Charity

28 minutes ago, cman said:

what or who is god, if prelearned ideas of god are eliminated then what could it be

it's fine to not believe in god, it's mostly someone else's idea of what god is that has been introduced in some sort of biased way

an old Indian/survival book I read once called it "the spirit that moves through all things"

there will always be the old back and forth between ideas, but really what is god and what is it that is believed or not believed, something that should be answered to yourself

You know cman, I really appreciate this post of yours.  Thanks

Thanks for your post Raf.  It's obvious that you have spent time researching evolution which is great.  There is so much information about it out there, all of which never interested me in the past.  But now that I no longer believe a god exists and that the bible is not his word, what's left is how do I make sense of the natural beauty of life on this planet.  Just to observe it, to interact with it and to appreciate it, for me, begs an answer to the question of how did it all come to be. 

I'm surprised by how emotional this topic is turning out to be.  I can't explain why, so I'm calling it a night and will see what the morning brings.

How do you let go of the theory of divine intelligence after always believing it was a strong argument for God being the Creator of everything?  I’ve started by recently listening to two videos. 

In the first, Seth Andrews interviews the authors of “Evolving out of Eden: Christian Responses to Evolution” - Robert Price and Edwin A. Suominen.  They get into deconstructing the works of “science-savvy theologians” who have come up with ways to combine Genesis and Genetics such as “Evolutionary Creation.”  Their conclusion is that such theories don’t hold up under scientific scrutiny. 

In the second one, Seth Andrews interviews Abby Hafer about her book “The Not-So-Intelligent Designer: Why Evolution Explains the Human Body and Intelligent Design Does Not.”  In the video, she gives a number of examples of faulty designs, one of the first being about testicles being outside of the human body while certain other animals have them inside, safe and protected.  Faulty designs point to a faulty designer which would remove a perfect God from the equation.     

I know WordWolf has a thread in the Doctrinal: Exploring the Bible sub-forum called “What Happened in Genesis 1?”  This thread is in the Atheism sub-forum for the reason I gave above.    

I’ll start reading “Evolving out of Eden” on Kindle tomorrow and then begin sharing some ideas as I go along.  Any posts on the topic would be helpful as well.

3 hours ago, modcat5 said:

It is done.

You know there is a new Disney musical drama film being released in December about the life of Mufasa.  I don't know if it will make those of us who were traumatized by his treacherous murder when he was pushed from the cliff and then trampled to death by the stampeding wildebeest as his adorable son who had just been saved from said stampede by his brave father watched him fall...feel any better, but it's worth a try, I guess. 

And thanks for changing the name!

2 hours ago, Raf said:

You're supposed to say the magic words: "Modcat5 killed Mufasa."

Then we can change it.

Modcat5 killed Simba's father!!?  But why???  On the other hand, considered them said.

1 hour ago, Ham said:

Just saying..  take the abortion issue.  The Fundamentalists regard it as a work of the Devil..

TWI- Disagree.  It has its uses- especially if a possible son of a man of God is to be illegitimately born.  Well.. that was the Old TWI religion.  What does the organization think now?

 

That is just... the tip of the proverbial iceberg. 

...possible son or daughter.  So effing true and so effing bad.

1 hour ago, Ham said:

The hard part of this- after 14 pages one must spend probably 14 hours reading and researching to contribute what is the word.. 

 

meaningfully. 

I prefer short cuts.  Read the first page, the second.. skim through the next to last and last page.. 

 

If I could really retire, I would do better here.

 

OK.  So..

 

One does not really lose one's religion.  I think that we are supposed to actually improve it. My opinion.  So far- I have seen no improvement over Matthew 22:37ff.  Just a lot of justification why not to do it- yep.. got our reasons and all.

 

We don't have much time to straighten ourselves out here.. life is but a vapor. 

 

After starting the thread, I wanted to change the title to "letting go" instead of "losing" but wasn't sure if that was possible. 

