church of 8 people in a little yokel mountain town. Any interest I once had was gone, oh sure I tried from time to time to revive it, such as starting a bible study group at the JC I was attending (which nobody showed up for) but soon I was having a new world opened up before my eyes, and as I took more classes I realized there was a whole lot more out there to learn and maybe, just maybe, the xian's i knew didnt know everything. And I also started dating (behind my parents' back...weekend long ski retreats make good excuses by the way).
At this point, I was still pretty much an xian but beginning to question things. The first to go was the concept of hell...Loving god vs. wrathful eternal damnation...hmmmmm After that The TULIP petals fell off one by one. I had a major confrontation w/ my parents and was kicked out of the house...Then the stem was cut off -maybe jesus wasn't exactly god...Finally, does God even exist?
Where I'm at now...Well, several years later, rather than turning into the hepatitis infected druggie living with a stripper who is a member of the church of satan, I am a happily married guy of over a year with a baby, a good job, a college diploma, and a flourshing interest in neopaganism, while all the while maintaining a healthy skepticism of anything that claims to be the "right" way. Peace. - Dan
Interesting how an education will impact a religiously narrowed worldview. That's probably why most fundie families insist their kids attend religiously oriented universities.
Anyway, thanks again — enjoy reality.
I too stumbled upon your site while researching something else entirely.
I wanted to email my comments but honestly couldn't find a specific email link.
I know we're all busy these days, so I'll be brief with just a few thoughts:
1. Your testimony (since it's still a word used even legally, I left off the quote marks) is very well written. You obviously have a passion for learning and a gift for retaining. You have shown yourself to have studied much more Christian doctrine than other lay folks; and yes that is a lamentable fact, I agree.
2. I too have had my share of being hurt by people in the church and have been all over the landscape of Christian theology in my 20 years in the Church. I'm sincerely sorry for all of your hurt. I both sympathesize and empathsize with you. Again, I'm truly sorry, I can understand how you feel.
3. I've been mad at God at times, as you have been (maybe "are"?) I've questioned and argued with Jesus--even doubting His existence at times too. What makes Him so unique is no matter how much one digs, critiques, or "debunks" Jesus, He shines even more true.
Thanks for sharing your story. I hope it is unfinished. Would you please consider sitting quietly and attempting to just simply tell Jesus everything you feel--even read Him your testimony? I believe He already knows it anyway, and for you I'm only asking you for 20 min of your time. Then simply ask Him to take all that you've learned, all that you've experienced; all your hurts, confusions, and frustations, and just reveal Himself, period. Not doctrine (yet), just Himself.
Jesus really does love you. Search Him out. Eventually, He will show you sound doctrine and clear the cobwebs...I know, it's had to happen with me.
A helpless, miserable sinning machine saved by Christ on no merit of his own,
-Anthony
Speechless.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZz....
I have had that scriputre quoted to me a million times.
I just love the way weak minded Christians lean on scripture.
That's the kind of Spiritual Propaganda that holds so many people down in oppression and misery.
Christianity steals people's dreams. I take pride in Success and having a successful career. Not what some dumbass narrow minded preacher tells me.
Man does not live on God alone.
It takes money to make it in this world baby!!!!
So these churches and preachers on TV need to shutup asking for money, because it is evil to pursue money.
We should just die to christ,and be broke the rest of our lives, and look forward to our heavenly home.ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ....
Put a bible in your hands and you look and sound alot like the worst of the crypto-evangelists from backwoods Mississippi.
...about as compassionate and intelligent.
And what's the deal with uptight turds and thick glasses?
One must hang on to the childhood mentality, if one wants to keep the faith.
Little do they realize their actions prove the non-existance of their make believe god and savior.
I am a Christian, a believer, or whatever we want to call it. Jesus Christ has completely changed my life. I'm happy, I have hope, joy, and basically a feeling of purpose. Not a bad life!!!
One question posted here was the idea that if God was a God of un-conditional love then why would I ever go to hell. I have two children and I love them as well as I can possibly love. I teach my children to do the right thing in life (don't play with fire, look both ways before you cross the street, those kinds of things) but if they decide to go away from that truth then they will get injured. Guess what I'll be at the hospital still loving them but angry that they risked their lives in disobedience. Also if my son has a history of making terrible decisions like drug use or the like and my daughter makes good decisions then which one will I give my inheritance to. I still love them both but as a father I refuse to enable behavior that I know hurts them. You too have that free choice to decide.
I happen to believe that God's Word shows us how to live a life of joy, love, peace and when we walk away from that we risk injury. Does anyone doubt that the basic tenants of faith such as the "ten commandments" are a fairly good moral compass to live by. God has given each of us the gift of free choice. You choose whether to walk in His word or not, He still loves you either way.
Let me ask this very simple question:
If I live for Christ (a life that teaches me to have integrity, live at peace with others, love my wife as I love my own flesh, live for my family, love my neighbor as myself, love those that hate me, seek peace with all men, turn the other cheek, walk 2 miles when only asked to walk one, etc....don't lie, steal, kill, commit adultery), and you are right and there's no God and no heaven, then you and me end up in the same nothingness when we die. But I'll bet my legacy will be more honorable than most.
But if I'm right and there is a Savior, a cross, a heaven and a hell then....
I hope I've offended no one and if I have I ask for your forgiveness.
Thank you.
However, there are many other options to consider. For instance, what if Islam is the correct religion? In that case we'd both be burning in horrific agony forever.
If you're happy living out your days in a fantasy or a dream, well then by all means enjoy the delusion. I'm honestly happy for you, and in some ways envy you.
Unfortunately I'm not wired that way. I crave reality, even if that reality is in any way appears less appealing.
Frankly, to me, it's not what feels good that matters, it's what's true that counts.
That's fantastic, but please understand---one can have "hope", "joy", and "purpose" without the belief in Jesus Christ. Moreover, this is an EX-Christian website, and if you read some of the articles, you shouldn't be too shocked to find out that, 1) Your personal testimony regarding your Jesus is immaterial to us, as many of us used to have the same "life changing experiences", only now we know that it was clearly self-deception. In other words, your belief that your Jesus is the "absolute truth" amounts to nothing outside of your head, and 2) We've heard a GAZILLION excuses as to why we should still believe in your Jesus, yet, not-to-shockingly, we've not been shown one ounce of evidence that your Jesus, or any other supernatural being, exists.
Anon: "I teach my children to do the right thing in life (don't play with fire, look both ways before you cross the street, those kinds of things) but if they decide to go away from that truth then they will get injured. Guess what I'll be at the hospital still loving them but angry that they risked their lives in disobedience."
The parent/child analogy as been used myriads of times here, and it fails every time. Okay, so when your children are discharged from the hospital, will you take them to a remote place and set them on fire?....just for being "disobedient"? Of course not. But that's precisely what your Jesus does---he gets his revenge be incinerating people in Hell for eternity. And this is for such things as doubting. That's a "father/son" relationship I can do without.
Anon: "Does anyone doubt that the basic tenants of faith such as the "ten commandments" are a fairly good moral compass to live by."
Is gang rape okay, then? Are you telling us that you'd be compelled to forcably take sex from a women, only because you didn't read somewhere that it's "wrong"?? You don't give yourself much credit, do you? What about working on the Sabbath? Should we kill all people who work on Sunday? THINK about what you actually believe, and the implications.
Anon: "You choose whether to walk in His word or not, He still loves you either way."
What bible have you been reading? Your Jesus does not "love" the people he sends to hell. He "hates" the sin, AND the sinner.
Anon: "Let me ask this very simple question:...(insert Pascal's wager)"
Translation: "Play it safe". Okay, Anon, if you're going to believe "just in case", then you should switch to Islam, because their hell is much worse than the Christian hell. Don't DELAY!....do this NOW!...."just in case".
Anon closes with: "I hope I've offended no one and if I have I ask for your forgiveness."
Well, you've implied that we're going suffer in hell for eternity because we don't believe like you do. Gee, I guess that's not TOO offensive.
I said I prefer reality.
Now, you've told me what you believe, which I already had guessed. However, can you explain why you think your belief in a supernatural deity who impregnated a woman so he could mystically sacrifice himself to himself to appease his own wrath and not be forced to roast his children has anything to do with reality?
I don't believe in supernatural invisible entities of any kind because there is no evidence that such creatures exist. Magic is fun to imagine — Harry Potter is cool like Jesus — but reality is not the same as pretending. Please give me some evidence that what you believe is anything more than pretend.
I only want to say one thing to the person who says I got saved "just in case". That's not at ALL what I said. I excepted Christ because MY life was incomplete. I could not find hope, peace, or joy without Him. My statement was "if" there's no God then I am still very happy with my CHOICE.
I think that faith is the question and I think everyone here has faith. Faith to believe or not believe. If you want me to stop posting here I will honor that request, after all this is your house. I have faith to believe in God, I exercise that faith everyday; you have faith to believe there's no God.
The real reason I posted here was because of belittling remarks made about all Christians because of some bad apples. If one Youth Pastor does something terribly immoral then are all Christians immoral? Are all white males bad becasue of Ted Bundy; are all Muslims wicked because of a few terriosts; are all atheists evil because of some that do terrible things.
I'm not asking you to embrace my ideas based on a few comments I make on some website. The truth is I wish and hope that my life will speak of my faith.
Again if this site (webmaster) doesn't want me to post then I'll stop. Thank you again for just hearing me. I hope you all have a great day.
My name is Greg by the way. I really didn't think you would want me to sign up.
"If I live for Christ (a life that teaches me to have integrity, live at peace with others, love my wife as I love my own flesh, live for my family, love my neighbor as myself, love those that hate me, seek peace with all men, turn the other cheek, walk 2 miles when only asked to walk one, etc....don't lie, steal, kill, commit adultery), and you are right and there's no God and no heaven, then you and me end up in the same nothingness when we die. But I'll bet my legacy will be more honorable than most.
But if I'm right and there is a Savior, a cross, a heaven and a hell then...."
This is known as "Pascal's Wager". It boils down to intimidation, and yes, believing "just in case". I'd be happy to explain how I arrive at this, if need be.
Best regards.
No sir, it does not take "faith" to either lack belief in something or hold a position of neutrality. Where there is "faith", there may be belief, but there is an underlying uncertainty...e.g.. you "believe" the Red Sox will win; you have "faith" that they'll win...but you cannot "know" that they'll win. It does not take "faith" to hold the position that it cannot be known if they'll win until we SEE the results.
Moreover--an objective/unbiased universal higher intelligence may, or may not exist. It cannot be known in an absolute sense. Conversely, a personal, subjective, lower intelligence, humanistic deity, such as the Christian Biblegod, cannot, and does not exist---either in reality, or conceptually. Much like we can say that a "married bachelor" does not exist.
Anonymous/Greg said: "The real reason I posted here was because of belittling remarks made about all Christians because of some bad apples."
Christians, and especially their figure-heads, claim a higher morality, positing that those morals were bequeathed to them via a book supposedly inpsired by a "God". In other words, they've got the higher moral ground. Simply put---we're saying that THAT is utter bullshit. Yes, there are "amoral" people from every religion, race, creed, country, etc....and all that shows is that "morals" aren't dictated by religious belief, but by what is mutually and collectively agreed upon by humanity, not forgetting cultural relativity. To cannibals, eating flesh is not "wrong".
Anonymous/Greg: "The truth is I wish and hope that my life will speak of my faith."
That's what any "God fearing" Muslim would say. "Faith" is deadly if misused and/or abused. If you are a good person, chances are, you'd be good without your "faith".
Best regards.
"I think that faith is the question and I think everyone here has faith. Faith to believe or not believe."
Faith lets examine the origins of the word "Faith", shall we?
Faith, it's origin is, ans. the Bible.
Where do we hear about faith? ans. the Bible.
Where did you hear about the word faith? ans. the Bible.
Where the first words muttered out of your mouth when you were 2 years old, faith, god or jesus? No!
Most likely your first words were, mommy or daddy or poo poo, etc!
Where did you hear those words, faith, god, jesus, heaven hell, etc.? ans. the Bible.
You see Greg, had you never heard those words ever mentioned before, you would not be repeating them yourself today.
Where and only do these words originate? god, jesus, satan, heaven, hell, angels, saints, virgin birth, miracles, souls, spirits, holy ghosts, sin, savior, faith, etc.
Answer:
The Bible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So Greg tell us how much Faith do you have? 1/2 teaspoon? 1/4 once, a mustard seed size?
Jesus supposedly said that if one had as much faith as a mustard seed, then he could cast a mountain into the sea.
So please be so kind as to tell us the exact quanity of faith that you have, can you move a mustard seed into the sea? If not, then you have very little faith, a deadly sin, oh ye of little faith!
Let the one with a little faith, be the first one to cast a mustard seed into the sea, saith the Lord!
You see Greg the word Faith is a false placebo word that christians use to coax people into thinking they believe in the impossible.
From my observation, Greg you said you believe because you choose to believe, your belief is not based on fact, or evidence, or an imposed threat of hell, it based on what you have selected to choose to believe.
I'm not trying to offend you, I'm merely expressing my observation of your comment, and trying to show you that you have chosen to believe because you merely want to believe and it was not based on fact or evidence or an imposed threat of a burning hell, if you do not believe. Am I close to right in this observation?
So you choose to believe the Bible is true because, your real reason?
___________________________________________________
What is the basis for your strong belief in the bible?
___________________________________________________
Was it from your less than a mustard seed amount of faith?
You must confess that you have less than a mustard seed amount of faith, would you atleast concede that you have less than a mustard seed amount of faith?
I'm looking for true honesty here. Thanks in advance for your honesty!
Kind Regards,
Who is no-god?
Do you have the faith to believe in no-Santa? Or no-leprechaun? How about no-Zeus, no-Allah, and no-Ra?
Greg, I know Christian apologists like to say it takes more faith to believe in no-God (whomever that is) than it does to believe in God (meaning Yahweh and son) but that's not how it works. I lake faith in God. You either have faith in God or you don't. I lack a belief in God. You either have a belief or you don't have a belief.
Do you believe in Zeus? If not, why not? Do you think it takes a lot of faith to not believe in Zeus? Do you believe in Allah? If not, why not. Millions of people fall down several times a day praying to Allah. Do you think it takes a lot of faith to not believe in that deity?
What takes faith is to believe is something you can't see, hear, touch, smell, or feel with any of our five senses, can't locate with any of our sensory devices, and can't confirm experimentally in any way. If I told you that billions of tiny invisible "sticky spirits" were holding the world together and without those tiny tacky tots everything would blow apart, would you believe me? What if I really believed it? What if I was absolutely convinced that there were itty-bitty glue spirits holding the world together? Would you believe in them then?
Greg, when you figure out why you don't believe in all the other thousands of gods that have been worshiped and adored throughout human history, then you will understand why I don't believe in yours.
Finally Greg, there are three choices for posting: register with Blogger, click the Other button and type in a pseudonym without registering, and of course anonymous, which you've discovered.
You've just described my life, but I don't believe in Jesus. Do you honestly think Christians have the edge over everyone on the planet when it comes to moral inclinations? Do you think only Christians live peaceful happy lives with their families? I sincerely beg to differ.
The question was asked about throwing mountains in the sea "if I had the faith". So I guess I am to question my faith because I have yet to cast any large hills into some ocean. The scripture is found in Matthew chapter 17 and it finds Christ talking with His disciples regarding a struggle that they had dealing with a problem in a young boys life. Their ministry to this boy went completely without result and after Jesus successfully dealt with the issue they asked Him privately why aren't we as productive as you. So I want to respond on just a few points as to the words of Christ and especially as to my faith:
1. The word "faith" in the text used here (and in most places in the Bible) is defined as a moral conviction (of religious truth, or the truthfulness of God or a religious teacher), abstractly, constancy in such profession. As in reading any text there can be so many interpretations and as I write this I can only speak as to my interpretation of this scripture. I believe that here (as in most places in scripture) we could plant the word faithfulness where we see faith. If you were constant/faithful/convicted of a truth then you could move a mountain. Do I believe that Christ was literally talking about moving literal mountains? Personally I do not. I have "mountains" in my life. Some are in my checkbook, others in my marriage, some in my mind; and I've found that only when I show this kind of faith are those mountains removed. Did He really mean that we should not throw REAL pearls before REAL swine; did He really mean that I had to eat His LITERAL flesh and drink His REAL blood or was that a metaphor also? As a point Jesus later said that this kind of problem/devil can only be dealt with through much prayer and fasting (or faithfulness).
2. If He spoke literally concerning moving mountains with faith. I have studied some about faith and have found that "faith is the substance of things hoped for". Substance by definition is the quality of being important, valid, or significant. Jesus was asked once that since He was the Son of God and had this faith then He should throw Himself off the pinnacle and His faith in God would save Him. He answered by saying that He would not tempt the Lord which in my language means He said, "I don't have to prove my belief by doing some trick". Faith to me is real, about helping me deal with real problems, not doing some David Copperfield trick. If you need that trick to prove that faith is real then you don't have faith. I can hear some one now saying "here's someone else saying they have faith but I'll just have to believe them". I have seen some mountains moved in my life with real bonfide (bad spelling) miracles but I would rather my life, my faithfulness, be the trophy I hold up that speaks of my faith. About the Sox, they won't win without Big Poppy. If you don't believe they'll win then you must have a "strong confidence" that someone else will win. That's still faith.
