Oakspear

23 minutes ago, Charity said:

 

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). 

...

Anyway, getting back to my opening sentence, can you share your thoughts explaining the phrases you used.

 

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. 

On 6/11/2025 at 12:43 PM, Charity said:

Is it being honest to believe without question in salvation that is prescribed in Romans 10:9-10 but turn around and not hold God to what he prescribed about healing in James 5:13-15?   There is no difference - they are both clear promises.

One can put all their faith in "the abstract, unverifiable and unfalsifiable" biblical claim of eternal life, and yet make excuses for every biblical claims of healing (see below) that is demonstrated not to work.  How is this being honest?

Is not the honest thing to say is that an untrustworthy God cannot be a real God?

 

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. 

On 9/29/2023 at 5:58 PM, Stayed Too Long said:

As I was driving the other day it occurred to me how freeing it would be for a child to be raised as an atheist.

 

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. 

55 minutes ago, Charity said:

 

It's like the time I was on an errand outdoors and it looked like it might rain, so I prayed to God that it wouldn't because I had no umbrella.  When it started to rain, I prayed that it would be a light drizzle so I wouldn't get drenched.  When it became a downpour, I prayed I wouldn't catch a cold and I didn't.  Praise the Lord - God was real.  (True story  )

 

I hear similar things frequently. I often wonder whether people who claim to consistently receive answers to prayer would be as convinced if they kept a detailed log of every prayer and every time they received what they prayed for. 

I disagree though, that unanswered prayers is a "bad" reason to become an atheist. I can see that it might be a first step to realizing that, at the very least, God isn't what we think he is. Lack of results from praying might cause one to question their faith, leading eventually to atheism. 

48 minutes ago, Charity said:

 

So what's the deal here?  Is agape love only available to Christians because biblical writers (who wanted to sell their idea for a necessary savior from God's wrath due to man's sin nature) claimed it was and millions of people have since jumped on this bandwagon and so it must therefore be true?  Do Christians manifest agape love all the time and if not, then how is that different from non-Christians who do not manifest unconditional love all the time?  How was the word "agape" used in ancient Greek before it took on the meaning given to it in the new testament?

 

 

According to Wikipedia, the word was used rarest in classical Greek, but was used in various ways:

• (as a verb) -- to greet with affection
• to show affection for the dead
• love for spouse or family

I'm not sure the writers of the New Testament meant it in any way other than just "love". If I remember correctly, virtually every use of the word "love" in English is translated from "agape". (In TWI some "teacher" would breathlessly reveal that some instance of love was ...the word agape...as if it was some cosmic truth). I believe that it was retroactively assigned the meaning or interpretation of love from or for God.  

Biblical writers and theologians needed to present love that proceeded from God, or manifested by Christians, was somehow different than love manifested by disbelievers. I doubt you could subjectively see any difference between Christians and non-Christians in how they love. Of course any attempt to meaningfully define what God's love entails runs into the problem of any possible unloving action by God spurring a redefinition of love that includes that action. 

On 4/2/2025 at 3:17 PM, Charity said:

While listening to atheists' podcasts, I've heard it said that there are bad reasons for becoming an atheist, but I have yet to hear them identify these reasons and explain why they are bad.

So, iyo, what are some of these bad reasons?

Off the top of my head, a "bad" reason would be deciding to become an atheist because you're mad at God

Another might be because of perceived hypocrisy of religious people or organizations

On 5/23/2025 at 10:36 PM, Nathan_Jr said:

In one of the inexhaustible sessions of CFS, victor says the trees in Genesis represent people because Paul used an olive tree and its grafted branches as a metaphor for groups of people. He says he can't prove it, but something something you've just got to believe it to fit...

 

Didn't he take it one metaphorical step further and claim that not only did the trees in Genesis represent people, but they represented their genitals, making the original sin masturbation? 

3 hours ago, JoyfulSoul said:

 I'm just trying to give some atheists some happiness before the nuclear winter.

Almost thou persuadest me to be an atheist

7 hours ago, JoyfulSoul said:

Atheists are extremely without joy, IMO.   

Do you know enough atheists to come to a statistically valid conclusion that they are without joy? But extremely without joy...

On 5/22/2025 at 2:15 AM, WordWolf said:

...then II Peter 1:20  has to be understood in the context of the surrounding verses, which is to say, in light of II Peter 1:21.  When one allows this process, then the explanation that vpw gave- which he photocopied from Bullinger without understanding it- is seen as INCORRECT. 

Wierwille frequently quoted Bullinger without understanding him. Bullinger explains how the Greek word translated "interpretation" basically means "to loose", and gives the example of dogs loosed upon the game. The misunderstanding is that Bullinger was emphasizing the act of "loosing", or releasing, Wierwille thought the emphasis should be on the viciousness or wildness or the dogs as they attacked the game. I don't know how many times over the years that I heard people teach the misunderstanding of the example, rather than the verse itself

A few years before I was kicked out of TWI there was a big push for us to increase our proportion of giving. My wife at the time, who was usually much more waybrained than I was, vetoed that, pointing out reasonably that we had a lot of bills and just couldn't afford it, so we kept it at 10% (which in reality, was also too much for us). We were also saving up to replace our car. 

When we were able to scrape together enough to pay cash for a used vehicle (no debt ya know) our twig coordinator, who assumed that we had fallen in line and increased our "abundant sharing" percentage, praised us for "putting the principles of giving and receiving practice" by coughing up more money. I kept my mouth shut.