I never used to have a problem with Matthew 22:37-39 - what could be wrong where love is concerned.  However, the part I used to overlook or ignore before, now stands out - is it love when you are commanded to do so with there being negative consequences when you don't?

1 hour ago, Ham said:

A lot to quote but- I really don't agree that TWI was ANYTHING "fundamental" in the Christian arena. By no means..

Other than a claim of being such.

We'd have to go into the abortion issue here..  and politically it is probably forbidden.

 

Plus another half dozen issues..

TWI fundamental.. I don't think so. 

I used the word fundamentalist because it means believing the bible is the literal word of God and that it is inherently accurate.  This was how vp wanted us to view the bible, but you're right in that he felt free to change it whenever it suited his fancy.  I think because of the former, many were gullible to accept the latter.

4 hours ago, oldiesman said:

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? 

The first gift from God (and the one all future gifts are dependent on) is salvation, but since there is a requirement attached (that you must make Jesus your Lord), it is not a free gift.  If that requirement is not met, there is no salvation and one remains condemned to death/hell.

The way God set everything up from the very beginning in Genesis 2 was conditional on obedience and the result of the first sign of non-compliance was death.  What parent would set up such a system with their child?

3 hours ago, oldiesman said:

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"?

 

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.)

1 hour ago, oldiesman said:

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.'

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?

6 hours ago, chockfull said:

Have you ever considered that the lukewarm bit in Revelation might be in the midst of a war with extreme circumstances?  I think I even read in a fictional work about Revelation an idea about every believer being martyred for confessing Jesus Christ as their Lord.

I don’t find that verse to be a reason to become a zealot.

 

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.”

3 hours ago, chockfull said:

For me to answer the “what is left” question, and to key off the video making fun of people playing with toys, what I find useful is a child like believing mindset and looking for inspiration not consistency or accuracy as what I am reading is a blend of man and God writing.  I mean writing by inspiration while seeing through a glass darkly.  Or something similar.

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. 

4 hours ago, cman said:

As if death is a bad thing

Love your enemies, whether it's death or something else 

Fear not

I appreciate a reply to my post cman, but I was hoping you'd share your thoughts on the source of sin thingy I mentioned.  Was it because you didn't have any or you weren't interested in sharing them?

9 hours ago, socks said:

Hi Charity. Reading what you've written throughout made me think of a couple things I'll share, not sure that it's to "help" at all, but just to give my perspective on what you're doing.

First of which is, you appear to be having a pretty normal experience, living your life the only way you can, which is from your side of the experience. Your life, your story, your stuff. As far as I know nothing of this life survives the inevitable end of it's duration. The stuff stays, every bit of it. If there is something that persists it will be "you", and I'm convinced that whether immediately, over time or someday later, the best of what I am and have done will continue through eternity and in the form of "me", and the life I will continue to have. So to me, authenticity is very important, being as real and honest with myself as I can be. I would encourage you to continue being that, being you and working through this life. 

Secondly, to describe my own "beliefs"  I do use the bible's history, stories and records as a means to understand life. It's not an entirely "faith based" set of beliefs though. I have a lifetime of events and experiences that have built and formed my view of "God", and life. They've taught me, showed me, provided me, given me a growing sense of who I am, what I'm doing and where I'm going. Of the spiritual aspects, call them the metaphysicals, a long history of "miraculous" events have continued through my years. These have shown me both in the moments and then in retrospect a growing and very wide horizon in which there is a godly presence and what I call "forces of nature" far greater and widespread than I can imagine. I can't pretend to grasp all of it but over time I do have what I consider a way to see life, the world I'm in and what I'm doing in it and that includes things that to most others might seem impossible or the products of a delusional mind. But they're real events, delusional or not. Meaningful to me, if not others and even confusing to those who can vouch for them if not explain them as I would. so - I'm just saying I've learned to accept that my life is - mine. I'll share it and live it with others as best I can but I will do my best to not live by someone else's standards if I don't agree with them. To that degree I pursue choice and freedom of will, to the extent it exists for me. 