Finally, maybe I have mustard seed faith, maybe I have turnip seed faith, maybe I have boulder sized faith. Time will tell! Paul said "he that endures till the end shall be saved". Check back with me in a few years; if I'm still running the race, still overthrowing mountains, then I had/have faith.
Jesus was asked repeatedly to PROVE, give EVIDENCE, that He was the Christ. He said that the only sign they would be given was that of Jonah. Three days in the earth and the grave (last I checked) was empty. Believe it or not, that's up to you. I believe it with every fiber of my being.
Thank you again for the civilized conversation.
Greg
Greg, with all due repect, you're not getting it. Again, "no God" isn't a "thing"...as in, "SOME-THING". "No leprechauns" is not a "thing". "No" = 0. Furthermore, the non-believer's stance isn't about "complete convidence". On the contrary, the religious conviction---YOUR position---is the one where "complete confidence" is implied.
Greg: "As in reading any text there can be so many interpretations and as I write this I can only speak as to my interpretation of this scripture."
Um, this is the whole point, Greg. It's ALL open to subjective interpretation. And you say that "any text" has this subjective ambiguity? Why is it, then, that we can all agree on what a geometry book says? You either interpret it correctly and it's theorems work, or you misinterpret it and they don't work.
Greg asked: "Did He really mean that we should not throw REAL pearls before REAL swine; did He really mean that I had to eat His LITERAL flesh and drink His REAL blood or was that a metaphor also?"
Did "He" mean that you would "REALLY" go to a "LITERAL" place called "Heaven"?... or did he mean that you would have inner peace in this lifetime? Again, if one thing can be metaphorical, ANYTHING can be as such.
Greg said: "He answered by saying that He would not tempt the Lord which in my language means He said, 'I don't have to prove my belief by doing some trick'. "
In my language it means that it's just one more poor excuse. This tells me that it's much more likely that he doesn't exist at all. Again, you define your Jesus in terms of what he CANNOT do, instead of what he CAN do.
Greg said: "If you need that trick to prove that faith is real then you don't have faith."
Right. If you KNOW something, then you don't NEED "Faith".
Greg said: "If you don't believe they'll win then you must have a "strong confidence" that someone else will win. That's still faith."
Irrelevant conclusion. To remain neutral doesn't require "faith".
Greg said: "Jesus was asked repeatedly to PROVE, give EVIDENCE, that He was the Christ. He said that the only sign they would be given was that of Jonah."
Yet, he appeared to hundreds of people THEN.
Greg said: "Three days in the earth and the grave (last I checked) was empty. Believe it or not, that's up to you. I believe it with every fiber of my being."
How did you "check"? Okay, so again, your argument, like so many of the "Faithful", amounts to "I believe". Bigfoot trackers "believe" in bigfoot.
Wow you are awesome at this. I admire your faith, faithfulness to what you believe; or is it what you don't believe. I forget because you don't have faith, or you do have faith.
How did your parents prove that they loved you? How did your spouse prove it? Your kids? Your friends? By what they said or by your faith in them. PS if you've never believed that someone loves you I'm sorry.
I'm running out of comp battery I'll talk again after a quick charge...
To Be Continued
Quote: "Wow you are awesome at this. I admire your faith, faithfulness to what you believe; or is it what you don't believe. I forget because you don't have faith, or you do have faith.(?)"
It's not that you "forget" what I've been saying over and over about "belief" and "Faith", but more likely that you don't want to accept it. It's okay....your religious conviction get's in the way, and I understand, because I was once there.
Quote: "How did your parents prove that they loved you? How did your spouse prove it? Your kids? Your friends? By what they said or by your faith in them. PS if you've never believed that someone loves you I'm sorry."
"Love" is a verb as well as a noun. The important people in my life "prove" their love to me by their actions---actions that I can detect with my physical senses. To merely read that someone loves me on a piece of paper would mean nothing had I never met them.
Best regards.
CONTEXT: the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea. The context was that they were unable to do something right on the spot so Jesus says, "if you can just be faithful" you can do big things. These come out by "prayer and fasting" only. I'm so hungry I could eat a horse, metaphorically speaking of course.
Quick question to webmaster: If you are against all gods (you said you were an athiest) why don't you have a picture of Calvin taking a leak on Buddha or Mohammed. Have you ever heard the saying "Me thinks the lady doth protest too much". Do you really believe in nothing or are you just angry at Christ for not satisfying your intellect? I ask this question very sincerely. I am always troubled when I see pictures like that but I just don't get why everything is about Him and not about all of the gods you say aren't real.
Jesus I guess gave us credit that we would be able to differintiate between metaphor and literal. I will tear down this temple and rebuild it in three days - metaphor. The Son of Man must be crucified and rise from the dead - literal. I will make you fishers of men - metaphor (man would that hook hurt). I send you as sheep among wolves - metaphor. For God so loved boomSLANG and Greg (literal) that He gave His only begotten Son.
Peace
What god would that be again?
Sorry, I just don't believe in gods. I also don't believe in leprechauns, in Big Foot, in the Tooth Fairy, or in Palm Reading.
I also don't believe in Krishna, Zeus, Ra, or Allah.
I would guess that you believe in none of those things I've mentioned either. When you, Greg, figure out why you don't believe in any of those listed things, then you will understand why I don't believe in your deity either.
When it comes to all those supernatural entities, you are an atheist. The only difference between me and you is I believe in one less god than you.
If you would quit practicing your amateur evangelizing and read for a few weeks, you might be better equipped to carry on a more intelligible exchange. Until then, I bid you adieu.
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. 20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. 22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: 23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; 24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
Otay!
I just think your religion is bunk, that's all. Am I not entitled to that opinion?
From the easy way you've become enraged, my position on your religion stands.
You may want to read the site disclaimer linked in the upper right-hand corner of this page.
What would it take for you to believe again? I'll pray it happens for you. This is a very serious proposition. Give me something within reason that if it happened you would believe. Maybe someone to say a specific phrase to you in the next few days. Let me know and I will pray fervently that God would show up. Don't do something like say I want a dinosaur.
It's simply really. I was born in America, where Christianity is the dominant religion, Christianity is the religion that screwed with my thinking for so many years. That's why.
I happen to think those other religions you mentioned are nonsense, but since I didn't loose 30 years of my life following those idiotic religions, I don't personally have any emotional or economic baggage associated with those religions. I have no reason to hate those religions. I do have a reason to hate Christianity.
By way of analogy: You can't hate someone else's ex-wife. But you can hate your own.
Again please forgive me if I have come off angry. I tried to even throw a little humor in. I am happy.
Good luck tp you.
To be more clear, I am talking about finding a human being who has lost an entire limb and can show that a new one has grown in its place.
An "I heard a story about" testimony will not suffice. Medically verifiable documentation will suffice.
Thanks.
Again forgive me and I will not visit this site again.
Adios.
Awesome. It has been a joy to discuss with you. You are obviously well read and studied.
I'm one of those rare breeds who if someone doesn't hear me and/or understand me clearly, I will repeat myself over and over..::cough::..until hopefully they get it = )
Quote: "Do you say 'I'm as hungry as a horse, metaphorically?'I suppose you just expect people to figure out by the CONTEXT of what you're saying that you're just trying to prove a point that you're very hungry."
For starters, there's no conditions attached to whether someone understands if I'm hungry, or not. Secondly, it's no stretch of the imagination to think that a "horse" get's hungry---so if I said, "Boy, Greg, I have the urge to sing like a horse", that would bring what I said into question, because we know that horses don't sing. BTW, is the biblical passage where a donkey speaks the human language metaphorical?..or is it literal?
Quote: "Jesus I guess gave us credit that we would be able to differintiate between metaphor and literal."
I wish I could give Jesus the same credit for getting "His" message across clearly and unambiguously. After all, "He" is presumably "perfect", right?(nevermind)
Quote: "The Son of Man must be crucified and rise from the dead - literal. I will make you fishers of men - metaphor (man would that hook hurt)."
Satan?..the "talking serpent"? Talking vegetation? Are you familiar with the "Flat Earth Society"? They obviously misinterpreted something somewhere along the way...or wait...was it the rest of us?
Quote: "For God so loved boomSLANG and Greg (literal) that He gave His only begotten Son."
Like I said, "love" is a verb.
Um, did you happen to read that on an Apologetics website?...because you certainly didn't read it in George Washington's AUTO-biography, did you?
Well it really hurts when someone attacks the self-appointed halo and thanks Greg for not addressing any of my questions posed to you, and yes you do come off as amateurish and unprepared for the battle, so go away and indulge yourself and self gloat in the man made fable book you so fervently cherish.
Maybe some day you can see the world past your playpen mentality, although you may be considered an adult, you refuse to let go of your childhood fairytale myth that you have clutched in your possesive mind all your life, if myths and fantastic fables bring you inner feeling of false comfort as it does millions of immature weaklings then you have no business, visiting websites such as this one.
So go your own way and sing, Let me hide thyself in thee.
I did answer your questions to the best of my ability. You asked about faith. I tried to define faith; where the word originated and what it meant from Matthew chapter 17 which you my friend quoted, not me. Faith is the strong conviction or trust in someone or something. I also showed you the definition of the Greek word pistis which is used in Matthew chapter 17 and translated as faith in English. That definition was the belief in something and abstractly constancy in the following of that belief - or faithfulness.
The word, or idea, of faith does not originate from the Bible or even from the Christian belief. People have had faith (of course it would be called something else in their language) before the days of Abraham. Egyptians had a "strong conviction" in their gods. People in the Far East would sacrifice their children to their gods before Abraham was ever born; that is pretty strong faith.
You asked me if I had mustard seed faith and I answered you by saying that I might have mustard seed, turnip seed, or boulder size faith. That faith is faithfulness to what I do or don't believe. I guess my life will speak as to whether I remain faithful. I also tried to show that I believe that Christ was not trying to quantify faith. He was using a metaphor that His followers would understand. A mustard seed is small and if you have even just a very small amount of faith, again faithfulness, you can see great things happen in life.
I know everyone here hates what I'm saying but I think you all have a lot more than "mustard seed" faith. You believe and practice your faith. Your belief that there is no Supreme Being known as God. Something does not have to be a god; a noun is defined as a person, place, or idea! You believe in the idea that there is no God.
I've learned something however in my studies of human behavior and that is the intimidation of an intellectual bully. What do you do when you feel superior to anyone who thinks something, believes something, you feel is foolishness? Call them an idiot. If that makes you feel better about yourself ok. I am fully prepared to say that I do have the intellect that you obviously possess. I have never read one book on the ideaology of Athiesm so I do not quote its verses.
I have gone through a few of these pages just to scan the great writings of Ben "Ironic how people revert to kindergarden name calling and teasing when someone steps on their mental delusion." That was one of his. He called a 13 year old boy a fool, and idiot. Yet time would not allow me to tell you the sand he has kicked in the faces of others who don't toe the line of his reality. How many people called Columbus an idiot for thinking the world was flat? And yes that analogy works both ways. I like chocoloate milk and you like strawberry. Am I an idiot because strawberry is obviously a more intellectual choice. I live my life as a disciple of Jesus Christ; you live your life as a disciple of someone (insert name here) by the books you've read. You folks talk about being free thinkers but I've yet to read one original thought from ANYONE (Christian or non-christian alike). Someone said that if God would just make an amputee grow a arm he would believe; so being a computer geek I scoured the internet for hours and found that even that request was not original. I found countless pages (dating back as much as 5 years) of people saying the exact same things. You say I am living in a fantasy world for quoting a Bible yet you quote a scientist. Are you the original atheist?
Smooth...
I'm really not that dumb just totally stink at typing.
Greg, greg, greg...you just refuse to get it, don't you? Look, the Egyptians "believed" in Amon Ra with every ounce, or "mustard seed", or whatever, of "Faith" that YOU believe in YOUR Jesus. Yet, you don't believe in Amon Ra, do you Greg? No....and do you have to "practice" to NOT believe in Amon Ra? Answer: No, you do not. Do you sit around at your local "Shrine of the Nonexistant Deities", and "pray" for Amon Ra's non-existance? Answer: No, you do not. Greg: It DOES NOT take "Faith", "Worship", "religion" "practice"..or any OTHER rituals to NOT have a belief in something. It's such a simple concept, and I think you would "get it" if you didn't have the idea in your head that you think that you can somehow "level" the playing field by equating Atheism/Agnostism with religious "Faith". And EVEN IF you could, it would STILL not make your personal belief in Jesus an objective "Truth". Greg, you cannot "default" your particular God into existance. 'Sorry.
Quote: "Your belief that there is no Supreme Being known as God. Something does not have to be a god; a noun is defined as a person, place, or idea! You believe in the idea that there is no God."
Lol...give it hell, ol' boy!!! Um, Greg, there are many Ex-Christians here who are Deists. Notwithstanding, the existance of a "Supreme Being known as God" cannot objectively be proven or disproven. But no one's saying that a Supreme Intelligence is disproven, only UNproven. The burden of proof is in lap of the one POSITING the claim. And all that aside, YOU are the one making the leap from "Supreme Being known as God" to your Biblegod.....YOU are. Even the Deist can say that the Christian Biblegod does not exist with as much certainty as they can say that square circles don't exist. Greg, all religions think their god-heads are the "Supreme Being known as God". Is this sinking in yet?
Quote: "I have never read one book on the ideaology of Athiesm so I do not quote its verses."
Evidently, not. BTW, have you ever read one single book cover-to-cover in your life that opposes your Christian worldview? I would guess, "no".
Quote: "You folks talk about being free thinkers but I've yet to read one original thought from ANYONE (Christian or non-christian alike)."
Irrelevant conclusion. Greg---how many different ways can one say that fairies, imps, unicorns, and anything else with zero referant in reality, DO NOT exist? If I tell you a GAZILLION different ways that there's a boogie man under your bed, will you believe it then? Think.
Quote: "You say I am living in a fantasy world for quoting a Bible yet you quote a scientist. Are you the original atheist?"
Are you serious? Now you're equating science with religious dogma? You've really got a lot to learn, my friend.
It was me who said I'd believe if you could show me an amputee that had grown a new limb.
You just condemned me for asking it, because it's been asked before. But the fact remains that you failed to present an example of even a single amputee that has grown a new limb.
Your god seems a bit weak.
Do you believe in hobgoblins? Well, do you? Because if you don't believe in hobgoblins, then I guess you have a belief in the idea of no hobgoblins, which makes those who believe in hobgoblins and those who don't believe in hobgoblins equal in their beliefs, right?
Greg, in all sincerety you really should take a course, or read a book on logic. Not believing in something is not faith, it is a lack of faith, pure and simple.
I don't believe in magic. That doesn't mean I have faith in the idea of no-magic.
This is sad.
Are you astrong atheist or a weak atheist? Do you KNOW there's no god or just lack a belief in god?
Semantics? "To have" something and "to NOT have" something is hardly ambiguous wording. They are completely opposing ideas. It doesn't take "Faith" to NOT have belief.
We are told, when when we are young, that by believing in Jesus and God, that this makes us very intelligent, in other words, a much overly-honored preacher will get up and say anyone with the knowledge of God is all the intelligence anyone needs, people just like you Greg have determind that a knowledge or belief in Jesus or God is all the profound knowledge that anyone needs which I'm sure you'll whole heartedly agree.
But this is a total lie, do you realize how many people just give up on life, after finding Jesus? They think that they have found all there is to life, they think they have found the "Key" to all knowledge and understanding, and you come off sounding just like them, you give off this pious and self-gloating that only you have been worthy of enough to have found universal understanding, based only on your imaginable faith, that you've been so fool heartedly been told is a "Gift". You seem to come off as if it's "You" that have this rank above others, just based upon you willingness to believe in a most fantastic unbelievable fable and myth, why can't you or why do are you not willing to see that a virgin birth savior is sooo outstandingly unbelievable, why did it take your imaginary god over 4000 years to come up with the virgin birth salvation plan? I'm talking about the "God" that created the whole entire universe, with over 125 billion galaxies similar to our own in "Just Six Days???" a creator with this profound ability and the best thing this creator could come up with is a virgin birth savior???? After 4000 years?????Come on Greg, give it up, the childhood imaginary fables and falsehoods.
Yeah it takes faith alright!!! A ton of faith, much more than a typical human being can muster.
And please do not come back and say I'm trying to measure faith by volume, that is not my point, you know what my point is.
The Jesus myth is the most fantastic lie and myth ever to be devised in the history of the human race!!! There's no intelligence in believing in lies and myths.
I am coming to the conclusion that most of you find great solace in logic. That it is not logical to believe what I do, and it is very logical to think as you do. I've found that you most think there is no absolute truth, so I'm guessing that truth and morality must be subjective or relative?
Ben would you consider yourself a "weak atheist" or "strong atheist"? Do you KNOW that there is no God or do you just not have a belief in that there is a God?
I'm just wondering what makes you "think" that you need a savior? How did you arrive at that conclusion? Where you born with that information or was it something that you've heard repeated a million times, just like we have?
Us Atheists have decided we do not need a savior! Why? because we link "people" that wrote the Bible with ignorance, you must realize that the Bible was written over 2000 years ago, by people that thought the Heart was the center of all thought and emotion, surely an inspired all knowing God, would have told them about the Brain...huh? But they had no medical knowledge!!! Why not? Yet they knew all there was about an invisible god...huh?
