All Activity

How we communicate is a personal decision. I choose to (at least attempt to) communicate in a way that doesn't assume that the other person is a complete idiot. I'm also influenced by the way I communicated my faith while in TWI, and how I see many evangelicals/fundamentalists speak now -- it can be arrogant and condescending. I also figure that I'm not responsible for what other people believe as long as they're not trying to enshrine it in law, or are assuming that I'm an idiot for not believing what they believe. I think that Gervais, at least in that interview is pretty low-key about it. He presents why he thinks the way he does, but doesn't attack Colbert or imply that he is stupid. Regarding the second phrase you highlighted. My family members have built up an immunity to my opinions on religion stemming from my obnoxious "witnessing" during my TWI days and get very defensive when I express an opinion about religion. My point was not I wasn't trying to convince her that her god didn't exist, but that maybe her understanding about said god wasn't in line with reality...within the context of stipulating that God exists. By the way, I'm not an atheist, although I may sound like one sometimes. I allow for the existence of spiritual entities in a kind of agnostic way, but don't base any life decisions on their existence. If there is a God, then there are gods also, with their existence all being of similar probability. I recall a quote that was attributed to The Buddha (probably apocryphal) where he acknowledged that gods existed, but that they were rather silly! I have moved away from religion in multiple steps, starting with my rejection of TWO dogma, moving through skepticism about the Bible all the way to where I am now.

Dean Martin?

I'm interested in the phrases you used above (highlighting is by me) because it implies a concern you have about the way an atheist might be communicating their viewpoint - perhaps with a little too much conviction/boldness/emotion or with a condescending/judgmental tone. (This is obviously an assumptions on my part). I ask because I am an atheist posting on a board with Christians and often find it a challenge in how to express myself. (I find Raf walks this line more effectively than I do.) What I mean is that as someone who spent decades as a Christian, steeped in the study of the word, there are times when my posts as an atheist are simply about questioning the doctrines in the bible, and then there are times when I give a knee jerk reaction to a post or outright denounce what the bible says. I try to keep the latter to threads on the Atheism subforum but am not always successful. A recent example of reacting is how I replied on the About the Way forum to something JoyfulSoul had written where I assumed he meant supernatural stories that are recorded in the bible. JS - Jesus was accused of everything. We have accounts of supernatural stories. There are a million more. My reply - What proof was there of any of them being supernatural - because a book said they were? Anyway, getting back to my opening sentence, can you share your thoughts explaining the phrases you used.

I once told a family member who was complaining about not receiving the answer to her prayers that maybe God wasn't what she thought he was. I wasn't proselytizing atheism, just suggesting that maybe she had expectations of her God that didn't line up with what he was prepared to deliver. I'm of the opinion that if there's an entity upon which the God of the Bible is based (a big "if" in my view), the description of him in the Bible might not be accurate. Not to mention the theological and cultural accretions that have accumulated over the centuries. I like Terry Pratchett's description of how gods became gods in his Discworld books: they start out as little voiceless, mindless spirits that gain awareness and power as they gain believers, becoming stronger as belief grows. Pratchett was an atheist, so he didn't really believe this, but I sometimes picture the God of the Bible as a tribal god who hired a good public relations firm.

Thank you for acknowledging that the thread has veered away from its original topic so much that it is no longer even in the right forum.

OK, let me try it again. This twist into the 'prophetic movement' has nothing to do with TWI.

Except when one goes to the first post on the thread and clicks the link in that post. It directly references two LONG time twi followers. For reference, here is that link. https://restitutio.org/2020/02/06/313-questioning-way-international-doctrines-william-barlow/

This conversation has nothing to do with TWI. Skepticism and critical thinking are basic life skills we employ everywhere. Like most things, some are better at it than others.

Ha! I know that feeling.

Sometimes, I ruminate on a post after I've sent it as to whether my thoughts and intentions were clear. This is one of those times. I think the post above can be read as me getting honest with myself concerning my beliefs about God and his promises. I think it could also be read as me implying that those who do not agree with my conclusion are not being honest with themselves. (I also think it's possible that nobody even cares about what I wrote.) So to clarify, the questions (all except the one stated in the conclusion) were meant to invite discussion. As for the conclusion, I'd like to change to read: The honest thing for me was to conclude that an untrustworthy God cannot be a real God.