One defining moment of my beliefs came to clarity when it occurred with me and my entire family involved in a miraculous event that unquestionably revealed forces at work we were not in control of and not at the center of, but that were specifically directed to our benefit. During that set of events, each one of us have a different memory of what happened about the same thing - each person's involvement was unique and their own and as a result had different meaning but very clearly all experienced the same thing. Later when that sunk in I realized something so obvious yet powerful that it was overwhelming, life changing. And so it's gone over the years and why I say I know my "faith" is my own. I trust in things that others might not, but based on my life's learning they're true and reliable. This includes a belief in the life's purposes of the Jesus Christ of biblical record and the idea of a redemptive purpose to life.

Which is a long way of saying, I've learned that if I try to be as honest and thoughtful as I can be I seem to be getting through it all at my own pace and the pace I need to. I'm not a warm and fuzzy foo-foo-your-truth-my-truth kind of thinker, I do believe that there is a reality of which we are part of that is providing the structure and functionality that allows us to consciously go forward in time and that can be learned and understood to some degree.

The task is to find the sources and instruction to teach me about that so that I can live the life I'm here to live - which is what I'm doing, amongst other things but I think that's the priority that informs everything I do, trite or serious or whatever it might be that I'm fuzzing around with that at the moment.   : )

I wish you the best, you deserve it. We all do, and why not? We didn't get to choose when we were born or who would bring us forth or even when....yet here we are. That in itself is astounding. 

 

Hi, Socks.  Thank you for your post and your well wishes.  I’ve always liked your twirling, dancing character.

I want to understand the gist of what you are saying, so I hope you don’t mind that I condensed it down to some main points.  Feel free to correct any misunderstandings I may have arrived at.

Concerning your beliefs, personal events and experiences have enabled you to form your view of God, your life, your purpose and who you are.  The bible also helps you with this but not necessarily in the sense of needing to commit to a prescribed set of beliefs.   

In addition to these, a long history of "miraculous" events have shown you a growing and very wide horizon in which there is a godly presence and what you call "forces of nature" far greater and widespread than I can imagine. 

One specific miraculous event became a defining moment in what you believe.  There were outside forces involved which benefited your life in a special or particular way. 

Over the years you have come to know that your “faith” is your own as it is founded on things you have found to be true and reliable, two of which are Jesus Christ and a redemptive purpose in your life. 

Finally, you want to find the sources and instruction which will better make known to you a present reality of which we are all a part – a reality that helps us to best fulfill its purpose for our lives. 

Here are some questions I have. Are the forces of nature related to or because of God’s active presence in your life or are the two separate from each other?  Do you believe it's always been God or the forces of nature (or both) behind the miraculous events over the years?  Do you think Jesus Christ has proven to be true and reliable because you have remained aware of his redemptive work in your life? Is the reality you speak of a kind of benevolent relationship you have with someone or something? 

What I seem to be seeing is a physical and spiritual life that is free of any authoritative forces or demands but instead is the result of a genuine thankfulness and a willingness to keep God and Jesus Christ in your life which in turn has allowed you live an authentic and progressive life.  I'm interested in knowing about any challenges you've had along the way with your faith and how they were resolved if you are inclined to share them.

Thanks again Socks.

2 hours ago, cman said:

Since everyone dies everyone gets paid lol we earned the right 

I get it - "the wages of sin is death" idea from Romans 6 which takes you back to the whole Adam and Eve story in Genesis 3.  For those who think this was an allegory or a fictional story posing as history to teach us something (a myth), what part of it teaches how sin really entered the world that we are born with it and therefore deserving of death?

40 minutes ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Since I was a child I’ve wondered the same.

Yahweh had to pay himself with the life of his only begotten to forgive a debt? He was the creditor, he held the note, but he paid himself? With his only begotten son’s life? Now everyone must feel guilty and submit? What passive aggression! WTF? How does this even make sense?

As a father myself, I can think of no deed more wicked than to murder my own son as a means to… accomplish…

 

… ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!

