Jump to content

Questioning the faith


Crazydog7

Recommended Posts

I want to thank you and all the other contributors 6 years I’ve been posting on these boards and I’ve never had a topic that was locked for getting to big (405 wow).

Its funny I don’t feel as though I’ve actually deconverted even if I think that teachings are BS now (and if I’m being honest with myself for a lot of years before that) I can still take comfort from the community and find the ceremony moving.

I do however see wisdom in the opposite what the atheists on this board have always said that religion in moderation still leads the door open to intolerance and fanaticism example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayDdhgmIke4

I bought this video up to my mother and even she maintained that even if an Iraqi Muslim were to die because of evangelism its ultimately a good thing because the soul of that person would be in heaven. That really threw me for a loop even more then the conversation with my cousin. I’ve always looked on my mother as a particularly open minded and tolerant person not a firebrand as far as the faith is concerned so if even she a comparative liberal can have this attitude is it possible to be a moderate Christian?

So is it religion that is ultimately the problem? Are people too concerned with the sprinkles on the top aspect? The Pie in the Sky When you Die mentality? Are the Atheists and other non-religious people on this board correct in their assertions that Christianity is a death cult? The most important question I think is by being persuaded by an argument am I really examining the fundamental questions or am I just easily lead?

The more I think about this stuff the more I just want to take the blue pill and forget about it but I can’t. Even if I am acting purely out of emotion it would still be I think intellectual dishonesty not to seek out answers to these questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to thank you and all the other contributors 6 years I’ve been posting on these boards and I’ve never had a topic that was locked for getting to big (405 wow).

Its funny I don’t feel as though I’ve actually deconverted even if I think that teachings are BS now (and if I’m being honest with myself for a lot of years before that) I can still take comfort from the community and find the ceremony moving.

I do however see wisdom in the opposite what the atheists on this board have always said that religion in moderation still leads the door open to intolerance and fanaticism example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayDdhgmIke4

I bought this video up to my mother and even she maintained that even if an Iraqi Muslim were to die because of evangelism its ultimately a good thing because the soul of that person would be in heaven. That really threw me for a loop even more then the conversation with my cousin. I’ve always looked on my mother as a particularly open minded and tolerant person not a firebrand as far as the faith is concerned so if even she a comparative liberal can have this attitude is it possible to be a moderate Christian?

So is it religion that is ultimately the problem? Are people too concerned with the sprinkles on the top aspect? The Pie in the Sky When you Die mentality? Are the Atheists and other non-religious people on this board correct in their assertions that Christianity is a death cult? The most important question I think is by being persuaded by an argument am I really examining the fundamental questions or am I just easily lead?

The more I think about this stuff the more I just want to take the blue pill and forget about it but I can’t. Even if I am acting purely out of emotion it would still be I think intellectual dishonesty not to seek out answers to these questions.

Crazydog I lost faith in christianity when I started to look at its history. The church was for a very long time extremely corrupt, that caused schisms etc but the big problem is they kept all the same old rubbish, if you look at contempory religions of the time many of the things that Jesus is said to have done were already in other religions.

So you would be reasonably safe to exclude all of that. What is left is essentially a very holy man who was a Rabbi of the old testament. There is a section where he is talking to the old rabbi's and he says " I come not to destroy the old but to bring in the new."

I interpret that as the old is still valid but the way of looking at it is what has to change.

So we know the old testament has not changed or been corrupted by the church since the Jews have made certain that it is properly copied. But how the hell can anyone balance the old and new testaments by todays christian teachings?

I mean in many places they directly contradict each other, unless of course you look at it from the perspective of reincarnation. That is when the Bible starts to make sense. At least for me.

Then you have translation issues, for example the bit about not suffering a "witch" to live. the word originally used meant an evil magic user. The Church in its almighty wisdom decided to make it female magic users

Not to mention the simple fact that if you are a true christian etc then every self proclaimed witch is your target for death. If thats not the case then don't call yourself a Christian. Or what about the bit about women must be silent at Temple/church?

