oldiesman

17 hours ago, modcat5 said:

No worries.

See what I did there?

On another front, I wanted to thank Modgellan for stepping in yesterday. We don't always see eye to eye, and I tried to make it clear that I would accept his review even if I didn't agree with it.

One thing he only touched on that I think needs to be said out loud. And I'm putting on the modhat even though I take it very personally.

DWBH said a LOT of hateful things about me after he left GSC, and I am not really at liberty to respond because he's no longer on this site to defend himself. I will tell you that he went on a vicious and hostile social media campaign to slander my personal and professional reputation.

I do not accept the blame for his disappearance from GSC, and while I don't expect one, I believe I am entitled to an apology for this cheap, petty and ignorant allegation.

OldSkool can come here and defend himself whenever he wants. But I expect him and everyone else to be honest about it. He was always perfectly free to espouse his point of view. That was never the problem. The problem was he had zero tolerance for anyone espousing the opposite point of view. GSC has dozens of threads where Christianity is presumed, the scripture is respected as an authority, and unbelievers have [at best] limited reign to interject. That wasn't good enough for OS. He had to say Christianity is no longer welcome at GSC, which is demonstrably untrue. Then he got mad at me for calling that lie a lie. Too bad. OS was not banned. He left because he wanted to, never recanting the lie that served as his motive.

I do not accept the blame for his disappearance from GSC, and while I don't expect one, I believe I am entitled to an apology for this cheap, petty and ignorant allegation.

Finally, poor skyrider. I believe in our years on GSC, we maybe crossed swords a few times. I want to say I challenged an anecdote of his, but I truly don't recall if it was skyrider, Socrates or socks. Whoever it was, it was years ago and never stopped any of them from posting. Maybe they avoided ME. Hard to tell seeing as I don't/didn't interact with any of them often enough to notice. Sorry, but it's true. They say their thing and nine times out of eight I don't get involved. I'm not saying never, but it's rare.

In his very last post, May 25, 2023, he praised GSC for shining the light on TWI. He also quoted scripture. It's in the Time To Come Home thread in About the Way.

Here's something skyrider wrote in Feb. 2023:

THAT is what skyrider thought of GSC.

Five months after his final post, Skyrider died. DIED. He didn't "quit posting because Raf made him feel unwelcome." He DIED.

And you have the cold-hearted AUDACITY to blame MY conduct as a moderator for the decision of a man to stop posting here after his DEATH?!?!

I do not accept the blame for his disappearance from GSC, and while I don't expect one, I believe I am entitled to an apology for this cheap, petty and ignorant absolutely contemptible allegation.

The phrase gets used too often to be effective, but if ever there was a time it was appropriate: YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF.

Off my soap box. Apologies for digressing from the thread topic.

 

Completely agree.  Thank you.

11 hours ago, Charity said:

I'm asking sincerely if there were times you struggled with an answer you believed you received after saying this prayer.  Have there ever been feelings of guilt, doubt, confusion or fear as a result of listening for answers?

No, and no.   But "answers" aren't always there for me either.

Hi oldiesman, thank you for your answer.  The action I was referring in my question though is whether it is okay with God for believers to choose which scriptures to believe and which to discard.  Phil 2:12 does not speak to this. 

It speaks about how obedience is required when working out ones salvation because God will be working in them, at the same time, to be willing to do his good pleasure.  

Phil 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. 13For it is God which works in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

(The phrase "fear and trembling" is used in two more verses and obedience is mentioned in them as well. They are 2 Cor 7: 15 and Eph 6:5.)

Agree, and agree.  The first one, I don't know if it's ok with God to believe one "translation" over another; I think it's one of those mysteries but I do believe that God will be judging that from what he sees in our hearts.    The second post, agree, eternal life comes with conditions.   Thx for the correction.

1 hour ago, Charity said:

The lukewarm bit and needing to be a zealot are also found in what Jesus said in the gospels about following him.  Some may say Jesus was speaking in hyperbole but when you put them all together, I think his consistent message of “all or nothing” is quite clear.  

And while Christians may choose to not take these verses literally, maybe because they require too much of followers, there are many who in their love for God have decided to believe them as they are written.  And unfortunately, many narcissists have begun ministries/cults to attract these types of believers and go on to abuse them every which way.  Most posters on GSC could say "been there, experienced that."