Another POV:  On Julia Sweeney's 'Letting Go of God' video, she talked about her brother's death from cancer - how long it took him to die a slow, painful death.  Then she shared what someone had said to her about Jesus' suffering and crucifixion in comparison and the comment was "Jesus had a bad weekend."  Add to this the idea that he was only dead for 3 days and 3 nights and then God got his son back again. 

I've never thought of the passive-aggressive point you made above before.  John 3:16 also makes this tug-on-the-heartstring point. 

John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.

Yet, where are the books?  You would think if this was actually true, there would be more historical records other than just the gospels?  Yes/no?   

What surprises me the most about becoming an atheist is how insane biblical apologists now sound when giving answers to sincere questions about God and what the Bible says.  I'll come back with examples later.

Then again, some of you might have examples of your owns.

Is it wrong to compare the actions of an almighty heavenly father to how we as human parents would behave towards our own children?  I think doing so is a reasonable thing to do, but others might say it's like comparing apples to oranges for god's ways are higher than ours.  If god's ways can only be understood spiritually, perhaps those who want to believe they're spiritual will not want to question god's parenting skills so they rationalize them instead.  Similarly, questioning god's wisdom in how he shows "unconditional love" to his children only makes us fools according to Paul.

_____________________

Should we not judge a parent as being inhumane when they commands us to love them or face punishment, who sets us up to fail, who says we were born corrupt and unholy and therefore deserving of their wrath and who will meet our needs only when they decide we have enough trust in them?   

22 minutes ago, Raf said:

Final thought for now:

It takes a LOT to process a loss of faith. There is a period of intense emotion akin to mourning. Not the loss of a relationship with a nonexistent god, but a recognition that so much time and energy has been wasted in his service that could certainly have benefitted real people instead. If I took the money I gave the church and sent it instead to cancer or als research or autism or clean water or even just a gotdang food bank, I would have actually helped more people.

It is exhausting to come to terms with what just happened in our lives.

Charity came here to share that journey. The disrespect shown in return, the accusations of arrogance, the prissy, privileged, entitled ANGER at Charity's gall to format responses in a way that made you unhappy...

You wanna talk about not being important enough to DEMAND any such thing!?

You wanna talk about who is acting like a f'ing judgmental Pharisee?

Charity will respond however Charity chooses to respond, and if you don't like the method, tough s*it. How DARE you act as if this creates a problem for YOU, after the contempt you've shown for Charity's journey and pain?

Ok I need to step away before I lose it.

Some might think I'm not on a journey any longer because I've already made up my mind that god does not exist.  Sometimes, I ask myself if I've come to that conclusion, why do I continue to read and consider scripture?  Do I have a confirmation bias now when I do so? 

In your first post on this thread, you cautioned me against allowing my faith to be undermined by whatever challenges my children or grandchildren are facing and you shared your reason for saying so.  Although I did mention in my OP post that the doctrine of the rapture and great tribulation was another reason for questioning my faith, being hurt (and angry) at a god for not answering my prayers concerning my grandson's health did make me think I might be coming across to others as a spoiled brat who's having a temper tantrum or saying 'I hate you" to a parent because they didn't get what they want.  I wondered a bit if I was myself.

So self-doubt is an uncomfortable part in the process of moving away from one's faith.  I know you've experienced this yourself, so I appreciate your post above.

4 hours ago, chockfull said:

 

The scriptures say of themself they are not valuable without a positive outlook toward them.  Your attitude towards a Creator really determines what unlocks for you in scripture.

 

If He doesn’t exist then your bias is to tear down everything attached and pointing out inconsistencies to invalidate any value in His messages.  So you yourself are the impediment to actually accomplishing an in depth analysis of scripture.  And your confirmation bias will allow you to “prove” anything you want.

 

What makes you think that an atheist did not do “in-depth analysis of scripture” (sometimes for years) or have a positive outlook when they did believe in God and in the bible?  More than likely, some believed in many things then that you still believe today. 