A few weeks later he somehow found out (I forget how) that we were only giving 10% and chastised us for "merely budgeting and saving" in order to achieve our financial goals 

On 5/8/2025 at 1:02 PM, Charity said:

JoyfulSoul wrote the following in the "I had a very interesting stop at HQ" thread in the "About the Way" forum:

"I began as a college atheist 45 years ago.  I'm long gone.  Over the edge gone.  Unreachable.  Forever lost.

If we ever enforce a complete atheist, anti-supernatural society, take me first, drag me around back and shoot me."

What would such a world be like without all the supernatural beliefs in a heaven and hell be like?  Or without the concept of a chosen people and a promised land?  Or with the concept of humanism being our motive to love and care for one another?  There are many other "Or" examples that could be given from either side of a supernatural vs atheism POV. 

If ad hominem attacks can be avoided, this could be an interesting discussion.

I'd be against enforcing such a society, but if one had evolved, would it necessarily have been much different? People behave the way the do, good or bad, because they choose to. My own observation is that if someone follows a religion that commands or expects "love thy neighbor" or some version of that, they will find a rationale to behave against those strictures if they feel strongly that their neighbor shouldn't be loved. On the other side, one who has religious beliefs can very easily choose to live a life indistinguishable from what a religion might teach.  

On 12/26/2023 at 5:53 PM, Twinky said:

Witness of the Stars.

I always thought Bullinger had to really stretch things to make any of his position make sense. I do have a vivid memory of Wierwille saying, in reference to this book that "there were no stars in the North", when there obviously are. Then Martindale trying to "clarify" that statement by saying that it was in "the gap" between Ursa Major and Ursa Minor (near Polaris the North Star) that contained no stars. I was on a camping trip away from city lights one summer and noticed that there were most certainly were stars in that "gap". When I questioned leadership about it I was told that they didn't have telescopes in Biblical times. 

 

Dress for Success

The book that had all the men wearing three piece suits to job interviews at Burger King!

To be fair, the information Molloy imparted was probably true at one time, but dress standards have gotten progressively more casual in the intervening decades

My how time flies...I just realized that I was Mod Kirk back when I was on the moderation team 15 years ago!

What happened between Genesis 1:1 & 1:2?

Drum solo

"...emerged into full fruition..." ?

A voice of reason and kindness

Worked BP at the ROA a couple of times in the early 80’s. One shift I was working at the entrance to the driveway leading to (I think) Wierwille’s home. We were specifically told only vehicles with a certain colored pass were allowed through. A black limo rolls up. We stop it. Driver arrogantly demands that we let him through. We explain about the pass. He, again arrogantly informs us that The Way only has one limousine & this is it. We don’t budge. Finally the back window rolls down & it’s Howard Allen. Yeah, we let him through, but how difficult would it have been for the driver to get the pass that BP was being told to require for entry? Other than that, I worked the swing shift, so I had a legitimate reason for skipping the main evening teaching. Also a female friend would stop by to make out after things slowed down 

Hey guys & gals, your old buddy Oakspear popping in for my periodic “hey”

Life continues well:

• My wife & I will soon officiate our 900th wedding; 17 years marrying folks
• I gave up alcohol in 2022; too many bad decisions & the hangovers got to be too high a price to pay
• I got out of retail grocery 8 1/2 years ago & have been working as an analyst in the department of revenue, also training new hires & will be retiring in one year 
• I do a lot of concert photography & sold a photo to Alligator Records 

I enjoy seeing some of you on Facebook or Twitter, and occasionally I get nostalgic for the days of yore on Grease Spot, including Weenie Roasts and weddings, but don’t really have the desire to be here as much as I used to. 
 

My tablet remembered my password, so I interpreted it as a sign to interact for a bit

Love you guys!

On 4/12/2024 at 4:20 PM, Nathan_Jr said:

Right.

He very briefly and stupidly mentions the Hebrew radicals (the sequence of consonants forming the root of the verb) and that they are the "most difficult radicals in all of Hebrew"... yada yada bull yada shonta... but quickly trails off because he has no fcking clue what he is talking about and then changes the subject to Paul and what he says about Christ sitting at the right hand of God... yada bull yada shonta... therefore, BOOM! Shabath means to sit, not to cease working, because God doesn't need to rest, he sits, Sits, SITS!!.. See, kidz? Math! Accuracy!

Like in so many sermons or "teachings," he mentions something technical (or mundane) that he read once or heard somewhere or imagined in a fantasy but never quite understood, because stupidity, and he regurgitates it incorrectly, hoping his audience won't understand it, either, but will be impressed with the esoterica and just smugly mutter, "Mmmmph."

Short answer: E. Coli-laced word salad.

And he is a charlatan.

The list of things that Wierwille talked about that that he clearly didn’t understand would be a long one. 

I used to think there were good times when I was in TWI, but the more I reflected on it, any good times were IN SPITE of TWI, and not BECAUSE I was in TWI. 

Oh my. Martindale is out & about “teaching”? He has a “ministry”? 

By the time Martindale canceled the ROA (because of rampant sex, or secret gay people? I forget) I was glad to see it go. It had gone from a fun reunion, hear some Bible, meet new folks to a regimented yell-fest where attendance at teachings were required and you had a good chance of being underwater if your tent was pitched in some of the fields.