Sorry but finding someone who truly follows the bible and not just those bits they want to follow is like trying to find a perfect star saphire.

All that said and done Christianity has done a lot of good to balance against the evil it has done and is still doing.

So I guess it is up to you, do you believe in some sort of Creator or do you believe we are all organic machines?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christianity is a death cult? The most important question I think is by being persuaded by an argument am I really examining the fundamental questions or am I just easily lead?

Christianity is a black hole designed to appeal to as many people as possible and suck them in. (No moral judgment intended) Is it a death cult? Since it's split in a thousand parts, it's possible that some of them are, especially those centered around Jesus worship and lakes of fire. Now if we are talking about the most relevant part, it's certainly not. The catholic church is many things, but most of them are only a facade. Afterlife has not been of great importance for some time now.

If you are interested in something important, you should always do your own research. Accepting arguments without questioning them is not a wise path to take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christianity is a black hole designed to appeal to as many people as possible and suck them in. (No moral judgment intended) Is it a death cult? Since it's split in a thousand parts, it's possible that some of them are, especially those centered around Jesus worship and lakes of fire. Now if we are talking about the most relevant part, it's certainly not. The catholic church is many things, but most of them are only a facade. Afterlife has not been of great importance for some time now.

If you are interested in something important, you should always do your own research. Accepting arguments without questioning them is not a wise path to take.

That is excellent advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that you can label Christianity pretty much any way you want, including "death cult", and however apt, it won't be particularly helpful.

For me, the Christian attitude with which I have been presented for most of my life is the very thing that worked against the faith when my questioning turned vigorous. The aspect of that attitude to which I refer is the "you accept the whole thing or you don't" mentality. In the end, I just found that there were some articles of faith in which I just hadn't any.

If these feelings and ideas were concerned with tangential things about God and faith ... eating fish on Fridays kind of stuff ... then I don't think I'd have been dissuaded. But in the end, some pretty central ideas about God had me thinking, "You know, if this is how God is, then God is a feckless thug. I'm not going to serve a thug."

Once I really got underway with my more serious questions, I realized that on some level being a Christian is really about just taking some guy's word for it that a being I cannot see wants me to act a certain way or else feel guilty and face eternal damnation for doing nothing particularly bad. I asked myself, "How would I know if I were just being taken by a con man and a group delusion? On what detail could I possibly pick up to tell the difference?"

Answer: none.

This is not to say that God doesn't exist or that Christianity is a delusion. Only that, because there is nothing about it by which one can tell the difference, I just couldn't see myself taking part anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm always super pro religiion in these sort of things because atheists are usually almost as bad as Jack Chick style evangelist. I DO NOT CARE IF I AM LEADING MYSELF INTO AN UNFULFILLED LIFE OF IGNORANCE, I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH MY DELUSIONS OF AN IMAGINARY BEING WATCHING OVER ME.

I think the only good way to use religion is by choosing the aspects that are right for you. I sincerely don't think anybody's supposed to do absolutely everything dictated by a religion, mostly because most of them started over a thousand years ago and have not been updated much (or at all) to today's values. I have a bible class, and last year we learned about forty laws from the Bible about how to treat your slaves (It really sucks that after 7 years of service I have to release them. Goddamn "advanced society".). Some things just aren't very up to speed about religion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the old thread:

I don't know if I am ready to say that there are no universal standards of good and evil, at least at the far ends of the spectrum.

Intellectually honest atheists are agnostics.

I'll take on the second part first, as it's the easiest to deal with - I think this opinion of atheism fundamentally misrepresents what it is that atheists actually believe. Now, obviously, there will be a few atheists here and there who are 100% utterly convinced that there is no possible possibility of any deity of any kind existing anywhere, ever... but most of us are more like 99.9% convinced, because a belief that strong is almost as weird as believing in a god.