As it often happens, people begin deconstructing their “beliefs” because of what their continued study begins to point out to them, inconsistencies being only one of them.  I can’t speak for Penworks personally, but it seems to have been that way for her.  And it definitely happened that way for Julia Sweeney according to her story.

What you wrote above is what people did concerning vpw's and other twi's teachings, usually beginning to question while still being involved and even more so after leaving.  You were okay with the process then.  It’s only now when some apply the same process to God and the bible that you seem to take issue with it.    

Perhaps it's not the process you're objecting to but the results of it because with atheists, their results disagree with what you believe.  Then, it becomes all about their egos.  I'm pretty sure twi followers said the same thing about the people who posted here on the "About the Way" forum.

1 hour ago, chockfull said:

The strange part is that you are blind to the bias you are bringing to the analysis.

Likewise those who think that Jesus Christ was mentally abusing children he was healing or that somebody made up all those stories completely is delusional.  They are ignoring probabilities of any kind discounting inaccuracies introduced by centuries of hand copying and just making up their own narrative completely and saying unless you “prove me wrong” what I say is true.

Since there doesn't seem to be a way of knowing what these probable inaccuracies were, how is anyone supposed to know what the original account, if there was one, even said?

Is calling certain people delusional because of their conclusions about the bible not your own way of bringing "bias for the scriptures" to the analysis?

I think the account of Jesus casting out that demon from a child is fictional for a number of reasons, one being that if there is no god, then there would also be no devil spirits.  Another reason is given at the end of this post.

I’ll repeat what I said before except to add "causing physical abuse" to Jesus' actions when he cast out the devil spirit in such a way that the demon “rent him sore (mangled, convulsed), and came out of him: and he was as one dead.”  I’ll also repeat my reason for saying this - if Jesus had the authority over devil spirits, why did he not add the command to leave the child without causing harm when he said, “Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him.”  Jesus was obviously the one in control, yet he allowed the spirit to come out in such a violent way as to cause physical harm to the child. (Nothing to be concerned about though, we'll just overlook that part since Jesus then simply took him by the hand and lifted up the boy.)

Now, compare this to another account in Mark 5.  This demon named Legion (because there were many devil spirits present) was strong enough to repeatedly break the chains which bound the man. When Jesus granted Legion's request to be sent into the swine, this specifically strong demon just came out of the man after Jesus gave them leave.  I guess it's "probable" that they were so thankful that Jesus agreed to the swine thing that they decided not to leave violently - but didn't feel the same way when entering the swine.

IMO, these accounts were written by men in a way to emphasize the evil and power of demons to make the story more gripping with the additional benefit of likely putting fear of them in the reader. 

1 hour ago, oldiesman said:

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.

I totally understand what you are saying.  If the scriptures are true, there is a certain comfort in believing one has eternal life over eternal death.  I think a "once saved, always saved" doctrine is needed though because without it, many Christians continue to strive to keep in God's graces.  I would see that as having both a fear of life, as well as a fear of death, which makes it a kind of hell on earth to live that way.

If the scriptures were written by men alone, eternal life is the biggest of all carrots on a stick churches can rely on to get people to believe and act a certain way.  

1 hour ago, Raf said:

William Lane Craig is the master of the Gish Gallop, a form of debate in which you efficiently spout as much bulls hit in the time allotted as you possibly can. Since it takes more time to clean bulls hit than it does to defecate it, the opponent will leave some arguments unanswered strictly because there's not enough time in the world to answer it. Then Craig cites all the points he made that were not refuted and declares victory.

Meanwhile ALL his arguments are bulls hit. All of them, without exception or distinction.

Thanks for clarifying what Turek definitely appeared to be doing.  It would be very time consuming to read up on his SPURGE theory to see its flaws and as tempting as that is, there are other priorities in life at the moment.

1 hour ago, Nathan_Jr said:

I didn't remember. I should watch it again myself. It has been a few years.

No problem.