They also thought sickness was caused by Demons, also that the Sun revolved around the Flat Earth and that the Earth was the center of the universe, will you side with ignorance and beliefs or do you prefer to believe a bizarre fable? Can't you see that the bible writers had absolutely no "Merrit" simply because the voices that they heard which was just their own voices and they thought it was from a God, just like you perhaps, you probabaly think you talk to a God, but the bible has been translated over 1600 times, so if a bible god talks to anyone, it must be translated over 1600 times also, unless of course your bible god has suddenly learned how to speak english.
You see Greg, the bible shoots itsself in the foot under close scrutiny only those that prefer not to scrutinize the bible because they prefer not to see the fallacy and the errors, because they want to believe so badly, no matter how foolish or ignorant the bible may appear, they want their belief to become true.
The threat of Hell was invented to punnish those that had they dealed with people that did them wrong properly, had they stood up to them and dealed with them rightly, instead of being a coward and let them trespass over, say perhaps you, now you'll let the imaginary god deal with them in the hereafter, that way you can say god is the final judge, but in reality, it is from being a coward in the first place. That is the reason so many want there to be a "Hell" to punnish those that have done wrong to them. I know, because I was raised to be a religious coward, and my father is a total coward and he cowers to the imaginary Jesus and to the church and to the preachers.
Jesus was described as a coward, he prefered to die than to stand up to his aggressors, he left the judgement up to his imaginary god, he never stood up to anyone.
That is what religion is, a cowards reprive. Many people will get up in church and say that they are ready to meet god, but let someone walk into a church with a gun and watch them scatter, they will herd and trample over each other to get out of harms way.
Religious cowards! Let me hide myself in thee! Very famous lyrics!
You see Greg, you've chosen the easy way out, you're trusting that your bible will turn out to be true and thusly leaving you looking so grand, you've chosen the cowards venue, we've dedcided it's all bunk, because we once fell for the nonsense ourselves, now we know better and every day that I live, each day confirms in me how insane and ridiculous the bible is, there cannot exist a god and ignorant as the one described in the bible, there cannot be a god that had never been seen and yet described by human beings.
So that leaves the door open for inspiration. Inspiration is not an exact science! Inspiration can come under the form of many things, including drugs, alcohol, and the condition of the mind at the time of inspiration, would you agree?
So this Bible god has all the resources at his finger tips, yet he puts man in charge of describing man's "true way" to salvation, you know the very men that he regretted making in the first place! Genesis 6:6
Can there be a god that stupid and that callous? Yet this God is willing that no one should perish, yet he puts salvation in total charge of men and we have over 1500 denominations and sects of religions, how is that possible when god is totally absolute?
So this god hands over his responciblity of leading people to salvation that he created from soil, into the trusting hands of men?
What you actually have faith in is men and their word, not the word of a god, No, God nor Jesus never wrote one single word in the bible. So your trust and faith is in men that lived over 2000 years ago. That is such a stretch, believing in people and what they thought were inspired to write down on papyrus as coming from a god, how grandiose? What serendipity? No wonder they were glad, god finally decided to talk to them, how fantastically bizarre?
I'm just wondering how come the bible god chose the middle-east to inspire, why not the eskimos or the aboriginies or the amazon peoples or the native american indians? Because opium was not currently available to them.
Then he's back. Civilized for only one moment.
That last comment was at least long, but since I have been convicted of not answering questions, I must say you never answered mine. You just regergitated the same stuff I've read from you over and over. It's obvious that you don't believe (got it).
I went to answers.com (non-christian research website) and did some research into atheism. There is implicit (weak) atheism and explict (strong) atheism. My question was which are you? A strong atheist states that there is no God. He knows there is no God. A weak atheist, basically, 'lacks belief' in a god of any sort. Maybe this time instead of just calling what I believe dumb you would answer as to what stance you've taken. Weak or strong? Implicit or Explicit? Ignostism? Well forget that last one if you were ignostic you wouldn't even be here fighting about it.
You are right in saying that I heard from various sources that I needed a savior. It also bore witness with how I felt and what I had experienced in my life. I eat brocoli because my mom said a million times "you've got to eat more than just hamburgers and fries". Should I not eat vegetables because it was not an original thought. I think the people who told me a "million times" that I needed Christ are great people. They are not authors from a book I've never met they are people I know. I know their lifestyle, their sincerity. Matter of fact after watching (reading) you I would rather listen to them than anyone like you my friend. A person who feels he must build his case on the degredation of other peoples intellect. Wow. You must feel pretty small when no one's around; I mean when you've got no one to try to step on.
Let me say this as well: You're not saying anything Ben that YOU haven't heard a million times. I don't think that makes you weak. I heard a million times my teachers in school tell me that 1 + 1 = 2. Because someone else told me doesn't make it un-true.
Once you've answered at least this one question we can talk about the Bible. I would love to talk about the validity of God's Word!
' Don't mind if I do---Greg, you seem to be missing/ignoring an important point regarding these definitions and your newly found inquisitiveness about non-belief. Even IF a "weak" Atheist concedes that it cannot be known if a "God" exists---AGAIN, it does NOT automatically make the Christian biblegod into this Universal God, whom may, or may not exist. Greg, you cannot use "default" to prove your Jesus. I've told several different ways that Atheists--"weak" or "strong"--- can say with 100 % certainty that the Christian biblegod DOES NOT exist as a supernatural being. If Jesus existed as just a person?.. goody, Captain Kangeroo was a person too.
Greg, can you at least concede that a Universal God would be accepting of everyone? This is what "Universalists" claim---that there IS no "hell", that everybody is accepted. On the other hand, the Christian biblegod accepts only certain people---there are clear-cut conditions, and this blatantly shows that the X-ian biblegod is anything but objective..or UNIVERSAL.
"I heard a million times my teachers in school tell me that 1 + 1 = 2. Because someone else told me doesn't make it un-true."
And even if you've NEVER been told, 1 + 1 = 2 is still a "truth". No one's debating this.
"I would love to talk about the validity of God's Word!"
But we are debating this. It is NOT "valid", in a universal sense. Nice try, though.
We all learn from other people. That's not the point. The point is, that religion, and Christianity in particular, claims to be revealed knowledge, more-or-less straight from the mouth of God. However, it's not true. Everything is learned from other people, and that's all there is to it.
No matter how many times I've been told 1+1=2, that in itself would neither make the statement true or untrue. Verification would be required before complete acceptance of the idea could be achieved.
Now, for some reason you want us to accept the reality of your God. Personally I could care less whether you believe in a god or not, but you seemed determined to sell us on the idea that your god exists, and that it is something we should willingly accept. Okay, fine. So sell us. Please show us the merchandise. I gave you a reasonable condition: an amputee growing a new limb.
I, at least, am not trying to sell you anything. I don't care what you believe. You don't have to change. You don't have to reconsider. We didn't come to you, you came to us. If you are insistent on convincing us of the reality of your god, then give us some real evidence. I can clearly demonstrate that 1+1 does indeed equal 2. I cannot, however, clearly demonstrate that a god exists at all. Please show us how you've verified the existence of your god.
It is in deed a pleasure to talk to you. You seem to be level headed and your comments very well thought out. I am not really trying to sell my faith. To me that would be like selling ice to eskimos. You don't recognize the need for what I have to offer. What I am attempting to do was explain my faith, or for lack of a better word, defend it.
The entire reason I got on this site was because of some disparaging comments blanketly laid on all Christians because of one very bad apple. This bad apple (youth pastor) was a member of a church in my area (Atlanta). I know the people of this church, I have extended friends and family that attend there. They were devastated by this man's terrible lifestyle and mistakes. There's just no way that because one leader in the church is corrupt then the whole church is corrupt. I know that there have been and will be corrupt politicians and/or leaders but I don't believe they're all corrupt. I don't think the Great Ben represents you; you are both proclaimed atheists yet I feel as though you are reasonable and he is not. Should I think that all atheists are angry blow-hards because one is. NO I shouldn't. I don't think all white people are racists, I don't think all black people are thugs, I don't think all Hispanics are illegal immigrants, etc...
I don't think all Christians are non-intellectual; and I don't think all atheists are intellectual. I don't think all Christians have faith; I don't think all atheists serve logic.
I am a pastor of a small church and I hope and pray that as a leader I am not a hypocrite. I do think about that everyday and this site has helped me to focus more on my fruit.
Thanks
Greg Out
"I've told several different ways that Atheists--"weak" or "strong"--- can say with 100 % certainty that the Christian biblegod DOES NOT exist as a supernatural being."
Based on the very definition of logic how can you possibly KNOW 100% that the bibleGod does not exist. Your atheism is illogical. You cannot know that He is not God. To do that, you'd have to know All things to know. I know you're smart but come on. You can not KNOW 100%. You are assuming BASED on what you KNOW that He's not God. Tomorrow you will learn something you didn't know and so will I. We used to know that the cell was the smallest fabric of life; yet everyday we learn it's not. What's smaller than the atom? We can't KNOW 100%. We assume based on the information we have. I read just the other day that they have removed Pluto as a planet. When I was in school I was taught the truth, the fact, that we had 9 planets and now we KNOW there's 8. WOW! What will we know in 10 years? What if what you know changes and that assumption is broken? Scientists used to KNOW the world was flat then Columbus and the like found it was not.
I risk attack by saying this but I don't even KNOW 100% that Jesus Christ is God! I take what I know and combine it with faith and get my belief. Jesus said to Thomas blessed are you because you believe by seeing but more blessed will they be who without seeing are willing to believe. (that is a Gregory paraphrase).
Thanks again.
PS are you a strong atheist or a weak a theist? Not one of you have answered this yet and I'm just curious. If you think there is an Universal God (even if it's not Jehovah) then you are NOT an atheist you are an agnostic.
Using the definition of logic---I can "know" it, precisely the same way that you can "know" that a square circle does not exist. It contradicts reality, that's how. It is an illogical concept, therefore not valid. Square/circle; natural/supernatural; omnipotent/omniscient.
Greg: "I read just the other day that they have removed Pluto as a planet. When I was in school I was taught the truth, the fact, that we had 9 planets and now we KNOW there's 8. WOW! What will we know in 10 years?"
We just had another Christian guest use this analogy the other day. It fails. Greg, in 10 years we may discover more planets based on the information taken in. Time will tell. Science doesn't deal in absolutes, however, there are some hypotheticals/concepts that will NEVER be true...i.e..."square circle". Science is open to change based on new information. On the other hand, religious convictions such as yours, are not subject to change---even in light of evidence to the contrary.(see below)
Greg: "Scientists used to KNOW the world was flat then Columbus and the like found it was not."
Yet, the bible---the "unchanging" word of a perfect "all-knowing god"---still says differently. Just like we "know" that there's no "firmament" seperating the water and sky. Just like we "know" the earth isn't geocentric.
Greg: "I risk attack by saying this but I don't even KNOW 100% that Jesus Christ is God!"
Redundant.
Greg: "PS are you a strong atheist or a weak a theist? Not one of you have answered this yet and I'm just curious. If you think there is an Universal God (even if it's not Jehovah) then you are NOT an atheist you are an agnostic."
In terms of a Universal force, or consciousness...I'm an Agnostic Athiest...or yes, "weak" Atheist. I don't know(Agnostic) if there is such a "God", but I don't have a belief(Atheist) that there is. Nor do I care, really. Notwithstanding, when it comes to personal gods, I am a hard Atheist.
Best regards.
It would be foolish to stereotype an entire population based on the behavior of one, but that's what people do all the time: all black people are lazy, all women are overly emotional, all atheists lack morals, etc. That kind of silly stereotyping is considered offensive because it is uncomplimentary, not because it is untrue. People rarely condemn complimentary stereotypes, no matter how exaggerated or falacious (e.g., All California women are beautiful; Princeton men make the best lovers; etc.).
Now, it is undoubtedly true that there are good and bad people everywhere. People possess varying degrees of education, perception, ability, opportunity... an endless list of differences exists between everyone on the planet.
But...
Christians claim to have the Holy Spirit of God inhabiting their very bodies, their minds, their spirits, molding them, changing them, leading them into all truth, mystically at one with them, convicting of sin, sanctifying, speaking with them, comforting them, supporting them, holding them up, carrying their burdens...
The list is nearly endless.
Yet, what do we see in reality? People — good, bad, smart, stupid, moral and immoral, just like everyone else on the earth.
I don't think logical thinking freethinkers are of more value or worth, or in any way better than Christians — as far as being people goes. People are people, that's all. What I resent, and would greatly disagree with, is that Christians are mystically better than anyone else.
Before you insert "Christians aren't better, just forgiven" in here, stop and think for a minute. The entire system of Christianity ultimately teaches that Christians are better than the rest of humanity. Christians are beloved of God and will spend a beautific heavenly eternity with HIM; everyone else can just go to hell.
Some Christians maintain an air of humbleness when it comes to this realization of thier purported loftier position in the scheme of eternity. But some Christians display an ugly air of smugness, especially when confronted by confident, strong unbelief in their magical stories.
Still don't agree that Christianity teaches Christians to see themselves as better than everyone else? Well, "the first will be last and that last first." This is nothing more than a formula for being first, and to be first is something most humans do enjoy.
I wonder how being congratulated for being the most humble would feel like.
Anyway, to speak more clearly, Christianity throughout history has given no indication of being lead by a supernatural being. Christianity is rife with all the same problems found thorughout society, in equal, if not larger, percentages. Stories about fallen Christian leaders, like your youth minister example, do not "prove" anything, but these types of stories, which hit the papers every week, do serve to provoke thought.
I started to call you Pastor Greg, because I knew you are a hard core fundy.
Let me tell you something Mr. Jeckle and Hide, you've got yourself into a postion that you are not qualified nor worthy to be in, yet you must bow to and appease your mindless followers, because you're leading them off a steep cliff.
You could not get out of your postion in any shape or form, without moving completely away so far away that no one cared who you were.
You've taken gifts and money and proclaim to represent an invisible myth, that you have no way of proving, nor any way of knowing yourself any of it is true.
People like you are sooo discusting, you'll get up in front of people with your hand taylored suits and big cadilac outside and tell about how Jesus suffered on the cross and you're there with your fat belly stuffed full of fried chicken and potato salad, woundering what is coming on TV after you get through counting your vain money.
You have absolutely no authority to represent a deity that claims to have been sent by a God, and you've not addrsssed one thing thatI have mentioned because you are a coward, you are a religious coward and you know it 100%. We know you're a blatant fraud, you don't deserve the air that you breath for misleading your wondering fools around like sheep, and you know they are fools too, just like you.
I do not see how you can look people in the face and tell them you are a preacher!!!!!
The good ole country boy self-appointed preacher.
You spread lies like mayonaise on a sandwich, and the thicker the lies the more money people are willing to give you, and you know this, you are a low lying snake.
You rob people's minds and then you rob people's pocketbooks, if there is a Jesus and a judgemental god, you haven't got a chance, they will say part from me, theif!!!
You are a theif in the grass, so go running back to your congregation because they refuse to see what a fraud you are, but I knew you were a fraud from day one.
Good riddance!!!!
You may think you have fooled your god and jesus, but you haven't fooled us one bit, you charlaton!!!
As for Paul, no one has invited you here, if you do not like what I have to say, then go somewhere were everyone tells you how wonderful you are because thats all you want to hear. You've have not said one thing worthy of a debate, you just want to hear sweet kind nothings and call that a debate, you're not prepared for bear either. Ben
This is exactly what Jesus had in mind anyway by his crucifixion, to elect someone to get up and tell them how wonderful that they are and keep their hard earned money and to sing gospel songs and have huge fine churches built and have fine choir robes made and electronic equipment and wireless microphones and have stained-glassed windows and shinny religious effigys and a big fine steeple on top, with a paved parking lot and the finest materials that money can buy, although Jesus died pennyless, he loves to see those mega-churches and all the fine dressing and papal dignity, with a partridge to comfy the pastor. Jesus supposedly died with nothing, and yet the preachers want money continuely want money, for their selfish greedy selves. Jesus would have loved to see the money grubbing preachers of today, don't ya think???
The church is a total mockery of what Jesus taught and represented, if Jesus was alive he would come back and destroy them all, along with the greedy money grubbing preachers!!!
Preachers and churches are a disgrace to Jesus and what Jesus taught.
Well, as my story was intended to communicate, it wasn't all that simple. But I guess I could sum it up for you by simply saying I finally realized that none of it was true. That's all.
Once I knew it wasn't true, I couldn't stay.
Do I smell a True Christian™ in the house?
lol.
it sounds like people turned you off to God, which is something I've realized to be too common. Christians need to represent the religion better sometimes. Here's hoping somebody else can bring you back. =)
People may have helped, but really it was the Bible and the history of Christianity that finished my faith. As long as you attend your happy-go-luck church, and sing your light praise songs, and listen to your Christian pop music, you'll never leave the faith. If you ever actually study how Christianity spread, developed, and changed over the last 19 centuries, well, it just might create some questions in your mind.
Most Christians are entirely ignorant of the degree of mutation Christian thought and theology has experienced since its beginnings. That realization helped me break the bonds of imagined Christian supernaturalism. Christianity is just another of the thousands of man-made religions.
Her dear Lord, to defend,
To guide, sustain, and cherish,
Is with her to the end.
Though there be those that hate her.
False sons within her pale,
Against both foe and traitor
She ever shall prevail.
I have lost my easy God - the one whose name
I knew since childhood.
I knew his temper, his sullen outrage,
his ritual forgiveness.