Speaking just for myself, the likelihood of a god existing is just so small that it's not worth worrying about, so I'm happy to make up the difference and blithely state that no, I do not believe in one, therefore atheist. I don't need 100% certainty to make that claim, just a look at the balance of probabilities.

Much of the difference between atheists & agnostics is just minor semantics anyway (how much doubt is enough? Do you really need to believe in the unknowable? etc), but I'm a tad fed up of seeing atheists get a bashing from the middle ground as if we're some kind of fanatics. It's just not the case.

Now, onto the moral relativism thing. I just can't believe that there is a moral white line drawn across the universe separating Right from Wrong, so I guess that makes me a relativist. Were there morals before humans existed? Did evil velociraptors commit great wrongdoing when they slaughtered innocent protoceratopses? I suspect not, so I view morality as nothing more than a human artifact, and therefore entirely subjective.

What that does NOT mean, however, is that (for example) I'm OK with the Taliban throwing acid in the face of schoolgirls, simply because that's what they believe is moral. Just because my moral code is subjective, does not mean I'm not going to stick to it when faced with a conflicting one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll take on the second part first, as it's the easiest to deal with - I think this opinion of atheism fundamentally misrepresents what it is that atheists actually believe. Now, obviously, there will be a few atheists here and there who are 100% utterly convinced that there is no possible possibility of any deity of any kind existing anywhere, ever... but most of us are more like 99.9% convinced, because a belief that strong is almost as weird as believing in a god.

Speaking just for myself, the likelihood of a god existing is just so small that it's not worth worrying about, so I'm happy to make up the difference and blithely state that no, I do not believe in one, therefore atheist. I don't need 100% certainty to make that claim, just a look at the balance of probabilities.

Agreed.

Since there is no way of proving there is no god, it would be unrealistic to demand proof to support disbelief.

For me, the burden of proof falls on god. If you exist, show yourself! :tantrum:

So, while I acknowledge there is the possibility that there is a supreme being, I don't bother worrying about such a scant one.

Also, it is completely possible to disprove that individual gods do not exist. As an example, the abrahamic god, in all its forms, has been completely proven not to exist. This is undeniable fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll take on the second part first, as it's the easiest to deal with - I think this opinion of atheism fundamentally misrepresents what it is that atheists actually believe. Now, obviously, there will be a few atheists here and there who are 100% utterly convinced that there is no possible possibility of any deity of any kind existing anywhere, ever... but most of us are more like 99.9% convinced, because a belief that strong is almost as weird as believing in a god.

Speaking just for myself, the likelihood of a god existing is just so small that it's not worth worrying about, so I'm happy to make up the difference and blithely state that no, I do not believe in one, therefore atheist. I don't need 100% certainty to make that claim, just a look at the balance of probabilities.

Just thinking you have sufficient information to estimate probabiioies is what's weird from the agnostic perspective. The exact value is of less importance. And really, since when was anything byond Cognito... 100%?

Now, onto the moral relativism thing. I just can't believe that there is a moral white line drawn across the universe separating Right from Wrong, so I guess that makes me a relativist. Were there morals before humans existed? Did evil velociraptors commit great wrongdoing when they slaughtered innocent protoceratopses? I suspect not, so I view morality as nothing more than a human artifact, and therefore entirely subjective.

What that does NOT mean, however, is that (for example) I'm OK with the Taliban throwing acid in the face of schoolgirls, simply because that's what they believe is moral. Just because my moral code is subjective, does not mean I'm not going to stick to it when faced with a conflicting one.

Which highlights one thing I find odd: Moral Relativism is often formulated as a for of objective moral: The correct action is the one demanded by the dominant local moral. And I've read one or two writers that actually seems to believe that. But it also seem to be an exceedingly rare view, and not one that those that oppose objective morals is likely to hold

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm always super pro religiion in these sort of things because atheists are usually almost as bad as Jack Chick style evangelist. I DO NOT CARE IF I AM LEADING MYSELF INTO AN UNFULFILLED LIFE OF IGNORANCE, I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH MY DELUSIONS OF AN IMAGINARY BEING WATCHING OVER ME.

