No Longer A Christian

Status
Not open for further replies.

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Gerald

I have an excuse: my origins are entirely human.

You seem rather enamored with the idea of God being some sort of cosmic prankster.

What point is there in trusting an entity who might just say "Ha ha, joke's on you!" and toss you into the Lake O'Fireâ„¢ just because he happens to feeling cheeky that day?

I s'pose that's where Faithâ„¢ comes in: maintaining trust in the entity in spite of the above possibility, or just accepting that if the Big Guyâ„¢ wants to screw you over he going to whether you like it or not.

You'd be better off venerating Loki...

"Cosmic prankster"? How Fortean!:thumb:
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Originally posted by ilyatur

...There are semantic ambiguities in every text, including the Bible....
You mean the alleged creator of all that was, is, and is to come, including communication itself, has communication problems that produce semantic abiguities?

What an odd idea... that a "perfect" being could communicate in a less than perfect fashion...

... sounds almost less than divine... and, of course, raises more incompatibilities with the allegedly infallible scriptures...

:think:


The one that we are dealing with here is not a defeater for the doctrine of inerrancy, and neither interpretation of eleph alters the doctrinal and ethical import of the passages involved.
The doctrine of biblical inerrancy is a bunch of codswallop and has been soundly trounced in any number of historical venues. You're wasting your time here, ilyatur.

:rolleyes:
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Originally posted by Poly

But you continually try to pursuade people that God inspired the parts of the bible that you like.
And you don't do this very thing?

And every reader of the Bible doesn't do this very thing when they deny the literal truth of the texts?

Perhaps the Catholics and Orthodox have it right about transubstantiation after all.

:think:
 

wickwoman

New member
Tomorrow I shall write a gospel of my own: The Gospel of the Notorious and Wonderous Wickwoman.

And 1000 years from now, people will study it and will say:

1. Yes she is from where she says she is from
2. Yes she did write it when she said she did
3. Yes, she said she posted on TOL and there was a place called TOL at the time.
4. Yes, there was a woman named Wickwoman who lived during the years 19__ and 2100.


WALLAH (sp?) EVERTHING THIS WICKWOMAN HAS SAID IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE!
 

Sozo

New member
Originally posted by wickwoman

And 1000 years from now, people will study it and will say:


3. Yes, she said she posted on TOL and there was a place called TOL at the time.
Are you trying to say that there will be no TOL in a thousand years?

That's it, I'm done with the anti-aging vitamins! :madmad:
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Zakath

And you don't do this very thing?

And every reader of the Bible doesn't do this very thing when they deny the literal truth of the texts?

Perhaps the Catholics and Orthodox have it right about transubstantiation after all.

:think:

Same spirit, same Bible...and everybody's saying something different.

Everyone cherrypicks. And it leads to very, very serious problems within the church. I don't think half a dozen local area pastors could sit down for communion together without it turning into a feces throwing contest.
 

Sozo

New member
Originally posted by granite1010

I don't think half a dozen local area pastors could sit down for communion together without it turning into a feces throwing contest.
That I'd like to see! (From behind a window that is) :noid:
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Originally posted by granite1010

Same spirit, same Bible...and everybody's saying something different.
Yup. At last count, at least 33,000 different ways... and growing.

Everyone cherrypicks. And it leads to very, very serious problems within the church. I don't think half a dozen local area pastors could sit down for communion together without it turning into a feces throwing contest.
I used to belong to a ministerial association of most of the churches in my town. We had a monthly lunch meeting at the local buffet place. We were a very congenial group but one thing we never did was to discuss doctrine.

:thumb:
 

firechyld

New member
What if we were to teach our kids that this is the way we discover what is right? By holding on to only those things that feel good to us. They'd end up smacking and choking other kids who took their toys or did something they didn't like because this is what felt right to them.

This is something that really scares me about Christians like you. You imply that, without your faith and without Biblical teaching, you'd be a savage, a horrible and violent and "evil" person.

I don't base my life on the Bible. But I'm not a horrible, violent, evil person. The idea that Christianity is the only thing stopping you from becoming a monster says quite a lot about you... not so much about Christianity.
 

jeremiah

BANNED
Banned
Originally posted by firechyld

This is something that really scares me about Christians like you. You imply that, without your faith and without Biblical teaching, you'd be a savage, a horrible and violent and "evil" person.

I don't base my life on the Bible. But I'm not a horrible, violent, evil person. The idea that Christianity is the only thing stopping you from becoming a monster says quite a lot about you... not so much about Christianity.

I think you miss the point. What they mean is that without their faith and the teachings of the Bible and a Church to guide them that they could be an adulterer or a homosexual in America, and would condone abortion for others at the very least. Of course these are legal and are not generally considered horrible, violent or evil at the present time. They could also worship Satan, or any number of false gods. They could blaspheme the name of God with virtual impunity in most settings.
Since several of these sins are against the ten commandments, and- or required the death penalty in the assembly of theocratic Israel, I don't see that one could be much worse; except by a matter of degree? Since I used to practice some of these sins before my conversion, the statement makes perfect sense to me.
Since many people practice these things today without the smallest twinge of guilt, the statment makes no sense to them. Yet the typical non believer routinely breaks most of the ten commandments and consider, themselves more righteous by degree then the average Christian.
The truly bizarre statement is the one that granite, and other former believers have made. {Paraphrased} "Now that I am no longer a believer, I am a better Christian in many ways."
How can that possibly be??????
It would be like saying, I used to be a terrible Boy Scout, but when I quit believing in the highest ideals of the Scouts and broke some of the oath and pledges, I became a better scout. Maybe so, but you never were, nor ever could be better than any scout who continued to believe and kept the oath and pledges as best as he could.
If Christianity is a total farce as someone like granite might now maintain,
one must not use Christians as a conveniant whipping boy, if you were one, and not a very good one, by your own admission.
If faith without works is useless, and if even the demons believe and tremble, how much more useless is it to say that one does not even have the faith of a demon, but has better works than a Christian? Works without faith is totally meaningless in a Christian perspective.
Likewise for a Christian to say that he would be a terrible "person" as an atheist, is far more understandable than sayng I am a better Christian as an atheist. It is a non -sequitor.
You may be a better person in society, as an atheist, but it is impossible to be a better Christian as an atheist, by ignoring the first four commanments concerning God, and practicing the next six, concerning man, slightly less imperfectly than before.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
"If Christianity is a total farce as someone like granite might now maintain, one must not use Christians as a conveniant whipping boy, if you were one, and not a very good one, by your own admission."