I knew the strength of his arm, the sound
of his insistent voice.
His beard bristling, his lips full and red
with moisture at the moustache,
His eyes clear and piercing, too blue
to understand all,
His face too unwrinkled to feel my
child's pain.
He was a good God - so he told me -
a long suffering and manageable one.
I knelt at his feet and kissed them.
I felt the smooth countenance of his forgiveness.
I never told him how he frightened me,
How he followed me as a child,
When I played with friends or begged
for candy on Halloween.
He was a predictable God, I was the
unpredictable one.
He was unchanging, omnipotent, all-seeing,
I was volatile and helpless.
He taught me to thank him for the concern
which gave me no chance to breathe,
For the love which demanded only love in
return - and obedience.
He made pain sensible and patience possible
and the future foreseeable.
He, the mysterious, took all mystery away,
corroded my imagination,
Controlled the stars and would not let
them speak for themselves.
Now he haunts me seldom: some fierce
umbilical is broken,
I live with my own fragile hopes and
sudden rising despair.
Now I do not weep for my sins; I have
learned to love them.
And to know that they are the wounds that
make love real.
His face eludes me; his voice, with all
its pity, does not ring in my ear.
His maxims memorized in boyhood do not
make fruitless and pointless my experience.
I walk alone, but not so terrified as when
he held my hand.
I do not splash in the blood of his son
nor hear the crunch of nails or thorns
piercing protesting flesh.
I am a boy again - I whose boyhood was
turned to manhood in a brutal myth.
Now wine is only wine with drops that do
not taste of blood.
The bread I eat has too much pride for transubstantiation,
I, too - and together the bread and I embrace,
Each grateful to be what we are, each loving
from our own reality.
Now the bread is warm in my mouth and
I am warm in its mouth as well.
Now my easy God is gone - he knew too
much to be real,
He talked too much to listen, he knew
my words before I spoke.
But I knew his answers as well - computerized
and turned to dogma.
His stamp was on my soul, his law locked
cross-like on my heart,
His imperatives tattooed on my breast, his
aloofness canonized in ritual.
Now he is gone - my easy, stuffy God - God,
the father - master, the mother - whiner, the
Dull, whoring God who offered love bought
by an infant's fear.
Now the world is mine with all its pain and
warmth, with its every color and sound;
The setting sun is my priest with the ocean for it's alter.
The rising sun redeems me with rolling
waves warmed in its arms.
A dog barks and I weep to be alive, a
cat studies me and my job is boundless.
I lie on the grass and boy-like, search the sky.
The clouds do not turn to angels, the winds
do not whisper of heaven or hell.
Perhaps I have no God - what does it matter?
I have beauty and joy and transcending loneliness,
I have the beginning of love - as beautiful as it
is feeble - as free as it is human.
I have the mountains that whisper secrets
held before men could speak,
I have the oceans that belches life on
the beach and caresses it in the sand,
I have a friend who smiles when he sees
me, who weeps when he hears my pain,
I have a future of wonder.
I have no past - the steps have disappeared
the wind has blown them away.
I stand in the Heavens and on earth, I
feel the breeze in my hair,
I can drink to the North Star and shout
on a bar stool,
I can feel the teeth of a hangover, the
job of laziness,
The flush of my own rudeness, the surge of
my own ineptitude.
And I can know my own gentleness as well
my wonder, my nobility.
I sense the call of creation, I feel its
swelling in my hands.
I can lust and love, eat and drink, sleep
and rise,
But my easy God is gone - and in his stead
The mystery of loneliness and love!
© Copyright - James Kavanaugh
I found your website while searching for information on NDE as well as looking up info as to a discussion I am having on an Australian site at the moment as to Religion being the Bane of mankind.
I too was a Christian for many years, married a Baptist Ministers son, my brother-in-law also a minister, so you can possibly appreciate I got to see the ins and outs workings at the root...of that church at least. The hypocricies I experienced and witnesed while I was living my life "with the lord" were rampant, however at the time I did not speak to protest, as by my doing so, I would have gone against what I was told,or TAUGHT god wanted.
During this time, still a christian, I was involved in a car accident resulting in my "death". I had no "NDE". I had nothing. No "whitelight" warm 'n fuzzy moment with "god", nor a fire and brimstone "satan" experience. The only reason I knew I was been dead was because it was on my chart and the Hospital staff told me. I was constantly questioned by my inlaws as to "what happened when I met god" and when I said I didn't, they were mortified and actually TRIED to convince me I did, saying I had to for "him" to send me back, to fulfill "his" plan. They constantly kept giving me "suggestions" as to what might have happened, constantly going on about the bright white light, the warmth I MUST have felt etc etc etc.. The power of suggestion IS the most powerful thing I know of and because of their suggestion and their suggestion alone, I actually started believing what they TOLD me I saw. (being on morphine for pain at the time helped my own resolve weaken). I weakly, bought into it and they used me in sermons at the church as an "eye witness" to god and all his glory...(puke) recalling their own suggested "experience" as a "truth" and validation for their salvation sales pitch. This got me to look into NDE's as a whole and I noticed that ALL these god/satan "experiences" people have claimed to have, although some minor things altered, the main outcome was the same. For a God one : whitelight, warmth, "feeling of peace"..sunshine, lollipops, rainbows, everything. Where as the satan inspired ones were: Satan (always a caped or "sinister" figure, a lot of screams but no one actually screaming....heat as opposed to warmth... I could go on but I expect you know what I mean. Odd though isn't it, that never ONCE does anyone say that God looked weird and had 2 heads. Nor does anyone say that satan was an average looking guy sitting in a field of dandelions. On having researched this, I have come to the personal opinion that all these alleged NDE's people claim to have had, comes down simply to suggestion and expectation based on a taught concept. From early childhood, we, whether from religious families or not, are some way TAUGHT about the concept of god/satan/ good/evil heaven/hell. There is no middle of the road you are allowed or supposed to take, its either one or the other so CHOOSE.( I am speaking about western "christian" society here as I am an Australian, brought up in a colonised protestant belief backed nation) We are taught, even in public schools where up until recently religious instruction classes were a compulsory part of the curriculum, that god is good and if you follow him and his rules you will go to heaven living by his side for all eternity, but satan is bad and if you don't do gods will you will be cast to damnation forever. All of this is based on instilling fear into people. ALL NDE's where people claim to have these supernatural experiences, are based soley on a taught concept and the doctrine of good/evil, god/satan etc...
In cases of trauma, people usually go into a state of shock, where the bodyand mind as such actually shuts down to prevent us feeling the intensity of the pain associated with said trauma. We close down to whats actually happening around us, but that does not mean that the subconscious is still not working and all people whom have had the "supernatural" NDE's have all been CLINICALLY dead, meaning only their vitals are not responding to monitors for that time pretty much, but it doesn't mean that the subconscious has shut down, as the subconscious can not be read on a monitor. The subconscious. Where we keep all the things we don't necessarily want to deal with. The little part of us with that TAUGHT concept of fear always pulling at us. Now, through my research, I have found that those with the "whitelight" experiences, have lead what the individuals consider themselves as being basically a "GOOD" life (as determined by the taughtconcept good/bad - god/satan) where as those whom have committed crimes or feel in their subconscious that by the TAUGHT standard, they have been bad, always have the satan, screaming etc NDE experience.
I don't know if anyone reading this has seen the movie Ghost, but that is a perfect example of what I am trying to say, albiet clumsily..lol Referencing that movie also goes to show just HOW much this taught concept of fear IS instilled in us all.
I do hope that anyone who reads this understands what I am saying.
And Webmaster, Thank you SO much for creating this site and I fail to see the "concerned mothers" issue with it at all, unless of course she is also just as "terrified" with all the Pro christianity sites out there too and telling them to STOP as well. Otherwise she is as most christians are...hypocritical.
I've read your story and I must say it is great you to see your open minded approach and honest evaluations of your thoughts. This being said, I do believe God is greater than our senses can comprehend and that we have a spiritual side to us that cannot be measured either. I think we all want to be part of something greater than ourselves seeing that selfish living is a horrible alternative.
Anyway, I'll continue to check your site and see what your conclusions are in the future. I will pray for your continual honest search for the truth -- I cannot pretend to have all the answers, but God has made Himself real to me (as I see at times He has done this for you too).
All the best!
God has made himself "real". How original. I wonder though---yes, I wonder what the chronology of the events leading up to this was? I mean, did "God" reveal "Himself" to you, first?.. before you ever even heard of the word "God", or "Jesus"?... thus, "proving" his existance?.....OR, did someone reveal to you what God/Jesus actually is, first, and this concept sounded appealling to you, and THEN this "being" made itself "real" to you?
No, actually, I'm being facetious...I don't "wonder"---I know the answer. The answer, depending in which culture/religion you're born into---is that your Muhammad concept; your Jesus concept; your Buddha concept; your whatEVer concept....was revealed to you via other human beings, FIRST.
Nonetheless, I've always been curious as to what "God" looks like. And YES, "God" would HAVE TO HAVE physical attributes for anyone to say that "God" is "real" and/or that "God" is a "He".
So please--anyone who says that their god is "real", and is an absolute "Truth"---if you would, describe for us, in vivid detail, exactly what your "God" looks like. Example: Dark hair/ blonde hair? Green eyes/hazel eyes? 5'6"?...6'5"?...you get the picture.(BTW, this applies to you too, Vynette, if you see this)
This is a challenge that I continually offer, yet, no believer can ever provide such a description. But of course, there's a reason for that, isn't there?
It sounds like you have a lot of anger. There are lots of intangible things in life that cannot be "sensed", but nevertheless exist. I can see you've never touched/seen/tasted/heard/smelled your thoughts, but don't they exist?
Broaden your mind my friend. What are you so afraid of? Dave has honestly experienced something from God (as he mentioned himself in this testimony). Have you been steeped in atheism? Wouldn't you have been brought up in this and wouldn't this be "real" to you? I admire Dave's honest approach and that was all I was trying to say.
Should we all think like you? Please, remember that things that are seen are temporal, but the unseen is eternal.
Not the same BS, how do you know your parents love you? You cannnot feel love, blah, blah, blah!
Yes, almost all of us are angry with evangelist! Your god/religion is no more "TRUE" than the rest of the gods/religions that have existed or will exist!
We cannot prove that "a god" does not exist. However, there is more evidence that "your god" (that of the bible) does not exist than to say that it does exist! Therefore, we are EX-CHRISTIANS!
No, Dave believed he had experienced something from God, as he mentioned in this testimony. Believing he had experienced something from God is a far cry from actually having experienced anything tangible or real. Once I figured out that ecstatic, emotional and mystical religious experiences are not unique to Christianity, I did some personal research on the phenomena. Now I'm of the opinion that such experiences (even those I experienced) are triggered by some peoples’ natural brain chemistry coupled with an average susceptibility to suggestion.
Things that are seen are temporal, but the unseen is eternal.
Actually, everything is eternal. Haven’t you heard that matter and energy can be neither created nor destroyed, but only changed? You, me, the computers we're staring at right now — nothing ever really ceases to exist at it's atomic level. The atoms and energy that comprise everything get recycled over and over again... forever.
So, the things that are seen are eternal and the unseen gods, devils, angels, and floating cube-shaped cities in the sky are only in the imagination of the temporary arrangement of atoms known as human beings.
Dear Steve,
Please pay close attention, and "remember" this: You are a believer in Christ. I am not a believer in Christ. And for the record, we're talking deities here, NOT "unseen emotions". Anyway, I go one step further in my non-belief and say that I have no belief in ANY "unseen" deity---and this would include deities such as Toth, Allah, Muhammad, Shazam, Isis.. and literally, THOUSANDS more. 'Funny thing is, is I bet you have no belief in any of those "other" deities as well, isn't that right? I will assume "yes", since the one deity that you DO believe in says to not have any "other" Gods before you. Since I can reasonably conclude that you don't believe in any of those other "unseen" deities---shall I come to your "cyber-space" and tell you to "Broaden your mind"???? Shall I tell you that, yes, those other God's are "real" because "the unseen is eternal"???
So no, I'm not "angry"...not in the sense that you implied it in your blanketed assumption---however, yes, I do get a bit pissey when Christians bumble and stumble their way into an EX-christian website, BTW, and minister to us about how our skepticism is "irrational", "close-minded", and a whole host of other "finger-pointing" adjectives.... when all along, they dismiss all other "unseen" deities FOR THE SAME GOD DAMNED REASONS WE DISMISS THEIRS!
Oh, I'm sorry...did that sound too angry? Tisk tisk! lol.
Look, you said your God is "real". Either offer objective evidence that the Christian bible God is "real", as you say, or kindly dismiss yourself from this conversation. Thanks.
After living some 50 years, I decided tell them just how I felt about religion and God and Jesus. I told them it was all a hoax and a scam and their jaws droped to the ground, they looked like Nazi prisoners boarding the train, I'll never forget that look, like total despair, it was like I had just run over their pet dog just for fun, for about 10 seconds.
And then the preaching broke loose about how Satan was in control of my life and I was headed str8 to hell, then their demeaner changed they suddenly became as slobbering revenous rabid wolves, I could see the hate and resentment boiling in their faces, I told them it's only a Belief, not a fact, oh no they would not accept that they had a belief, it was proven pure fact to them, in their minds.
From there after, they determined that anything I had to say carried no merrit, like I was beside myself and seperated from their imaginary world and doomed str8 to hell.
So needless to say, we no longer communicate with them, which is ok with me, but I know for sure that they socialize with their fundy croonies and they share their god speak between them which also condones and verifies their silly beliefs.
I would have never guessed that grown adults could act so childish and immature.
So this is a fair warning to you from which you already know, if you tell them you no longer believe the BS, they will excommunicate you from their lives, because you will be a threat to them, they are braind-ead in the mind fog of jebus.
And we have the same type of idiots trying to run this country. I do not know what it will take to wake Christians up, because they have submitted their very being and mind to jesus. By this, anything else outside of the bible is of Satan and his army of deceptive angels.
Good luck, but I know you're tired of hearing the self-righteous cliche's. TC
BTW, they said they will pray for me, see how frickin ridiculous? Like a slap in the face!
I just heard about the site today, and I just wanted to say that, in a weird way, i'm grateful it exists. I'm a Christian, and so naturally my hope would be that people wouldn't become "Ex-Christians." But since there are, I'm glad i can read your stories.
Take it slow, express doubts about certain issues. Become informed by reading as much as possible. There is a link to Recommended Books on the left side of the page.
How old are your children? I ask just to find out how long they have been exposed. It is natural for children to question the dogma. You can ease them out whenever they ask certain questions.
Your husband and the rest of your family will be less understanding. Again, go slow with your "coming out" and read so that you will be able to counter anything they throw at you.
Also, stick around, read the comments and ask questions.
We have exposed Oz and there is no magical deity behind the curtain!
I just found your site today. I laughed and cried. I was raised in church. Most of my life I would say I was a Christian, but over the last couple of years, I've had many doubts and questions. As I have examined the "truths" I have been taught, I found them terribly wanting. I know what I have always believed to be true is not and it's a relief, but I have never felt so alone. I haven't "come out" yet, but I know for integrity's sake I will have to eventually. You guys banter back and forth and it's fascinating and funny too, but how do you deal with the social aspect of losing your community; your family and friends? I know it's going to be major when I finally come clean. I don't even know how my husband will react or my kids...gosh, I hate to even think about it. Those of you who have left Christianity; how did all that work out?
Hi Barbie,
For me, my family accepted my decision, just as they accepted my decision to be "with" God initially. I do have to say though that my father has always been an atheist, but either way he still loved me and accepted me for what I CHOSE to believe at the time, with no critisism either way. My mother although having her own "christian" beliefs still supported me on my choice to be a non believer. Perhaps I am lucky on both counts that these people whom I love dearly accepted MY CHOICE either way with no question or judgement attached.
As for friends? Well, I had a lot of judgement from them, but those I associated with at the time LIVED by "the word" and they themselves judged me accordingly! lol How ironic! On reflection, it sort of reminds me of a Simpsons ep where Maude has been to Christian camp to learn how to be more judgemental! Any REAL friend will accept you for who you are regardless and if they don't then obviously conditions were attached with that friendship in the first place.
I doubt and hope that your husband and kids don't love and care for you on the condition that you are a Christian as Christianity as all religion is a taught concept. We are not born with bibles in our hands, or labels saying you are "THIS" or "THAT". We are just born and what we are thereafter is determined by a taught concept. With your kids, I have to say though you have been instumental in that taught concept, and as such it is also up to you to show them the alternatives.
Ruth
In fact, comments can be posted in a large number of places, and read by people all over the world.
Also, if you join the forums section of this site (notice the link toward the top center of the page that says "forums") you can post there too.
Have a great day!
The way books became part of the bible's canon is rather hard to follow, but the Third Council of Carthage and the Sixth Council of Carthage finalized the formal canon. There is not one shred of evidence that the apostles wrote the scrolls with their names appended, nor is there any evidence that they were in any way involved in binding any codex of any kind. To imply that the church took the advice of the apostles when deciding which ancient Aramaic writings to trust is just bizarre. The first indication that there was anything like a church was at least forty years after the time of the events listed in the gospels.