As an atheist, I see religion (by way of the bible) as a means of controlling people.  Atheists are often automatically accused of wanting to be one so they can to be free to sin.  However, to make that kind of generalization is being very close minded and ignorant of the way they do live their lives.  (P.S. Being a Christian does not guarantee any have stopped living in "sin".)

~~~~~~~~~

Here are the verses I mentioned above.

In the gospels:

- To the young man who had kept the commandments since his youth, Jesus said he also needed to sell everything he had and give it to the poor.

-  Jesus said, “And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life

- To a man who asked to bury his father before he committed to following him, Jesus said, “Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.”

- To a man who wanted to say good bye to his family before he committed to following him, Jesus said, “No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.”

- (Think of Abraham being willing to literally sacrifice his son when you read this quote.)  Jesus said, “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.  For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. He that loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that takes not his cross, and follows after me, is not worthy of me. He that finds his life shall lose it: and he that loses his life for my sake shall find it.

- When being told his mother and brethren wanted to speak with him (seemingly out of concern for him), Jesus said, “Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? [And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said,] “Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.”

- Before ascending to heaven, Jesus saidto his apostles, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.”

No argument.   It's readily apparent that one must desire to accept all that responsibility presumably for a greater purpose.    Here is a catholic prayer to the Holy Ghost:

'oh Holy Ghost, beloved of my soul, I adore thee.   Enlighten me, guide me, strengthen me, console me.  Tell me what I should do.  Give me your orders.   I promise to submit myself to all that you desire of me, and accept all that you permit to happen to me.  Let me only know thy will.'

2 hours ago, Charity said:

The decision to no longer be a fundamentalist like twi taught us to be has opened up the choice like yours to look to the bible for inspiration not consistency or accuracy.  (Does saying this mean you think parts of the bible are not consistent or accurate?)  And instead of needing to take literally that “all scripture is God inspired and is profitable,” you can see the bible as being a blend of man (writing by inspiration while seeing through a glass darkly) and God.

Christians having different criteria for what they decide to believe and what they decide to disregard.  It's a pick-and-choose way of defining God in their lives.  That’s why I previously called this process as “Build a God” after the idea of “Build a Bear.” 

Christians are free to do this but my question is “Does God say it is okay to do this anywhere in his word?”

So far for me, becoming an atheist meant that there's not enough of the bible that:

- teaches a god who always loves unconditionally and whose gifts are totally free

- is authentic without man-made changes, additions and deletions

- is not based on ancient myths and philosophers

- does not teach absolute obedience to a god or his son in order to avoid punishment (which is not the same as consequences) and hell

- consistently reliable when it comes to putting my trust in what it says.

I know there are other places to receive inspiration without the bible and all the baggage attached to it. 

Charity, these are profound questions but I will try to answer as succinctly as possible.   Disagreements welcome: 

Christians are free to do this but my question is “Does God say it is okay to do this anywhere in his word?”

"Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling"?

So far for me, becoming an atheist meant that there's not enough of the bible that:

- teaches a god who always loves unconditionally and whose gifts are totally free

The gifts themselves are free -- no amount of good works can earn them; but, later must be used, otherwise they basically are forfeited.    The fruit from the gifts then would be conditional.    Like muscles atrophy if left unused? 

- is authentic without man-made changes, additions and deletions

Agree; no originals exist that we know of?

- is not based on ancient myths and philosophers

Ancient myths can be true or false -- guess it depends on one's own belief?  

- does not teach absolute obedience to a god or his son in order to avoid punishment (which is not the same as consequences) and hell

Agree in part.   Punishment is part of getting back on the right track; like our earthly parents would do.    But eternal torture (the worst level in hell) is hard for me to believe that God would allow this.    

- consistently reliable when it comes to putting my trust in what it says.

Agree

16 hours ago, Charity said:

I watched the whole debate, and Sharpton repeatedly criticized Hitchens for talking about horrendous deeds done by those who believe in God (while not addressing Hitchens biblical references of God doing much the same).  Instead, he wanted Hitchens to talk about God Himself, apart from the bible, whom Sharpton believes exists because of intelligent design and his personal experiences with Him. 

IMO, Sharpton's dismissal of the bible shows he has a "Build-a-God" mindset.  I guess I am late to the party on recognizing how acceptable this has become. 

In the short clip Mr. Hitchens refers to the fear of death.  Does he mean 'eternal death'.  If so, I would agree, it's there for me.   The only comfort I see in eternal death if there's any at all is, it's not eternal fire and brimstone torture.   Otherwise I think it's eternally tragic and something to be afraid about.