I think the only good way to use religion is by choosing the aspects that are right for you. I sincerely don't think anybody's supposed to do absolutely everything dictated by a religion, mostly because most of them started over a thousand years ago and have not been updated much (or at all) to today's values. I have a bible class, and last year we learned about forty laws from the Bible about how to treat your slaves (It really sucks that after 7 years of service I have to release them. Goddamn "advanced society".). Some things just aren't very up to speed about religion.

EXACTLY. Well said my friend.

Searching for the 'truth' is completely futile, since we are imperfect. Just believe whatever makes you happy and live your life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Searching for the 'truth' is completely futile, since we are imperfect. Just believe whatever makes you happy and live your life.

I would beg to differ. While I do believe an ultimate 'truth' is not something we could ever arrive at the benefits of searching for one are not without merit. Its the journey taken that matters, not the result achieved. As long as one proceeds with humility and a healthy combination of both skepticism and openmindedness one can grow a great deal as a result of the path one walks searching for truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would beg to differ. While I do believe an ultimate 'truth' is not something we could ever arrive at the benefits of searching for one are not without merit. Its the journey taken that matters, not the result achieved. As long as one proceeds with humility and a healthy combination of both skepticism and openmindedness one can grow a great deal as a result of the path one walks searching for truth.

No it doesn't. The 'search for truth' simply gives someone an inflated ego and an irritating conviction that they must be right. In my experience, anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oooh bacon would be a religious dealbreaker for me. It's disappointing to me that if I reach my goal of being rich and insane, I should probably be a Scientologist.

IMO, there is no one correct set of "fundamental questions". I think that good questions include- what are the reasons I can no longer believe in Christianity- do those reasons make enough sense to satisfy me? What would it take for me to believe again- and can Christianity or any other religion provide that? I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to trust yourself to find these answers and come to the conclusions that make the most sense for your life. You don't have to solve the ultimate answer of religion for the world, but to be able to be satisfied with your own beliefs.

***

I agree that most atheists could be more properly labeled atheistic agnostics- but in very few things is 100% evidence needed to draw a conclusion. If 90% of the evidence indicates one thing and 10% is neutral or could be explained in a variety of ways- but not inherently contradictory to the 90%, it makes sense to believe in the bulk of the evidence, with open mindedness toward changing the theory to fit new evidence.

I'd say that "atheist" also can refer to the belief that there is no god adhering to any religious system or affecting the world and physical laws. I'd call myself an atheist in regards to Christianity/Judaism/Islam/a large variety of other religions both present and past, and an agnostic towards the possibility of any "higher" power. But can a power be considered a god just because it has more capabilities/intelligence than humans? Or does it have to be a creator/law giver/supreme ruler over humans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, the burden of proof falls on god. If you exist, show yourself! :tantrum:
Be careful what you wish for, because God may mindfuck you from a whirlwind.

GOOD NEWS EVERYONE!

A little confusion regarding what organized religion you should follow is understandable. Fortunately, this flowchart will make everything clear.

I saw this on one of my religious friend's Facebook wall the other day. It was decently funny, but only for a chuckle or two.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

EXACTLY. Well said my friend.

Searching for the 'truth' is completely futile, since we are imperfect. Just believe whatever makes you happy and live your life.

No it doesn't. The 'search for truth' simply gives someone an inflated ego and an irritating conviction that they must be right. In my experience, anyway.

People like you are the reason we took so damn long to figure out the earth revolved around the sun. :angry:

Now as for faith you can believe in anything you want as long as in the end you make your decisions yourself and are willing to keep an open mind. (this my seem counter to my arguments in the other thread but I'm really not against religion just fundies)

Oh and Crazydog you spelt questioning wrong. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...