As for the continual harping of Pascal's Wager, it's true that if there was just one option (Christian God) to believe in, then the logical thing to do would be to believe in him. Just as Pascal said, what have you got to lose? Except, of course, that there's a billion different deities to choose from, so what happens if I bet on Zoroaster and it turns out that it was actually Kali all along? And, how does anyone turn off the critical thinking in their brain in order to accept something which they know to be logically implausible? One cannot get to blind faith through logic.
The study regarding PhDs having equivalent theist tendencies to the general population is interesting. It's also interesting that the members of the National Academy of Sciences are over 90% non-theists. It seems that the more people study and learn about science and the way the world actually functions, the less likely they are to believe in invisible friends. Too bad, since that turtle god sure looks neato.
Some fun places to read: God Hates Amputees, Richard Dawkins, or any of the Skeptic-related sites. Oh, and Julia Sweeney's "Letting Go of God" is a fantastic CD.
It seems to me, if you will accept open criticism with no offense, that you were focusing WAY too much on theology and doctrine, rather than the true dogma agreed of of all churches: that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried and on the third day he rose again, forty days later he ascended into heaven where he sits at the Father's right hand, and he is coming back once more to judge the quick and the dead and the saints and man. THAT is what it is all about. Sure, we all have our own doctrine and criteria of living (who doesn't?), but as Christians we are to love and accept one another as diverse as we may be. Unfortunately, most Christians don't do this. In a letter/rap song written to Slim Shady by Christian rapper KJ-52, he states that "it's just too bad alot of Christians, all they do is hate on you, instead of dropping to their knees and taking time to paray for you"(Dear Slim, pt.2; album IT'S PRONOUNCED FIVE TWO)I'll be praying for you man whether of not you think there's a god up there listening or not. Well, there's just one more ting I've got to say. Hebrews 5:12-14 states that "12For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
13For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil."
Have you had a child? If so, you very well know that if it were to eat meat while still a child it would kill it. Isn't this correct? I mean, it's been scientifically proven. The same is with a "newborn" Christian. You cannot search out heavy doctrine (including Dake) when you just become saved. Start with the "milk" of the Bible and work your way up.
Well, until next time, I'll be praying for you, and remember, only one God, one Truth, and only one Way.
"True dogma"? Virgin birth? Someone coming back from the dead after three days, and then getting whooshed up into the sky? Ah. This is obviously some strange new definition of "true" that I wasn't previously aware of.
And FYI, babies less than a year old *do* eat meat. But don't take my word for it -- Google "meat"+"baby food" and see for yourself.
This is Ex-Christian.net, not "NeverHeardOfChristianity.net". We read the magic book. We found it wanting. We rejected it.
BTW, many people (myself included) consider "I'll pray for you" to be extremely rude, if not an outright attack on our persons. Consider the prayers rejected as well.
FOR SOMETHING YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN YOU SURE HAVE GONE TO A LOT OF TROUBLE TO TALK ABOUT NOT BELIEVING
>>
Yeah? I'm living proof that you're wrong. And if I'M wrong, then I dare you to demonstrate how I am wrong!! -Wes.
I mean, after all, lions DO have to eat.
Christians, the other white meat!
FOR SOMETHING YOU DON'T BELIEVE(EX-CHRISTIANS)IN, YOU SURE HAVE GONE TO A LOT OF TROUBLE TO TALK ABOUT NON-BELIEF
anony wrote: "There is no such thing as an ex-Christian......You canbe anti but not ex"
Erm no... Like Wes I am also proof to the contrary. "ex" means former..
Sheesh...are they giving labotomies FREE with baptisms these days ANONY? :-)
Same goes for resurrection accounts. They made you an agnostic and they made Josh MacDowell a teist and a Christian.
Another thing is the baptism in the Holy Spirit. I got baptised at home praying to God. In my case, I wanted to keep on praying in my mother tongue but suddenly, as despite my intent, in the middle of the word spoken in my mother tonge, I started to speak fully fluently in a language I did not understand. I personally know many people who started to speak in tonges having never heard that such a phenomenon exists. No one told them about the baptism of the Holy Ghost or about the tongues, they got it on their own at home, and then went to other Christians and asked what on earth happened to them.
Then, healings. I personally experienced a couple of sudden, instant healings (severe stomachaches and one earache that continued for a few days before prayer). I prayed for my wife about her prolonged pain related to female problems and it was gone in 10 minutes without coming back again. I also prayed a couple of times about my mother in law and saw results in less than 1 minute. I personally know a couple of women healed of cancer, one women healed of sclerosis multiplex, and one girl that had been slowly dying for 7 years because of a tumor in the back part of her brain that got healed instantly and after 15 minutes she was up and dancing and she's still fine today (over 2 years have passed since then).
Finally, words of knowledge. I'm not a good one at that, but God did speak several times to me very precisely on a couple of subjects. When I was a young Christian God gave me book names and chapter numbers where to look for a thing I wanted to learn about, and there it was. God was telling me where to look for certain things I lost at home, and there they were, even in such strange places as a dust bin. God was giving me very precise and strange names of problems that other people had so that I could pray about them, and later I found out that these were existing words and actual problems.
And what about all those Bible prophecies which are so precise and detailed? details about Messiah, 69 weeks of Daniel to the death of Christ ending in 33AD or 40 AD, appearing of Messiah under the Roman Empire, emerging of an apostate Church in Rome, reemerging of the state of Israel, the war between EU and Asiatic Union which has not even emerged yet, full globalization of the world just before the Antichrist.
You're right to have doubts if they're well founded. If you believed for years and persisted and saw no obvious miracle, no obvious work of God. Many people get dissatisfied with religion. Jesus also didn't like religion. But God is God, and it would be strange if He did not wonders for you, cause I see His unexplainable wonders fairly often.
Your interpretation of reality, if it makes you FEEL good, well then, please hold on to it.
Your so-called prophecies are every bit as specific and accurate as Nostradamus' prophecies. Those rantings mean nothing for hundreds of years and then all the sudden someone says, "OH, THAT's WHAT THAT MEANT!!!"
Baloney.
Religious Zealots in every religion believe that some God is talking directly to them. Even the Laws of Hammurabi say "the god told me."
Big deal. The human mind is a complex machine, and everyone of us regularly carries on conversations with ourselves. If you want to believe that when you talk to yourself you are talking to a god, well, whatever. That's up to you.
Your Dispensational End Times doctrines you hinted at were invented just prior to the American Civil War. No Christian anywhere believed any of those doctrines 200 years ago. Sorry. Learn your history.
You're obviously an emotional, sensitive, young woman, so I'll be gentle. You're living in a fantasy world. As life's problems cross your path, you may find your religion a bit shallow and powerless.
For instance, healing stomach aches seems a bit easy to me for an almighty god. Is he good at clearing up rashes, too? The next time you see someone without an arm or a leg, pray to your GOD to regrow the limb. I'll wager he won't. And the reason he won't is because he can't, because HE DOESN'T EXIST.
And the next time you break a bone, or catch severe infection of any kind, or have any kind of severe health problem, just pray. Doctors are unnecessary when you have a pipeline to god, right?
Oh, is that so??? What subjects?....the side effects of guzzling mushroom tea? Schizophrenia? Which subjects?
Also, I'd be curious---and I bet many other people would be curious, as well---but what does the voice of "GOD" actually sound like? Firstly, it IS a "male" voice, right? Is it more akin to a bass voice?....you know, like James Earl Jones? Or a tenor?..more like Mel Gibson? Or is it a higher pitched voice, like Pee Wee Herman? And how about language---what language did "GOD" speak to you in? Hebrew? Italian? Southern French? Also, which direction was the voice coming from at the time? The sky? Your ceiling fan? Or did "GOD" speak through something?...like a TV, or a picture of the Mona Lisa?
Anonymous, you said God spoke "very precisely" to you, so we can expect a very "precise" description of this "conversation", right?
Thanks in advance, and we await your reply.
I am sorry for what the Church has done to you. I hope you do not blame God for what the Church has done.
I guess in all this, I must ask, what do you think of Jesus Christ? Looking at the Church and humanity, you must not have faith in religion whatsoever. I would have to agree with you there. Religion is a failure.
However, I am curious as to what you think of Jesus? How do you feel about Him?
Blake
Really, check it out.
Get this…you can meet Jesus online!!!
He must have been busy blogging someone else ‘cause when I tried to ask questions, all I got were links to text messages with the same old tired bible rubbish, and links to videos of Jesus. However, it seemed to have everything BUT Jesus videos. I don’t know who was filming Jesus at the time he walked the earth 2000 years ago, but that must have been some camera!
So instead, I tried “Prophets and Prophecies”. And Preston, you must be the most gullible person on earth if you think she is a prophet.
Here are her seven prophecies for 2007:
1) 2007 will be a year of success and fruitfulness
2) There will be Change, Change, Change (Boy, I am glad she narrowed that one down!!!)
3) It will be a year of covenant blessing
4) It will be a year of earth-shaking catastrophes
5) There will be walking on water, which, according to her means “Many will be called out of the “boat of comfort” into “arenas of risk” in 2007.
6) Bible faith will be challenged (NO! That’s never happened before. Must be prophetic!)
7) God’s media army is emerging
I am “really” impressed with this prophet…nothing like making broad, generalized, weasel-worded blather, and then getting the gullible to believe this prophetess have some supernatural connection with the almighty!
She even has a deliverance room, but it’s fraudulent, I went there and not one baby was being born.
Ms. King should be thankful they don't still stone false prophets.
He's busy having his face carved into trees in Jacksonville, Florida.
Please tell me why your God hates amputees. I mean, he will not help an amputee grow a new limb. He refuses to heal anyone with a missing arm or leg.
In fact, HE won't even heal a person with a missing little toe!
WOW.
GOD HATES AMPUTEES!
I have posted some other comments on your "plea to Christians" post and I have to admit that when I stumbled upon this site, I thought "what happened to this guy to make him an exchristian"
Now I am reading your testimony and let me ask you something -- in reading your testimony, I read that anytime you had a question about the things of God you always turned to another PERSON, or a book written by another PERSON. Have you ever thought about praying to God to answer your questions about HIM? I find that in my walk with God I have come across doubt at times and struggles - the last two years of my life I have felt just as confused and decided praying wouldn't help, but in my very lowest time when my brother had died and I was at rock bottom - had no guidance in my life, it was Jesus who guided me, I prayed and he answered, it was the best time of my life. Then, I had some personal issues in my marriage - purely spiritual- and strayed from my faith, figured God must hate me, I am a horrible person. All that did was send me right back to rock bottom, I then began to attend church again and found that I didn't feel the same as I once had, church wasn't the same, so I stopped attending and spent time alone with God, at home, studying His Word, asking him again for direction. And again he has answered my prayers, given me answers my pastor or pastor's wife couldn't, why? because they aren't God, they are a follower just like me. I went straight to Jesus for my answers and although, I have a ways to go, I know that the start in the right direction that I have made is not because some other person TOLD me I should pray, or TOLD me what God wanted from me, but because I sought God. Their words and advice can help me and books and study guides are just that guides, but for the answers for my life and my path in life, I need answsers from Jesus that I get through my personal relationship with Him through His Word and prayer.
Jen
By the way - describe to us exactly how Jesus talked to you? Was it a nice warm fuzzy feeling inside? Was it a voice in your head? Golden tablets? A command from god directly ordering you to slaughter neighboring cities and 'dash their little ones against the rocks" (as per your fucked up toilet paper bible)? Jen - you remind me of that rabid woman on Trading Spouses some time ago (google 'god warrior'). Sorry, Jen - but you need to bring some irrefutable hardcore evidence to this discussion before we consider you seriously. All you have spewed here is the same old chewed up garbage every other christian dumps here - nothing different whatsoever; so no, Jen, you're hardly unique, and guess what? No one gives a rat's ass about your delusions, your rants, your "answered prayers", so maybe you should reconsider posting here again in the future? By the way - I asked before on another thread - why did god get so pissed when the tower of babble was built? And do your reeally REALLY believe that insane story?? Careful now how you answer- this might further damage your credibility here! Or would it? -Wes
I understand what you are saying, and I've had those emotional times and feelings myself. My brother died in a car accident, and the peace I felt during that time was in marked contrast to the rest of my non-Christian relatives.
However, I would still feel the same peace, even though I am not a Christian. It's not my nature to become overly emotional about things. That's just the way I'm wired. And all the wonderful feelings of peace and tranquility I obtained through Christianity I still have. I only imagined that those feelings were being generated by my relationship with an invisible, immaterial deity. I now realize that every spiritual experience and feeling I or anyone else feels is generated in the mind. It is a function of the imagination. It is normal, but it is not evidence of a deity.
How do you know that you would have felt these feelings of peace without God? You stated that you grew up in Christ from the time you were a small child. How do you know that the feelings of peace and tranquility that you get now that you consider yourself an ex-christian isn't still God's grace upon you to remind you of the peace and tranquility he once gave you?
I can tell you this without Christ in my life, I have no tranquility. I had an abusive father, I have a mother who was so victimized that she can be verbally abusive at times, and has not been able to guide me into my adulthood. I found my guidance from Jesus. I went to others in Christ to get help, was too embarassd to tell my story, but when my brother died, I suddenly saw the breakdown of my family. All I had left that I could do was pray. I didn't depend on others in Christ to tell me what to pray or how to cope, I just prayed, and Jesus gave me a life of hope and peace. Throughout the last 3 years, I have been through some great struggles and turned to friends instead of prayer and you know where that got me? Deeper in sin. I said before I went back to church and it doesn't feel the same, I feel judged, because now I am divorced. But when I open my bible and read it, and pray and ask for forgiveness for MY mistakes, I am forgiven. For the first time in about 3 years, I feel like I have some hope and that began when I began to pray to God every day and not once a month. There are some self serving Christians out there, I have met them, but I won't let their example guide me. There are some Christians out there who have given me advice that doesn't line up with God's word, and again I don't follow them. I can say also that throughout all of my struggles, the one thing I wouldn't do was deny God, because I know that as sure as I am talking to you, I was talking to Him and when I asked for signs he gave them to me, I know He is real. I don't hate you for your choice of lifestyle, why? Because I don't believe God hates you. He does hate sinners, but as soon as you turn from the sin you are forgiven. He loves us enough to wait for us.
My last post on one your forums was responded with so much hatred and I felt attack against me personally, I won't be back, at least to that forum. I felt that in reading your testimony this would actually be a discussion, but I see I was wrong. I will pray for you and your site, that maybe you will again feel God's love one day and that all who come on here will at some point know Jesus.
One more thing, Rick, if you are truly an ex-christian, then why in your testimony do you still capitalize Christ, God, Jesus? If you truly don't believe, why show Him any respect?
Yours in Christ,
Jen
Thanks,
Jen
Anyway, I appreciate that you've had some problems to deal with, and religion has given you comfort.
As I said, if that gives you comfort, then please pursue it. Perhaps, one day, when the scars of your upbringing fade, you'll be in position to face life a bit more rationally.
Take care.
If you are alive by that time, i hope you will see and believe. Keep your minds open to the fact god could be real. Because so many prophesies are about this lifetime. I know The coming of jesus is coming this generation. So I ask you to be wise and keep comparing what's going on in the natural to the scriptures that ya'll know so well.
Just Don't dismiss god just yet. We're almost there
I stumbled across a website that has given me a much clearer and better insight and understanding to Christians and the Christian faith.
It's called A Christian Think Tank.
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/
I would assume you have probably done alot of research yourself on Christianity and so you have probably heard of it, but just if it interests you.
what kind of "signs" did you ask for and receive? I asked for plenty throughout my struggle with christianity and never got so much as one.
My final words
the Gate is narrow and also the path is narrow. Make sure you know the Lord. Try listening to Paul Washer at
Heartcrymissionary.com
listen to his YEC in alabama
I am roughly convinced that if you recieved your answers in satisfaction you would not turn back. "he that started a good work in you will finish it" DO YOU KNOW THE LORD. Many will say to me on that day Lord Lord (notice the signifigance of the double Lord) . . . and I will say to them depart from me I NEVER KNEW YOU. Quit looking for happiness. Quit looking for yourself. surrender yourself to the fierce fire that is God.
I wonder in all your readings for answers you have read any early church writings by the church fathers, such as John Chrysostom, Basil, Tertullian, Justin Martyr?
Mike
I thought "God's word" was "unchanging"? Or wait, it only changes when it changes?.. and it stays the same when it stays the same, right? Perfect.
Daniel: As for your current views with athiesm it's theology is far more faulty than the supposed ones in christianity
There is no "theology" in "Atheism". Learn your definitions before you spout off such non-sense.
Daniel: Athiesm by it's very nature makes no room for any kind of morality.
Utter bullshit. What is "right" and what is "wrong" is dictated by society, and/or, from culture to culture. "Right and wrong" is purely subjective. The bible says, in no uncertain terms, that we shouldn't work on the Sabbath, nor shall we allow our "slaves" to work on that day. Yet, how many theists are out stoning to death the people who work on sundays? And how many theists have slaves? How do we know it's "wrong" to kill people who work on sunday, and to keep slaves?? I mean, it's right there in "God's commandments". Yes, tell us more about your divine "morality".
Daniel: You must neither accept or reject any "idea" if you do then you are hinting to an absolute truth and then giving evidence for God.
Again, totally preposterous. CHRISTIANS can't even agree on what "absolute truth" is.
Daniel: As for the tree in the garden. that falls in with CHOICE every person must have a way to love or deny God to sin agains or glorify to be good or bad. Otherwise, if the coice(choice) is not there than the relationship and the love and the glory recieved is worthless.