59 minutes ago, Charity said:

 

The fact that Jesus would say to any believer, at any time or any place, that he would spit them out of his mouth for being lukewarm is sick stuff.  

Besides, there are plenty of other verses in the gospels where Jesus lays out what it takes to be a follower of his and being lukewarm is nowhere in the mix.

This carries with it a couple of interesting thoughts at least:

(1)  The Douay Rheims version says "vomit".   This to me conveys the idea that Jesus' reaction to an unconcerned or disinterested churchgoer is one of nausea and disgust.    

(2)  Preterists believe all this already happened, sometime around 70 A.D. and/or shortly thereafter, and the whole bible already has been fulfilled (full preterism); Jesus REALLY meant "I come quickly" he didn't mean 2000+ years later; and talk of "end times" today is BS.   "Gathering together" is BS.   Preterists also believe the 'millenial kingdom' already happened, but don't ask me how.  (Catholics, who have been described as "partial preterists" also think the "rapture" is BS.)

Preterism - Wikipedia
 added for reference purposes

19 minutes ago, Raf said:

Less polite than Sweeney but still entertaining. I actually laughed at this BEFORE my deconversion, but it resonates more now.

 

 

 

Yes he's funny and very bold.  Obviously he threw away the idea a long time ago that he will be meeting the lord when he dies, LOL.

BTW Raf, wanted to ask you:   is "humanism" the same as "naturalism".   Please advise, thx. 

27 minutes ago, Raf said:

I think the best I can do is point you to reviews that capture how this made other people feel.

https://www.amazon.com/Letting-Go-God-Julia-Sweeney/product-reviews/B001J21JRQ

Thx Raf.   I got to the below comment and it made me smile.   Gotta get to work now though!  I will read the rest later or tomorrow.

 "The invisible and the non-existent often look very much alike."

9 hours ago, Raf said:

This has always been my favorite deconversion story. 

This is Julia Sweeney, who played the Androgynous "Pat" on Saturday Night Live. 

 

Raf it's two hours long and judging from the first 7 minutes, really can't take her comic act.    Can you summarize the most important and impressive points from your point of view?

2 hours ago, chockfull said:

Is a humanist one that removes all controversial posts from a thread yet leaves the ones up that present the same point they embrace?

I notice about 4 of my posts were removed one of which noting the illogical nature of an atheist doing detailed word studies on scripture and lecturing others on “going deeper” into those same scriptures.

Believe what you want.

Do not censor logic.

Censorship is not “accepting reality on its own terms” but re defining your own reality by restricting what is presented.

These tactics are identical to TWI.  The viewpoint is opposite.

Why is a “deconversion “ necessary?

It seems like those are folks that still need to break the bonds of the fundamentalist cult before building their lives in a constructive fashion.

I certainly don’t need that.  The Christianity I accepted in my youth is still sound and solid and nothing like the bondage of TWI.  I can and do point out their doctrinal and practical errors.

What I dislike is the ego shown in viewpoints.  It seems like a “dog in the manger” approach.  We can’t eat any of the hay but we are going to bark at all the cows to keep them away from the hay.

I am growing to understand OldSkools perspective on sharing from a perspective that will not be respected.

And one more note.

Raf if this post is censored it will be my last on this site.  Not trying to be mean or controversial but if conversation is going to happen there need to be fair boundaries. 
 

Peace outta this thread for the fifth time.

I hope posts aren't being censored here.. all comments welcome far as I am concerned.  Thx.

3 hours ago, Raf said:

What I like about the Humanist label is that it places the emphasis on what we believe while merely implying what we don't. That someone is an atheist only tells you what he doesn't believe. A humanist is to be distinguished from a nihilist, who believes life is ultimately meaningless.

I personally believe nihilism = humanism + time. I'll agree with nihilists a billion years from now, but not today.

That explains more, thx Raf.

45 minutes ago, Charity said:

I'm reading about humanism for now. 

Got it, thx.

3 hours ago, Twinky said:

God grants a chunk of land to certain peoples whom he favours, to keep them safe and to give them a base. 

 

I share this view and believe it was designed to eventually be a base for the one body, i.e., 'the Body of Christ' as we know it.

5 hours ago, Charity said:

Here’s what I know.  My life is healthier since walking away from Christianity.  It's healthier mentally and emotionally which is inspiring me to work on being healthier physically.  It has freed up my time since there is no longer a need/desire to work on a 24/7 relationship with a god that supposedly wanted one with me. 

I’m now going to let go of the need/desire to learn more about why the bible was not inspired by any kind of God.  Simply put, I want to be able to stop thinking about god to the extent that only the rare thought will pop into my head and then quickly dissipate.

Thanks everyone for your input – it was much appreciated! 

Charity, if you decide to try any other religion(s) please post about it; would be interested in hearing about your experience. 

17 minutes ago, waysider said:

Is it though? Usually when we say something is a record, it implies it actually happened.

Respectfully, what is the standard that we may agree on in this thread: the bible is fiction?   or the bible happened but some refuse to believe it?   or something else?