I would like to request some caution here: the topic of this thread is questioning TWI doctrine, but if we start getting into arguments for and against the reality of claimed supernatural experience, I am concerned the discussion will no longer be "About the Way" and would instead fall rightly under "Matters of Faith." I'm trying to head this off now because I don't want people to come back later and say "why did you let so and so atheist say this and not let the Christian say that?"

I lived for years with the pain and fear than my unbelieving adult children and grandchildren, who being ineligible for a ticket for the rapture trip, would have to resist the mark of some dreaded beast all the while they were experiencing the great tribulation when God's wrath is poured out and life becomes worse than anything in the history of mankind. And if they were lucky able to survive all that, they would then have to face annihilation or the lake of fire or an eternity in hell or whatever God's judgment had planned for them. But, when I realized that there was no evidence that this bogeyman of a god even existed, that fear vanished.

Probably it would be freeing. By the time I started raising children I was already involved with TWI, so all my adopted and biological children grew up with TWI doctrine. However, despite being mostly Waybrained, I tried to encourage my children to think and come to logical conclusions. It took with some of them, but not with others! By the time I remarried and was raising a stepdaughter, my wife and I didn't attempt to indoctrinate her in anything. She still managed to catch the Christianity bug through friends, got baptized while she was in Air Force basic training, and still considers herself a nondenominational, generic Christian, although I doubt she cares about doctrinal specifics. Of my children with my first wife, none have stayed with TWI. One son is an atheist, another might be, but doesn't claim the label. My daughter considers herself Catholic, but doesn't really participate. The others never talk about it. My granddaughters are raised by parents who would probably not identify as atheists, but are not involved in any church and to my knowledge never talk about religion. One of the girls told my wife that she doesn't believe in any gods. They're probably the closest in my extended family who I would consider having been raised atheist -- more like raised doctrinally neutral

I like Gervais' approach. He doesn't try to beat people over the head with atheism, or even try to convince anyone, he just states that it's the conclusion that he came to.

This thread was started because one specific man (William Barlow) did not want to be gullible about what one specific group (twi) was teaching. Instead, he wanted his questions to be open for honest discussions. He learned the hard way that this was something the deceivers and manipulators leading twi did not want in the least bit, so they "upped and awayed" him from the corps training program and demanded that he attend fellowships under one assigned leader so they could control him once he was back home. Point being is that to avoid being deceived or manipulated by religious people who are out for your loyalty, time, money and ability to think rationally, one needs to gain a good understanding of what gullibility, critical thinking and skepticism are all about.

Hopefully, this will stoke someone's memory: Larry Todd Joe Anthony Rick Todd Bama Dillert Jeffrey Moss Sam Harmon Nick Arden Jason Steele Tom Elder Dee Bishop Matt Helm Vernon Demerest George

Nothing from Nothing "Well, since she put me down, I've been out doing' in my head." George

Jesus was accused of everything. We have accounts of supernatural stories. There are a million more. One person saw the Messiah. Another saw a drunk and a charlatan. Nothing new under the sun. Interesting the above account of Mike has a lot of Bob Jones's admissions of failures.

I was there one night when a guy was raving that his back was healed through a Chris Reed word of knowledge. I've seen and heard extensively from all of them. I was at the Lakeland Revival when Todd Bentley was drawing International attention. My first visit to Morningstar was 1997.

"I'm not tryin' to be your hero 'Cause that zero is too cold for me (Brr)"

Test your gullibility. Watch the clips above. Let me know how you scored.

Point taken - thanks. One way to get rid of a scandal.

Prominent? Perhaps. Often not reliable, though.

You're asking if I'm stupid and gullible? Sometimes. Eban Alexander and Mary Neal are a couple doctors and researchers claiming to have had death experiences (more than mere NDEs). Sill, there are countless others including Colton Burpo, Don Piper and a favorite, Ian McCormick. There is a whole stream of Christians claiming to go to Heaven without dying- Justin Abraham; Mike Parsons; Nancy Cohen, etc, etc. Eye witness testimony is perhaps the most prominent evidence used in law courts. By design, the gospel was to be spread by word of mouth. Without 'skepticism' it is impossible to please God. That's not what it says.