You can still have "choices" without threats. Furthermore, if you want to talk about "worthless"...I would argue that any love received under threats and coersion is "worthless"...e.g....Jesus: "Love me.....or burn!"
Daniel: The tree served as that choice. Once man chose against God he fell.
You are talking about parables in a book of mythology. But I'll humor you: Mr. "Omnsicient" KNEW the outcome in the little garden story. God has no one to blame but himself. So he damned sure shouldn't be blaming me.
I am young like you were when you started doubting and am sensing that you are holding back something.
You are young? Now that's some astonishing disclosure. Thank you.
Mainly because you have switched to aitheism which is purely illogical.
Feel free to show me the "logic" in talking snakes; swimming hammers; a talking domestic ass; camping out inside a whale; unicorns; giants; witch doctors and talking vegetation. Then, using the scientific method, show me the "logic" and "science" in "creation". Waiting.
My final words
Promise?
the Gate is narrow and also the path is narrow. Make sure you know the Lord. Try listening to Paul Washer at
Heartcrymissionary.com
listen to his YEC in alabama
Try reading just one book that challenges your belief. I dare you.
I am roughly convinced that if you recieved your answers in satisfaction you would not turn back.
No shit? That's the whole point---the "answers" ARE UNsatisfactory.
Quit looking for happiness. Quit looking for yourself. surrender yourself to the fierce fire that is God.
Yikes...that's just plain scary.
Atheism has no "theology." Theology is the study of god.
"will say to them depart from me I NEVER KNEW YOU"
It always comes down to threats, doesn't it?
To Mike: Yes, I've read those men.
Question for Mike: Have you read anything critical of Christianity?
She doesn't understand it but she knows she was speaking it fluently. That's amazing.
Religion is just a belief system...isn't that what this is?
FOR THOSE THAT ARE TIRED, WEARY, AND LOOKING FOR "ANOTHER RELIGION" YOU'VE FOUND IT!
Cheers.
It's nice to meet yet another bitter Christian.
I want to ask you a few questions. Do you think newspapers are religions? Do you think magazines are religions? Do you have any idea how much time and money it takes to run a website like this? Do you so resent seeing opinions in opposition to your religion?
Though I have nothing to hide, and no reason to tell you anything, I will tell you this: No one is required to contribute a dime to this website at any time. There is no requirement for a tithe, no expectation of generosity, no plea of funds to "save the lost," no promise of "blessings" to those who do help out, no nothing. The people who do help this site stay online do it for only one reason: because they relate to the purpose of this site: encouraging ex-Christians.
Anonymous: Go back to your loving congregation of mind-numbed believers and give, give, give to support your pastor, your television minister's new Porsche, your idea that the poor starving Africans are finding an apartment in heaven, or whatever you think you are accomplishing by making your religious leaders rich.
Go.
Your bitter emotions are wasted here. I've heard stupid fundie ranting so many times since shedding the rotten skin of Christianity, I could puke.
I mean this in the nicest way.
May your loving, forgiving, and everlastingly fun god bless your defense of his poor, wounded honor.
If I look at your reply objectively, it looks as if I have struck a cord with this money thing.
Cheers.
Thanks.
God's kid
You seem generally a bit cynical when it comes to people.
Did it ever occur to you that people wrote the scrolls and manuscripts that were eventually combined into your Bible?
Since you say that people are have a tendency to be undependable, I find it striking that you completely trust the writers of your holy book.
You see, people wrote those words in your holy book, GK. No god penned them. You are trusting in people.
Donna
Also, I get the reason for the site. This site isn't advocating one way or another. It's basically someone saying "these were my experiences that left me distraught and offended and this is where I blow of steam, and possibly unite with others that feel the same way".
Anyways, off to lunch. Let the flaming begin!
Religion:
1. a: Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b: A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.(American Heritage)[bold added]
Now, Chris, if you "stopped thinking in religious terms", then you stopped thinking in Christian terms. Christianity is a religion. Congratulations!......welcome to freedom!
Chris: If you believe in God, great! If you don't, great! The minute you want to push me one way or another, the minute I shove you back and it becomes a negative situation.
My initial thoughts are that someone here is being disingenuous. I guess I'll see how "great" it is that I don't believe in "Jesus", or any other god, when/if Chris comes back.
Chris: Also, I get the reason for the site.
Somehow, I don't think so, but just to be sure, the site's purpose/disclaimer is available.
Chris: This site isn't advocating one way or another.
It's "advocating" that Christianity is bunk.(in a nutshell)
Chris: It's basically someone saying "these were my experiences that left me distraught and offended and this is where I blow of steam, and possibly unite with others that(who) feel the same way.
(addendum)....and where I say that the Chrisitian biblegod doesn't exist".
Yup, you nailed it = )
While touting itself as the answer to man's ultimate questions, all it really does is enslave the mind.
If you are trying to say there are good people who happen to be Christians, well then I completely agree. If what you are trying to say is that because there are good people who are Christians that Christianity is true, then I disagree.
Every person who for one reason or another finds themselves captured by a religious cult, finds it very difficult to escape the clutches of that cult. If they ever do escape, they desperately need encouragement.
This site is for those who have escaped or are escaping from the cult known as Christianity.
Now do you get it?
---------------------------
MAN! AS AN EX-CHRISTIAN YOU MUST KNOW THAT CHRISTIANITY IS NOT FOR THE MIND BUT FOR THE SPIRIT. YOU MISUNDERSTOOD IT, DIDN´T YOU? REMEMBER: The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. REMEMBER ALSO THAT: Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body. THE BODY!!!!
Martin Stoimenov
And me, I find study positively exhilarating rather than wearying. If it's wearing you down, you're studying the wrong things.
:)
I live in Mexico, so Mexico is everything. I´ve never seen Malaysia, so Malaysia is a state of mind, as well as most of the world. Most of the world is just a state of mind in my "physical" brain and was brought to me by a "physical" TV.
Martin Stoimenov
But, it is possible to travel to Malaysia and confirm its existence.
Do you have any evidence, outside the moldering volume of a Bronze Age holy book written by ignorant Middle Eastern peasants 1,900+ years ago, that an invisible spirit of any kind actually exists?
If so, I'm sure many here would greatly appreciate any light you could shed on this topic. So often, Christians admonish us to believe in all sorts of invisible supernatural things without evidence beyond, of course, their personal Christian beliefs or a few words read out of their holy book.
When asked for evidence, they usually say something like, "Well, can you see love?" It's a poor analogy because love is an emotion which is generated and resides solely in the brain. Emotional feelings are not supernatural, and because thoughts and emotions are virtually invisible, that in no way provides evidence that there are invisible supernatural entities flying about the "firmament."
Some more. There is no any prove that you exist. I don´t know you. I´ve never seen you and only because you´ve written some website it doesn´t make you real to me.
You don´t have to talk about love in order to prove that an invisable world exists. Every single day we recieve SMSs and e-mails and only because we can read them it doesn´t mean that they are true. May be they don´t exist. May be they are only an image in our physical brain, a picture from the past that we´d like to forget only because they don´t convey an info we like.
Martin Stoimenov
And therefore, God exists.
Martin, have a nice day.
If I don´t see it, it doesn´t exist.
If I don´t understand it, it´s something stupid.
If I don´t believe it, it´s a lie.
I saw the LIGHT! God doesn´t exist! Thank you, MAN!
Martin Stoimenov
I just found this site. I have a question that I can't seem to get out of my head. Where did all the stuff come from? Does the physical world that we see around us just exist eternally? Did something or someone create the stuff? What is the uncaused first cause? Is this an important question? Anyway, I am tired so off to bed I go. I look forward to seeing some thoughts on this subject.
Dee
Hey Mr. Webmaster it's great to see more sites like this popping up all over the place, keep up the good work ;)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v609/mithrastheprophet/forum/god-v-satan.png
The probability of life being made by chance (after a Big Bang) would be rarer than the probability of a Boeing 747 airplane being assembled by chance in mid-air after all of its parts were sucked up from the ground by the wind.
:)
Yet, here you are.
Hmm.
I guess people really do win the lottery.
Would you mind showing us how you computed the probability of life arising? I can think of a good many biochemists who would be fascinated to see the solution to that puzzle (since, currently, nobody else has a clue). Actually, I'd be curious just to hear a few of your assumptions.
I found your "anti-testimony" fascinating and I'm really glad you posted it here and created this site. Thanks.
It appears that after your various religious activities and large amount of studying and book reading you seem to conclude that people ("Christians") are NOT indwelt with the Holy Spirit (God). Therefore, following this conclusion it is understandable that you think Christianity is a fake and a lie.
Your "anti-testimony" explains your experiences that support the conclusion that people are not indwelt with the Spirit which I can also follow.
However (I guess this is the real reason I'm commenting), I'm confused at the difference in life experience between you and me. (I would go into my own life story, but it would take up a lot of room so I'll just summarize.) Basically, I'm a Christian yet I've seen in my life and in those around me the huge change (for the better) that God has done.
I agree that not all Christians are "good" or nice people and that not all non-Christians aren't nice (I've met several very caring and kind non-Christians).
I'm confused because it seems like you are an intelligent, logical person who has clearly given Christianity a try yet your conclusion that God does not indwell people is far different than mine. Having God as Lord and Savior never changed your life for the better? Did He really not do anything in your life?
This just amazes me because I've seen so many lives change, including my own for the better (These are life changes that are humanly impossible to achieve). I've seen angry people soften and selfish, career-driven people change be aware of others at cost to themselves.
So, if God really didn't impact people and indwell them (change them for the better) I would agree with you that Christianity is a lie. However, I've seen and witnessed far too many occurrences of God working in and changing people to ignore.
I'm sad and confused that our life experiences could produce such contrasting conclusions. Thanks for sharing your story though. I wish there were more Christians out there who thought and read as much as you.
You said, "These are life changes that are humanly impossible to achieve."
Exactly. The person who changes wants to change and does so. It has nothing to do with magic.
Dumbo thought he needed a magic feather to fly, but he eventually realized he could fly without the feather. His belief in the feather was silly.
Peace.
As a refugee from evangelical/charismatic Christianity myself, I find much that I can relate to in your account. I can also say that I did NOT leave the church behind because of how I was treated. I knew many kind, intelligent, sincere people in the various churces I have belonged to and visited. I was raised in an abusive home, and was able to break that cycle and do a better job wtih my own children, largely because of the positive influence and example of many fellow Christians.
I was never as ardent, or as inclined to evangelize, as you were in your youth. I was brought to church by my parents, and kept there by my first husband. After my divorce, I started attending a less fundamentalist church, but even there -- it was the cognitive dissonance that I could no longer bear. Too many of the church's teachings, on too many subjects, just stopped making sense to me. I'm not quite an atheist, perhaps I am an agnostic. I have read quite a bit of buddhist thought lately, but I'm not totally committed to that either.
Thanks for sharing your story. I look forward to reading more of it. And perhaps I will soon get back to my own blog and share more of my own. :)
keith
First of all sorry for my bad english I am from Croatia.
***
This site has an interesting view. I think of myself as a free thinker but i would like to tell you one thing my friend and that is: "Religion is fear but faith is love". People always need to have faith in other people, don't loose faith. Religion is just corporative approach in using faith for gaining ego... Please do not think as this all bad (christianity). All people are natively good and want to make theirselves and other around them feel good. We as a people of this small world need to grow up beyond differences and join together to make this world worth living. No matter if you are christian, baptist, buddhist or islamist... Follow the way of love and help other people.
***
To provocated christians:
Religion is bad cause people are making it like that. As an ex-christian i can say that religion does not save you but people often search for an excuse so misuse religion for that. If i kill in the name of god or i go to church in the name of god would i be true follower or just someone who is searching for love in the wrong way? I ask you why do we need gods commands? Why do we need "gods" rules? IF we live by rules of love and understanding noone would be exchristian or christian. If you were in true understanding of your religion things like this site would not bother you. If catholic church encourages people to believe why wouldn't someone encourage them not to believe? I ask you again who is more right the one who asks to believe or the one who asks not to believe???
In fact, I was part of several of the cults that call themselves Christianity.
First, I get a code. Then I type in the secret word.
You get no comment because it apparently isn't God's will.
Every real disciple should have God Himself as his teacher and yet find the same truth. If you don't believe this then isn't God playing games with you that some "expert" on Him is all you can find?
There are many who are called but not chosen and think they know God but don't. Which one did you like best?
I think a person has to want to follow and worship a righteous King as God first.. if He exists. This is the kind of beginning point. If a person is happy without God, then they likely will not be sincerely seeking Him (though they may enjoy reading supposedly intellectual writings about "God" by writers whose real motivation is to exalt themselves by supposing they know God).
Since God is a King, He won't be bossed around giving out answers or even answering period unless a person sincerely wants to cooperate in His righteous plan and be respectful.
Most men are happy being their own god... no matter if the combined result in the world is kind of mediocre.
Follow a king? Worship a king? What in blazes for? My current country of residence has an honest-to-goodness queen who seems to be a nice enough lady. I know she exists; I've seen her on TV and heard her voice on the radio. But... Follow? Worship? No, no, a thousand times no. She isn't going anywhere I'd care to follow (and neither is anyone else, god -or- mortal).
I'm especially underwhelmed by the absentee-landlord Biblical god Yahweh, whose alleged actions on Earth are so random as to be statistically indistinguishable from chance occurrences.
As for gods-as-teachers, riddle me this: With literally thousands of versions of Christianity out there, and multiple versions of "the truth", what makes you think that anyone got the real deal?
This isn't "a god." This is the God that created and runs the cosmos.
There is little reason to believe that multiple gods of different personalities created or run it since they would long ago have begun arguing and let the whole thing go to pot. Also, the universe is really quite up to date after all these trillions of years, so God is obviously infinitely more with it than, say, the General Motors management.
If you believe it runs itself (the universe) then you probably might conclude the same thing about General Motors ( and of course the employees would agree with this assessment though we know better).
So far as which of all the forms of Christianity to believe... here's my experience.
I chucked the whole thing as a teenager after not getting answers to my questions. I was a Lutheran.
However, in my heart and mind I knew I would follow God as King if He is who He is in the bible and if He exists.
I supposed there might be a God, but if so He wasn't answering questions. He had given us death, which doesn't seem too great when He doesn't seem to have anyone around with answers to questions such as what happens after death; not convincing answers anyway. So I recognized the need for a loving Father God and wished we had souls that lived on, but it seemed too good to be true... must be a fairy tale.
And if one only gets to heaven through Jesus, then what about the man that died in India 5000 years ago that never heard of Jesus?
I went about my business and stopped looking for God or "believing in Him."
Then I had an experience where all my questions were answered about everything I could think of as fast as I could think of the questions.
It turns out there is a state of mind or communion with God wherein we are not seperated from the truth and the answers. If we were with God and holy we would be in this state of mind of communion and answers to questions all the time.
I wasn't looking for God at the time, but God knew my heart and reached me.
So, on the one hand, when you say you wouldn't want to follow a King, it indicates you aren't ready to respect one and so He knows your heart and unless He chooses to work on you, you will presumably continue to live your life without Him. This is, however, the real reason for you not knowing Him; it is not the myriad pontifications and denominations of men that you should claim for your reason for not seeking Him. He is able to reach a person personally if they sincerely want a righteous, holy God.
The queen you are discussing is not holy or righteous, unless she is by her relationship with Christ, if she has one. Following her is not at all the same as following God.
So far as the man who died in India 5000 years ago, he was judged by how he responded to his conscience and what he could see of the nature of God in nature (this is written in scripture and is logical).
Not knowing Christ,His judgment would have been that he came back here again to live another life as who he had become in the last life by everything he did which made him who he was by the point of death, judgment and rebirth, or he could have been denied another existence here by God and sent to hell if he deserved it (if you don't believe in hell, you must be niave because there are people who live in hell right here on earth).
Anyway, it turns out there aren't significant problems with the bible for me, just the overlay men had put on it, which makes it very hard to see it for what it really says.
Still, no problem, God is available with answers for those who humbly and sincerely seek the truth and a King because He has so prepared them. In my case, part of the preparation was demanding real answers that make sense.
If anything I said doesn't make sense, I will try to expand on it or clarify it if you request
Prove it. (And not by using the Bible, either... Not admissible as evidence here.) I see no reason to believe that such a being exists outside the imaginations of humans.
And there is certainly no evidence thus far that points to (and only to) the god of the Judeo-Christian mythological books.
"So far as which of all the forms of Christianity to believe... here's my experience."
Your subjective experiences are insufficient as evidence. I am not living life through your eyes, but through Mine. Your fantasies are not "truth" to Me.
What I did see in your testimony, however, is a fear of your own mortality and a craving for a father figure. And I think that you convinced yourself by looking for 'signs' that confirmed what you already wanted desperately to believe.
My needs are different from yours. Very different. I'm comfortable with the concept of death and, being an adult, am not looking for "Dad" to tell me what to do.
"It turns out there is a state of mind or communion with God wherein we are not seperated from the truth and the answers."
Exceedingly common "mystical" experience. Happens in all cultures. Advanced students of meditation (all styles) regularly give similar reports -- Read Ken Wilber's Transformations of Consciousness for an in-depth look at the salient features of the phenomenon.
And such an experience doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the Bible (or any other religious book), or with supernatural god-beings, either. I suspect it was "merely" your own mind in a particularly lucid and focused state.