24 minutes ago, chockfull said:

 

Mankind has arrived at whatever state he is in through his own choice. Yes this is allegorical as today people also arrive at their own state through their own choice.

 

A point I'd like to add here:   our choices don't control everything that happens; i.e. things happen also by providence, or accident; whatever way one choose to look at those two.

12 hours ago, Charity said:

That's what I kept hearing when I would ask Christians about the trinity. 

"Farther Along" - sang it all the time in fellowships.  Encourages Christians to remain faithful, but it also discourages them from asking questions.

 

True.  On the trinity, can't rely on the bible for that as the scriptures vary, so must of necessity be accepted by faith. 

20 hours ago, Charity said:

Your statement is true in the sense that no one is all-knowing, so there are many uncertainties in life.  But in Christianity, this is not allowed.  God expects (actually demands) believers to have absolute certainty in him and in the "word" he has given them (Heb 11:6, James 1:5-6).  IMO, this puts believers between a rock and a hard place - not a healthy place to be in.  

Now why would an all-loving God want to do this to his children? 

As the song goes "We'll understand it, all by-and-by".  Faith helps overcome the mysteries.

39 minutes ago, Charity said:

Deism from the Latin term deus, meaning "god") is the philosophical position and rationalistic theology that generally rejects revelation as a source of divine knowledge and asserts that empirical reason and observation of the natural world are exclusively logical, reliable, and sufficient to determine the existence of a Supreme Being as the creator of the universe. More simply stated, Deism is the belief in the existence of God (often, but not necessarily, a God who does not intervene in the universe after creating it), solely based on rational thought without any reliance on revealed religions or religious authority. Deism emphasizes the concept of natural theology—that is, God's existence is revealed through nature.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

Any thoughts on this?

Yes.   I agree with Raf in the sense that it's better to not believe in God at all then believe in a god that is absent and does not care.

On the founders, I have a book called "In God We Trust: the Religious Beliefs and Ideals of the Founding Fathers: Cousins, Norman: 9780764709562: Amazon.com: Books" that gives many quotes and illustrates that some "deists" may not be the deists some think.

I was thinking about something else related to the topic.    Do our animals have any spiritual perception?   Or, using their own intellect think spiritual things are BS? 
 

33 minutes ago, chockfull said:

Yes this is the dilemma it seems.  Is there anything spiritual out there or in there that inspires from the outside?  Or the inside?  

 

I would think no, no, no and no.   There's nothing spiritual, no God, no Spirit, no inspiration (in-spirit-action).   What is it then?  One's own intellect only at work?    Luck?   Random chance?   I don't know.

2 minutes ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Trying to understand. Spirits? Spirit beings? Like ghosts? Or devil spirits?

All spirit beings believed to exist by man.   God, Jesus, Holy, Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer, Watchers, Angels, Demons etc. etc.

16 minutes ago, Nathan_Jr said:

And this is the implication of Oldies’ question. 

Yes.   "God" isn't the only spiritual being that has been purported to exist and spoken about by man so I was thinking it might be good to know (for purposes of this thread only) we agree that no spirits exist?

4 hours ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Do you remember what it was like before you were born?

How then do you know what it’s like after you die?

What’s wrong with the answers “nothing” or “I don’t know”?

I've heard stories that some people believe they lived before.

Just for clarification that we are all on the same page in this thread:

Does not believing in God also necessarily mean not believing in ANY and ALL spiritual beings?    Thx.

On 4/14/2024 at 1:54 PM, Charity said:

Over the past six months, I have struggled quite a bit with my relationship with God for two reasons: seeing the suffering of my 8-year-old grandson with non-verbal autism beginning to have seizures again (as well as other health issues), and the doctrine of the rapture and the great tribulation.  As part of this second issue, I have seen a dear brother in Christ become very focused on warning others of the terrible wrath of God that will soon be upon those who are left behind.  I won't get into specifics about these two issues right now, but instead of what I've learned in the last week or so.

I began watching videos on the MindShift website.  They are done by a man named Brandon who was raised up in a fundamentalist religion and was very active in it for decades as an adult.  He no longer believes there is a God and therefore believes that the Bible was written by men alone.  He uses a lot of the Bible to show how the Christian god is not a good god.  He also talks about how Christians defend these verses to show the opposite - that God is a long-suffering and merciful God. 

I have found that what he says makes sense.  I am attaching one of his videos about how living a life as a slave to Christ is very similar to what real slaves to real masters here on earth had to suffer and endure.  I would really appreciate hearing what you think about this.  He covers a lot in 40 minutes so it's not necessary to listen to the whole video to bring up topics for discussion. 

Thanks!

 

It appears that Brandon very clearly lost the faith he once had.   Am curious what he thinks will happen to him after his death?   I didn't get to that part if he said something about that.   Thx.