"So, on the one hand, when you say you wouldn't want to follow a King, it indicates you aren't ready to respect one... And unless He chooses to work on you..."
Ah, so much for that 'free will' shit. So your pet god regularly fucks with random human minds to get people to believe it exists? I am sooo not impressed.
"The queen you are discussing is not holy or righteous..."
(picks up very heavy gauntlet) *slap!* Hey. No one disses Betty Windsor on My watch, kid.
"...he could have been denied another existence here by God and sent to hell if he deserved it..."
NO ONE deserves Hell.
No one.
Not even your mythical devil.
If you believe otherwise, you are one sorry and deluded little bastard, and I hope you simply wake up one morning and discard your religion because it no longer makes any fucking sense to you.
Before I even saw Astreja's thoughts, I also picked up on your fear of mortality, as well as your strong need for a father figure; which this god IN YOUR MIND, provides you with both.
Your justifications that try to prove to us that YOUR god should be our god to, have about as much credibility to them, as any other lame fundie argument we've seen thus far on this site.
All your proof lies within your own deluded mind and no place else.
Your reasoning ability is just a wee bit skewed and out of kilter, but a sick mind doesn't always know it's in need of repair (e.g. patients that are having strokes don't know it many times).
Your mind needs to worship this god because of your own selfish needs for immortality and that mystical father figure to protect and guide you. So you, like all xtians do, form god in the image they wish to see him as and cherry pick qualities of the bible to support that specfic image.
>"I wasn't looking for God at the time, but God knew my heart and reached me"
Again I agree with Astreja here. This is quite scary in fact.
So your version of this god being, goes around touching people with his mind at random, which of course takes away the free will that most xtians proclaim we all have.
This is on par with how god hardened the pharaoh's heart ON PURPOSE so he wouldn't let Moses's people go too soon (and wreck the length of the 4 hour movie).
Sure seems that your god likes to interfere with the thought processes of the human he created.
Thank goodness my mind has a force field wrapped around it that repels such conjured up gods.
I wonder if those extinct WoolyMammoths, had an equal talent for making up gods to worship in their primitive minds. If so, their god had the same amount of proof that your does...NONE.
You really do need to put aside your emotions that prove your god to you and try and use some reasoning ability to see your god never existed.
Your emotional needs have created this god in your mind, but his reality stops where your skull ends.
ATF
If you don't think creation, or "nature" as you might like to put it without recognizing God, or mathematics, or any other of God's beautiful creations "proves" God's existence then you logically believe a Rembrandt painted itself.
Now leave it to you to tell me who is logical.
Atheism requires a lot of faith.... I think you should prove that God doesn't exist... what evidence do you have(your grievances with God don't prove He doesn't exist).
Dead wrong. It is totally necessary. When a child believes he or she has an invisible friend, okay, sure....'harmless. On the other hand, when full grown adults commence to blowing each other up, even as we speak, over which invisible "friend" to worship, then YES, it becomes necessary to find evidence for, and identify, their alleged "friend"...i.e.. "God". When personal beliefs(yours) become collective beliefs, and those beliefs encroach upon my freedom and/or threaten my well being, then you'd better be able to validate the source, pal. That is the way it works.
Xian Fleece: If you don't think creation, or "nature" as you might like to put it without recognizing God, or mathematics, or any other of God's beautiful creations "proves" God's existence then you logically believe a Rembrandt painted itself.
Firstly, most Atheists I know are in awe of "nature". I, personally, don't need to know the source of nature, nor presuppose that it even needs a source, to be in awe of nature.' Follow? However, unlike you, the "lookist", I'm fully aware that nature can be just as ugly and deadly, as it can be "beautiful". In other words, if "God is like a icecream cone on a hot summer's day"....then to be objectively fair, "God is like a killing machine when a tsunami takes out 20,000 human beings". Of course, I wouldn't expect you to have a clue what the word "objective" means.
Secondly, if nature, in deed, has a source, then whoopty-shit. Who says it's not a non-personal indifferent impartial source? Who says it's a personal "being" flying around the universe in a tizzy over if a man has foreskin on his penis, or if they like to eat shellfish? Who says?..yoU? WHERE is your evidence?
Thirdly, your tired old apologetic, "painting needs a painter" analogy fails miserably, just like it always will. For one, I can waltz right down to the Ringling School of Art and witness painters in action, "creating" paintings. Secondly, you are comparing apples and oranges, to begin with---you are comparing nature, itself, to something that doesn't occur in nature.
Xian Fleece: Now leave it to you to tell me who is logical.
Oh?... you're leaving it to me? Okay, then I say that NOT believing in something; NOT spending a good portion of your life trying to please that somthing---something for which there is NO evidence...is logical. 'Hope that helps = )
Xian Fleece finishes with: Atheism requires a lot of faith.... I think you should prove that God doesn't exist... what evidence do you have(your grievances with God don't prove He doesn't exist).
WRONG again. Non-belief requires zero "faith". Do you have "faith" that Poseiden doesn't exist? How about the Almighty Allah? I think you should "prove" that every god you deny doesn't exist. Can you? Of course not...so what, then? Those deities exist because you cannot prove they don't? I'd advise you to not attempt that moronic argument if you should happen to challenge Atheists elsewhere.
- http://groups.msn.com/AtheistVSGod/theonusofproof.msnw
"Waaaaaaaahh waaaaaaah waaaaaaah, you've shown us up to be a bunch of fools!! those evil people from the past aren't true christans WAAAAAH WAAAH WAAH!!!"
You are only to be congratulated mr Webmaster, your work will go down in history as some of the most important free-thought and hence liberation known in the 20th-21st century..
I can just imagine or descendents now...
Descendent#1:"Hey did you know that people believed in an invisible sky man who watched and judged everything you did?"
Descendent#2:"Yeah but that was before the internet and the age of electronic enlightenment...the internet was like the global library of alexandria in it's heyday;)"
Christianity is nothing but a psychopathic death cult and ALL its followers are neurotic to SOME degree...how else can we explain a belief in something that isn't there?
At minimum there are individual Christians who are not dangerous.
Sure, you can think of a smart-alec answer to anything.
By the same logic some of you use, atheists are dangerous because Communist atheists slaughtered millions of people in Russia and other countries.
You know, it doesn't take too much thinking to expose the lack of fair thinking in some of what is being said here.
There is an emotionally charged hostility here sometimes which might be the counterpart in an atheist cult to emotionally charged "love" or positive emotions in a pseudo-Christian cult.
I could easily find a rationale for blaming atheists for all the problems in the world.
Anyway, the form of cultic atheism which some of you have chosen to believe in, though quite a widespread and scholastically supported cult, never-the-less has a lot of the allure and ego-appeal that most other cults have. Why not find several listings of the nature of cults and see if you have unknowingly found your next one?
I have no intention of playing fair.
I detest Christianity. It's a millstone tied around the neck of millions of people... A mind-fuck that has them shaming themselves, confessing unworthiness to a hypothetical invisible being who doesn't do squat to help this planet.
The problems of this world will not be solved by people who consider themselves to be less than dirt. What we need is strong, mentally stable individuals who know that they're good enough to sit down and come up with correct answers.
The violence of this world will not be reduced or resolved by us-or-them religions. Such cults, including (but not limited to) Christianity and Islam, see enemies on all sides and long for eschatological catastrophes such as the Apocalypse.
The future of humanity is at stake. Christianity is a liability to that future.
For you who are so concerned about Christianity being dangerous, aren't you using monolithic thinking?
I didn't finger Christianity, specifically, did I? Let's review together:
"When a child believes he or she has an invisible friend, okay, sure....'harmless. On the other hand, when full grown adults commence to blowing each other up, even as we speak, over which invisible 'friend' to worship, then YES, it becomes necessary to find evidence for, and identify, their alleged "friend"...i.e..'God'."
To be crystal clear---"full grown adults" was intended to mean adherents of ANY religion; I mean ANY religion that either, explicitly, or implicitly, condones/promotes the killing of opposing religionists. That would include Christianity, and Islam, and "God's Chosen". If you want to say that I'm thinking monolithically in terms of slaughtering in the name of "faith" being a bad thing?... 'so be it---I accept that "charge".
Wool': At minimum there are individual Christians who are not dangerous.
True---and further still, wouldn't you agree that those individuals don't likely need to keep a bible on their night stands to "not" be "dangerous"? Be honest. In other words, if they're good, compassionate, and peaceful people as moderate religionists, chances are, they'd be the same without religion at all, therefore, they wouldn't need to be proponents of the same doctrine that enable the extremists.
Wool': Sure, you can think of a smart-alec answer to anything.
Yup, all day...until you stop giving me the material.
Wool': By the same logic some of you use, atheists are dangerous because Communist atheists slaughtered millions of people in Russia and other countries.
I didn't bring up the past, did I? Nonetheless, you attack a straw man. Communism is/was a political movement. There is no Atheist doctrine that says all adherents must kill in the name of communism. Communism and godlessness are not mutually inclusive. Click here. Furthermore, how many wars are taking place as we speak, in the name of "no god"?
Wool': You know, it doesn't take too much thinking to expose the lack of fair thinking in some of what is being said here.
It apparently takes more thinking than what you have, because to my understanding, if you're here to campaigne that Christianity is the one and only Universal Truth, you've fallen way short. 'Got anything better?
Wool': There is an emotionally charged hostility here sometimes which might be the counterpart in an atheist cult to emotionally charged "love" or positive emotions in a pseudo-Christian cult
Tit-for-tat? That's the best you' got? Nonetheless, where's our cult leader? Where's our doctrine? Where's our symbolic blood sacrifice? Hey...where's our golden execution apparatus necklaces? Hmmm?
Wool': I could easily find a rationale for blaming atheists for all the problems in the world.
Sure you could---just like you could blame "evil" on a horned man-angel in a red leotard who lives in the center of the earth. BOO!
Grammar aside, let's take a look at the "logic" of this argument. WD claims that failing to attribute the creation of "nature" to "god" is equivalent to failing to attribute the creation of a painting to a painter. Let's see if this stands up. (I think I already know what's going to happen, but I won't give it away.)
As this is an argument by analogy, the whole thing stands or falls on aptness; that is, how close the parallel is between the two scenarios. WB claims that the parallel is so close that one cannot possibly accept (reject) one without accepting (rejecting) the other. Presumably, this is what WB meant by being "logical". So far so good, WD?
Let's start with a painting. We've all seen how they are made. A human dabs a brush into various paints and applies it to a canvas. We've never seen something that looks like a painting that was NOT done in this way. Hence, we have plenty of positive examples of painters creating paintings, and not a single negative example. Inductively speaking, we're therefore on solid ground when we assume a painter whenever we see a painting.
Now WD asserts that "nature" is so similar to a painting that it MUST share the attribute of having a creator (not a human creator of course, but a magical invisible being). Let's try to see why this must be. As WD gave no indication as to why this one particular attribute must carry over from paintings to nature, we'll need to guess why it must be so. Is it true, for example, that ANYTHING that is true of the painting must also be true of "nature"? Well, no. We cannot conclude that "nature" is nearly flat, or made of canvas and paint, or created by a human, or has a mass of less than a ton, or has no moving parts, or can be wadded into a little ball by a human, etc. etc. In fact, there's very little we can say about a painting that is also true of nature. NEVERTHELESS, WD claims that this ONE special attribute actually does carry over from the painting to nature; that somebody or something "created" it. And why is this again? Presumably because paintings and nature are SO SIMILAR; no other reason.
To sum up:
1) we've plenty of examples to cite when claiming a painter created a painting, but not ONE when it comes to universes or nature.
2) Nature is not very much like a painting, so there are countless things that are true of one and not the other.
3) The only reason to suspect that nature and paintings share the attribute of having a creator is a loose (and very poor) analogy.
So, the "logic" didn't fare too well. Perhaps you would like to try another example, or attempt to refine this one.
WD later said "I could easily find a rationale for blaming atheists for all the problems in the world."
Of course you could! Coming up with rationale is child's play. The question is whether that rationale would stand up to scrutiny. I very much doubt that it would. But don't let me stop you; give it a go if you like.
WD also said "Anyway, the form of cultic atheism which some of you have chosen to believe in,..."
To the religionist, all is religion. Atheism generally stems from skepticism; the demand for warranted belief. That's not only the antithesis of a cult, it's just about the only ticket out of a cult.
I didn't agree with most of Dirty Jim's (I mean that affectionately) reasoning.
I do think Karen wrote some beautiful stuff and Fist has it right when he says loving each other whatever religion you are or not... can't knock it when someone helps you out.... I'm not saying atheists or Islamists or whatever are all bad... can't knock it when they are there to help you.
Om the other hand, there are unsavory types operating under any name. Stuff it in your ear.
The "unsavory types" argument for the existence of God:
1) Some Atheist's comments are unsavory.
2) Therefore, God exists.
3) Therefore, Jesus is Lord.
That and $2.50 will get you a Frappuccino at Starbucks. Feel free to poke holes in what I said. We'll see if your reasoning holds up. Okay?
Wool, if this is true, the world is (pardon my french) fucked.
As soon as you pick religion as the touchstone of reality, then we have to start discussing how one can demonstrate the correctness of one religion over another when different religions disagree.
-Wilson Heydt
I had a response to your reasoning behind why a painting is not a good analogy to creation or nature. I erased the whole thing because I thought the primary motives on the site are more along the lines of Huck Finn demonstrating his independence.
Since then I read Anonymous's long posting about mid-way up the scroll button margin about the origin of scripture, which I kind of liked, because it basically said the disciples taught it and then handed it around once somebody wrote it down and it got copied and passed down like any popular and valued writing might. I would add that the personality of God, or for you, the imaginary being, is evident in all the books that are in the bible. Here is where you might say, "ya, and He was this and that." I see consistency in the Being despite the fact that records of Him or "the postulated subject god" are gathered from a number of sources.
This doesn't "prove" anything, but it would be a tip-off that the subject god was manufactured if the various authors making the god up were not constistent over time about the exact nature and character of the being.
But, anyway, let me read your objections to the painting/creation or nature analogy again.
Well, that is the reason for the example of the painting; the fact that noone has seen God create.
Now as to whether a painting is enough like nature to posit a relationship between nature and creator such as exists between painting and painter:
A painting and nature are certainly different. How about, there is too much complexity in application of materials for either to likely be the result of random incident or forces. I would say that the screw on the back of the painting is a dead give away and any human, be it Jim Lehrer or Einstein, is the equivalent in creation of the screw on the back of the painting.
We also have complexities in time involving the chances of entropy occuring before material complexities would have a chance to develop, in the case of creation/nature. I guess entropy is not a factor in a painting. The complexities of the painting, however, point to application of materials with a desired result rather than by random chance, even without observation of an artist painting it. Of course, the missing factor in nature is that noone saw the creator create creation/nature, but that is the reason for the analogy, to convey that a large likelihood, or by mathematics, a certainty that all of the complexity cannot happen and maintain in order without entropy over vast lengths of time without intelligence behind it.
I am not saying, of course, "Oh, here's the paragraph that proves a creator." I understand that that might be what some are looking for.... maybe it is a matter of degree.... a paragraph that would satisfy and thus "prove" a creator to the logic of one person would not satisfy another. The fact that noone saw God/imaginary being create does not mean that we cannot intelligently infer and reduce to a certainty with mathematics that intelligent design is behind the universe.
I just more fully appreciated your notion that no attempt at logic at all is worthy of a Frappucino at Starbucks.
You noted that it would be a brick wall if indeed, "the trick is that the spiritual can't be proved by empirical observation of the material by definition of the terms" is true.
I'm thinking the trick to this statement is the question, "Why are you attempting to empirically observe what is readily obvious once it has been ascertained that no nature/creator in a body has ever been observed?"
If for the reasons I stated, possibly inadequately, in the above post, there must be a creator, then the creator must exist on a spiritual level defined as one that is not observable from the frequency level our eyes and ears are attuned to. This because the group experience of mankind is that noone has ever seen the creator wih eyes or ears and lived.
On that you have my whole-hearted agreement! Now, do you believe the ghastly capricious being depicted in the OT is identical to the generally benign character of Jesus? Is stoning disobedient children, or sacking entire communities consistent with the person of Jesus as you conceive him? I can think of few books as psychotically disjointed as the Bible. But, point well taken.
WD paraphrased my point #1 as "...there are plenty of examples of artists seen painting paintings but none of God creating a universe."
No, you missed the vital point. We have no examples of anything being "created" or "designed" IN NATURE, whether by a god or otherwise. The entire category of "natural" phenomena is without a single verifiable example of something having been created or designed. Thus, there is no way to test any inference about such. If you claim that an amoeba was "designed", there is no observation or experiment that one can perform to check that claim (Behe, Dempski, and Denton no withstanding). Thus, any analogy you employ to hop from the category of human artifacts to that of natural phenomena is wholly without support.
WD: "...there is too much complexity in application of materials for either to likely be the result of random incident or forces."
I agree. "Complex" structures and processes are (in general) not the result of randomness. If you think that anybody is arguing otherwise, then you are attacking a straw man. Life, for example, is the antithesis of randomness, as is the molecular machinery that comprises it. However, non-random is NOT identical with "designed". We have plenty of examples of the spontaneous creation of order out of seeming chaos. This happens continually at the molecular level as molecules self-assemble (and, no, this not a violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics any more than crystal formation is). But more importantly, life is subjected to continual feedback from the environment, which is not random at all--it's highly correlated with the structure of the organism; feedback is effectively the opposite of randomness. What we see in nature, at the macroscopic scale, is not random at any scale except the atomic scale. Non-random does NOT equal "designed".
Let me turn your analogy around and use it to make my point. The painter does not first decide what picture she wishes to paint, and then applies a precise sequence of strokes to create the pre-conceived image. Rather, she will continually assess how the picture is developing, experiment, and happily accept random flourishes if they produce something "good". The painting she ends up with may be vastly different from what she originally imagined. There is a complex feedback loop between the painter and the painting. While there is indeed some randomness within each brush stroke (for the painter cannot perfectly anticipate how each hair in the brush will behave), the overall process is NOT random, even though the path ultimately taken may not have been anticipated at all.
That is a reasonable analogy with life and the process of evolution. Note carefully how I made use of your painting analogy. I used it to illustrate what is observed (and inferred) to occur in nature; I am not attempting to infer anything about life by means of this analogy. That is, I using analogy as a descriptive device, as do scientists, not as an inference rule, as do creationists.
WD: "...The complexities of the painting, however, point to application of materials with a desired result rather than by random chance, even without observation of an artist painting it."
I've already addressed that above. You cannot infer that the painter created the painting *intentionally*; that is, by choosing from the outset to create that particular painting. Doing so ignores the vitally important role of feedback from painting to painter. Once you make that observation, the painting analogy becomes a better metaphor for evolution than for special creation (with environmental pressures playing the role of the painter, of course).
WD: "...that is the reason for the analogy, to convey that a large likelihood, or by mathematics, a certainty that all of the complexity cannot happen and maintain in order without entropy over vast lengths of time without intelligence behind it."
No, no, and no. Nothing in that sentence has any basis in fact. Your reference to "likelihood" and "mathematics" in that sentence are once again based on nothing but loose analogy and gut feel. Yes, we can see lots of complex things around us that have been designed. That's no surprise--WE PUT THEM THERE! WE MADE THEM. The existence of those artifacts tells us nothing about the complex things surrounding us that we did NOT make. It's perfectly valid to wonder whether the process by which these other complex things came to be was similar in some way to the process we used to create our complex artifacts, but aside from suggesting a hypothesis, it tells us NOTHING. There is no valid INFERENCE we can make from the class of man-made artifacts to the class of "naturally occurring" complex things. Analogies tell us nothing. They may suggest, but they do not inform.
Here's a legitimate use of your analogy. You might say "I believe that a god designed us in the same way that humans design cars." As a tool for illustrating what you intend by the word "design", such analogies are quite handy. I've no problem with that at all. However, if you attempt to INFER that we were designed, because cars were, then you have just spoken nonsense. Why must our origins bear any similarity to that of a car (or painting, or computer, etc.)? Answer that first, then use the analogy to illustrate if you wish.
To expound a little more---even granting, for the sake of argument, that an infinite immaterial intelligence "thought" the material Universe into existence, the burden of proof that said "intelligence" is none other than the three-in-one man-god known as "Jesus Christ", remains in Wooly's lap. Note: if man-made holy texts and "gut-instinct" are his "evidence", then any one of thousands of "creator gods" throughout history can be validated as well.
Furthermore, let's also not forget that if "complexity" demands a "designer", then surely a infinitely wise/strong/present "intelligence" passes as "complex", therefore---by Wooly's 'logic'---requiring a "designer", as well. It's the age-old infinite regress that no Theist can over-come. They are simply answering questions with more questions.
But we're listening, Wooly.
In the case of creationist arguments, it goes like this: A watch (painting, jet airplane, car, computer, whatever..) was designed, therefore living organisms were designed, because watches and organisms are similar in some way. That "similarity" can be expressed in many different ways, such as being "complex", or having parts that work together for some purpose, etc. But the structure of the argument is inescapable: the attribute of having a creator is conferred by virtue of similarity to something else that had a creator. If anybody would like to differ, please speak up.
One of the fatal flaws in the creationist argument (aside from using analogy as an inference rule) is that the cited "similarity" is far too vague to be discerning. In fact, one can list many attributes that do not carry over from man-made artifacts (such as watches) to living organisms, despite the fact that they are both "complex", possess moving parts that work together, each part serves a purpose, etc. For example, a watch can remain in perfect working order for centuries with no input of energy while organisms cannot. A watch can be disassembled into a finite number of pieces using macroscopic tools and then be reassembled while organisms cannot. Why is it that these attributes are not shared, yet the attribute of having a creator is? Clearly, just being "complex" (and other variations on that theme) is insufficient to determine which attributes are shared.
My thinking gradually evolved closer to the nut of digesting your thoughts, but here are my notes in chronological order to my reading you:
When you say, "the entire category of natural phenomenon is without a single verifiable example of something having been created or designed," this seems like a faith proposition. You are assuming that none of them are created without proving that none of them were not created. You might mention evolution, for example as some evidence that none were created, but then I would ask you how a genetic lock-out on breeding between species came to be in place. (If there is an exception to the rule please don't quote it).
In addition I would say any evolutionary processes would be themselves inferential of intelligent design.
On randomness verses order:
Nature is designed to order itself. There exists a mathematical impossiblity of nature ordering itself without intelligent design.
A car rusting away is nature ordering itself. The fact that the car rusts away by nature ordering itself is further evidence of intelligent design because it might be inferred that a lock-out exists on and trumping over man's attempt in metals at intelligent design in the car. If numerous examples of nature ordering itself exist, all the more reason to posit by inference intelligent design behind a nature which so efficiently orders itself in a non-random way
Painters:
If you use "scientists" to mean observers only, then we need a new synthesis of observation and use of analytical abilities which allows for mathematically likely inferences to be made. Being satisfied with observation without inference from the observations seems like being stuck again with the world is flat, though anyone could, in ancient times, climb a mountain and, looking at the horizon, see that the world is not flat. Now, man-made and limited logical formats are being insisted on to come to impossible conclusions about there being no intelligent design when that design is clear all around us. You cannot possibly prove, even by the logical confinements you choose to indulge in, that there is no intelligent design.
"Nothing in the sentence has any basis in fact, aside from suggesting a hypothesis it tells us nothing." This seems like more of the same; using man-made limitations of the definition of "science," and playing with the popular notion that science is more far-ranging in scope that it actually is. Science seems to be defined so as to exclude any inference or analytical thinking which could lead to the conclusion that a designer is, for example, mathematically obvious. It seems the atheists are defining science in a way that suits them to reach their desired conclusions.
Let's look at our masonic judicial system. It cannot be assumed that a man is innocent of an act in reality just because he has been exonerated under our judicial system. The man-made rules of the judicial game are, contrary to popular notion designed to protect the sly as much as to protect the innocent.
The truth can be quite simple and obvious; a system of definitions and rules must be created in order to confuse respect for the system with unfettered seeking after truth. This is similar to the arbitrary rules and limitiations some theologians put on their thinking to arrive at desired conclusions or non-conclusions.
As for the Old and New Testament God being consistent, scripture explains the consistency. Under the old covenant laws and ordinances and worship we were being kept( preserved as individual spirits from deterioration from sin and as a culture from sin and annihilation)by God using these things to preserve us. Under the new covenant, we are preserved in a different way, having Jesus in us.
Having the potential to be closer to God as His sons and daughters, by adoption, we seem to be a bit cagier, though in spite of ourselves, since as scripture says, "the sons of this age are more shrewd than the children of light."
There are many things in scripture that take faith to agree with God on, but He is the surgeon qualified to make painful decisions we would dread. He makes these to bring something out of the chaos and mediocrity of men chosing to be their own gods. His plan and wisdom take time and patience and faith to understand it is so deep.
A mathematical improbability has occured, the word verification to send this message is the letters, "imjuew." I saved it to file.
Whether God is the God of the bible and Jesus is His plan; I think it's logical based on observing nature and making inferences about nature and people. One way to go at this would be to answer questions or objections concerning how or why this would be so. I still think God has to be working in the person's life to prepare a person to accept and know the truth, but that doesn't mean an attempt to answer questions or objections can't be made. I might expect a rash of objections and hostilities I suppose, considering the site, and wouldn't be able to answer all at once. Also, I don't say anyone couldn't make a statement, which I know is quite likely, but just making a statement isn't taken for granted always in the "religious"
world.
On if a creator is, he must be complex and where did he and his complexity originate from (Paraphrased):
Either complexity or simplicity would have to have a primal source of origination or be the primal source. Either matter or energy or a creator would have to be primal at some point. The non-theist has the same concept to grasp; that something or somebody had to be primal. Since intelligence exists, it is more sensible to conclude that the intelligence predated matter than that intelligence came from inert matter (whether that matter exists in the form of energy or light or solid matter).
You seem to have missed the word *verifiable*. If you disagree with my statement, then all you need to do is show me a *verifiable* instance of something in nature that has been "created" or "designed".
WD: "You might mention evolution, for example as some evidence that none were created..."
No. You have a fundamental misunderstanding here. It is IMPOSSIBLE, even in principle, the DISPROVE intelligent design. It is not a testable hypothesis as every conceivable observation and every conceivable experiment is consistent with intelligent design. No matter what we observe, it's possible that it is that way because some infinite deity made it that way. So, you miss my point entirely if you think evolution disproves intelligent design.
By the way, if you think being unfalsifiable lends any credibility to intelligent design, allow me add another unfalsifiable theory: My pet turtle, Fred, created the universe five minutes ago, along with all our memories, and all the illusory "evidence" of there having been a distant past. (As an aside, I have roughly equal regard for the Fred theory and the Yahweh theory.)
WD: "...I would ask you how a genetic lock-out on breeding between species came to be in place...
Geographic isolation plus genetic drift. The technical term for this is allopatric speciation.
WD: "(If there is an exception to the rule please don't quote it)."
Come again?
WD: "In addition I would say any evolutionary processes would be themselves inferential of intelligent design."
Okay. You can say it, but you'll need to back that up if you want to convince anybody.
WD: "Nature is designed to order itself...."
That's the point in question. What is your evidence for "design"?
WD: "...There exists a mathematical impossiblity of nature ordering itself without intelligent design."
A "mathematical improbability"?! Calling something mathematical does not make it mathematics. Where do the probabilities come from? What is the precise chain of reasoning? By the way, we are talking about empirical matters here, so mathematics alone has no bearing on the matter.
WD: "...If numerous examples of nature ordering itself exist, all the more reason to posit by inference intelligent design..."
You seem to be launching your argument all over again, but at a smaller scale this time. Please explain why self ordering implies "design".
WD: "If you use 'scientists' to mean observers only, then we need a new synthesis of observation and use of analytical abilities which allows for mathematically likely inferences to be made..."
I'm not going to respond to your specific comments in this section, as you seem to be suggesting some grand new vision of what science or mathematics ought to do or be. To me all these comments appear to stem from a naive view of science. Possibly you are reacting to my earlier comment that what you said was not mathematical. Well, it isn't. It was all based on loose analogies. That's not mathematics. (Incidentally, I'm a mathematician by training, so I'm quite familiar with mathematics.)
WD: "Now, man-made and limited logical formats are being insisted on to come to impossible conclusions about there being no intelligent design.... "
No. As I said, intelligent design is an untestable hypothesis. Let me clarify something. My point, from the very start, has been simply this: Your arguments for intelligent design are fallacious. Analogies and intuition are not evidence of design.
WD: "...using man-made limitations of the definition of 'science,' and playing with the popular notion that science...."
First, I am not "playing with the popular notion" of anything. You've made numerous dogmatic assertions and employed a good bit of fallacious reasoning. I've pointed those out and explained in some detail why they are fallacious and/or dogmatic. Dogma is not science. Observation, testing, and verification is science. As for science being "man made", yes, as a methodology, of course it is. I'll be happy to consider any alternative you wish to put forth. I'll even happily adopt such a methodology if you show me that it actually works. That last part it the key.
WD: "Science seems to be defined so as to exclude any inference or analytical thinking which could lead to the conclusion that a designer is, for example, mathematically obvious. It seems the atheists are defining science in a way that suits them to reach their desired conclusions."
Sorry, but that's a load of nonsense. See all my comments above.
WD: "Let's look at our masonic judicial system...."
I have neither the time nor patience today to follow each of your threads. None of this seems to addresses the fact that arguments from analogy are fallacious.
WD: "As for the Old and New Testament God being consistent, scripture explains the consistency."
So you think it's consistent for this "unchanging" god to insist on murdering children, homosexuals and adulterers at one point in history, and then to insist on forgiveness at another point in history? Sorry, I don't see that as consistent. I see it as one "holy book" being crudely grafted onto another "holy book", with some ill-conceived apologetics to smooth it over.
WD: "There are many things in scripture that take faith to agree with God on,..."
In other words, they conflict with what we would otherwise conclude, which makes them irrational beliefs. I agree.
WD: "...but He is the surgeon qualified to make painful decisions we would dread."
That is the point in question. Is there such a being? I see no evidence of one.
WD: "His plan and wisdom take time and patience and faith to understand it is so deep."
Here's another hypothesis. The "plan" you speak of is a fabrication of men. It takes time for humans to weave such stories and to convince themselves of it, against their better judgment. I think the second hypothesis is more likely, as it posits nothing more than mundane human behavior, which we observe in numerous cultures (i.e. all those following "false" religions). We know that humans invent tall stories, believe them, pass them on, embellish them, and attribute them to fantastic invisible beings. Every culture seems to have done this. It appears that you claim one such story to be actually true. I don't see any good reason to think so.
More sensible to conclude? Why is that?! Please, spell out your chain of reasoning here.
Whether God is the God of the bible and Jesus is His plan; I think it's logical based on observing nature and making inferences about nature and people.
Oh, perfect. So, "intuition" is your "evidence".
Boy, it just doesn't get anymore concrete than that, does it? lol
Wooly continues: Either complexity or simplicity would have to have a primal source of origination or be the primal source. Either matter or energy or a creator would have to be primal at some point. The non-theist has the same concept to grasp; that something or somebody had to be primal. Since intelligence exists, it is more sensible to conclude that the intelligence predated matter than that intelligence came from inert matter (whether that matter exists in the form of energy or light or solid matter).
Repeat: Until you can show, unequivocally, that there's a direct link between a disembodied "intelligence" and "Yahweh", using more than "a hunch", "gut-feelings", and/or "intuition", it is pointless to discuss the singularity or first cause. I've already conceded that, yes, there "could be" a disembodied "mind" that willed all matter into existence. Mind you, as Jim pointed out, that notion is not falsifiable. But again, neither is "Fred", the Turtle-god as Creator.
Wooly, this is ex-christian.net...NOT ex-deist.net. 'Sorry, you'll have to do better in bridging the gap.
In the name of Fred; the Tortugita; and their Holy shell!(the Trinity)..Amen.
All hail Fred. He's the shit!
(At least that's what I think he said. Hard to tell sometimes.)
"Fred bestows his blessings upon all of you"
--
Jim,
I need to wax my car soon, so rather than Fred's holy blessings, do you think he could muster up some extra holy "Turtle Wax" instead?
I'll even use the secret wax-on...wax-off holy rain dance while I'm waxing away.
Okay, I think I've waxed on long enough now....Bye for now
ATF
In the name of FR_D, his SH_LL, and a bar of soap... blessings to all.
....and "__L_SH_PH_RD."
Priceless!
fjell
You are incorrect! The Ninja Turtlians are a NEW TESTAMENT to the original OT(older turtle) ie, Fr_d. Their four gospel accounts are in complete accord with the original doctrine and are in fact Fr_d breathed. Please do not risk your immortal soul be denying their inerrantness.
Fr_d bless you all!
There is a link there to an experiment where fruit flies fed "different diets for eight or more generations and then reintroduced to each other chose mates from their own feed group. I don't make too much of this.... it doesn't say whether the two groups were reintroduced so that they would have to mate with the other group or just introduced so that they could demonstrate their preference.
The definition of a species is that the two populations cannot reproduce, I thought, meaning even if brought together after being in geographical isolation they will not succesfully interbreed. The site gives names to several different types of species lock-outs. Some are because of duplicate chromosome sets which leads to reproductive failure in plants and some to genital differences. The point is that there are lock-outs and it cannot be said that those locks-out exist without intelligent design... even geographical isolation, if that is able to lead to speciation and reproductive lock-out could be by intelligent design used as a vehicle or as a result of will leading to results consistent with Deity or Deity's intention. But then I guess we are beyond whether intelligent design is possible and heading toward the nature of the Deity if it is possible for one to exist.
"Analogies and intuition" are not what I was using soley... I used inference. Anyway, I thought you admitted that intelligent design is likely so why discuss the rules of proofs which automatically exclude the possibility of God because they are rules designed only for simple empirical observations.
Telling my reasoning is "fallacious" doesn't make it so. Remember, by your own rules you have to prove it. This is largely a matter of time and tenacity; I can answer accusations that my logic is faulty, but it takes longer to answer the accusation than it does to simply throw in a "fallacious reasoning" accusation, so this is really a political move on your part perhaps. It would also be easy to confuse when I was speaking about something that is experiental for me or a matter of faith that I said for when I was clearly talking about inference about intelligent design.
O.K. I'm going to send this part and then get on with responding to your concerns about what God, since I believe on Him I'll call Him God... you will no doubt call Him "your deity" which is fine.
Post a Comment