When did I admit that?

"What they mean is that without their faith and the teachings of the Bible and a Church to guide them that they could be an adulterer or a homosexual in America, and would condone abortion for others at the very least."

Adultery, homosexuality, and abortion are all alive and well in this supposedly "Christian" nation of ours, and the Christian church is full of gay and abortion rights activists. So, with or without the church, we'd have the same issues to talk about.
 

PureX

Well-known member
Originally posted by jeremiah I think you miss the point. What they mean is that without their faith and the teachings of the Bible and a Church to guide them that they could be an adulterer or a homosexual in America, and would condone abortion for others at the very least.
I think you missed the point. First of all, lots of Christians are adulterers already, so obviously religion does little to curtail this. Secondly, if you weren't Christian, you wouldn't care if you were a homosexual because the only people who care about homosexuality as some sort of terrible condition are Christians. And thirdly, if you weren't a Christian, you would choose to be pro or con on the abortion issue by some other criteria just like everyone else does. So in the end, if you weren't a Christian, you would just be someone else.
Originally posted by jeremiah Yet the typical non believer routinely breaks most of the ten commandments and consider, themselves more righteous by degree then the average Christian.
See, this is the kind of statement that reveals the depth of ignorance and prejudice being nurtured among Christians these days.

I dare you to produce one shred of evidence to support that statement. I dare you to prove that nonChristans "routinely break the ten comandments and consider themselves more righteous by degree then the avarage Christian". The blind arrogance and stupidity of that statement alone disproves the second part of it. Only a Christian is arrogant and self-righteous enough to say something like that.

You haven't got a clue who does and who doesn't abide by those common moral rules. You just presume that you and yours are morally superior with no evidence whatever to support that assumption. I can think of many Christians I have known that have broken the ten commandments routinely, and I can think of lots of non-Christians I have known who did not. Yet I still would have no way of judging, really, who sins "more" then who else, and neither do you.
Originally posted by jeremiah The truly bizarre statement is the one that granite, and other former believers have made. {Paraphrased} "Now that I am no longer a believer, I am a better Christian in many ways."
This may be bizarre to you, but there isn't anything unreasonable about it.
Originally posted by jeremiah How can that possibly be??????
I'll tell you how it can be. Many religious Christians have become so shallow, prejudiced, and dogmatic in their beliefs that they have come to idolize their religious rules and doctrines rather than focusing on embodying God's love and forgiveness on Earth. As a result, they have become mean-spirited and self-righteous and contenteous rather than kind and generous and tolerant. And once one of these idolizers finally lets go of their religion as their God, they rediscover a God of love and forgiveness and univrsal kindness and they come to express these characteristics more within themselves. This is why they say that they have become better Christians by letting go of the religion of Christianity that had been their false idol, and that had been causing them to be so defensive and antagonistic.

The real difference here is the difference between the religion of Christianity and Christ. You're not going to be able to recognize this difference, however, because to you, right now, the religion IS your Christ. But for those who have finally come to recognize the difference between these two, they can also recognize the different results within themselves of holding to each in their hearts. And they are saying they prefer the latter.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
"The truly bizarre statement is the one that granite, and other former believers have made. {Paraphrased} 'Now that I am no longer a believer, I am a better Christian in many ways.' How can that possibly be??????"

I'm more at peace. Forgiving. Long suffering. Tolerant. Not as judgmental.

As a Christian I was a duckspeaker. (Hopefully somebody here gets that reference.) These days I actually think for myself. And it's refreshing.

I'm no longer on the look-out for people to judge, criticize, and write off as future barbecue participants in the lake of fire.
 

wickwoman

New member
Originally posted by jeremiah
The truly bizarre statement is the one that granite, and other former believers have made. {Paraphrased} "Now that I am no longer a believer, I am a better Christian in many ways."
How can that possibly be??????

. . .

Likewise for a Christian to say that he would be a terrible "person" as an atheist, is far more understandable than sayng I am a better Christian as an atheist. It is a non -sequitor.
You may be a better person in society, as an atheist, but it is impossible to be a better Christian as an atheist, by ignoring the first four commanments concerning God, and practicing the next six, concerning man, slightly less imperfectly than before.

If you're not a better person as a Christian, then what's the point? Is the only truly meaningful pursuit that of the afterlife?

An atheist has several things going for him/her philsophically speaking (this is a generalization of course, and I know that atheists vary in belief just like Christians but humor me for a moment):

1. An atheist does not have the idea that they are so special that they must live for all eternity. They understand the impermanence of existence.

2. An atheist realizes that, if they aren't happy and fulfilled and a good person right now, they may never be. The eternal now is the most important day for an atheist because there is no putting off for the afterlife. There is no afterlife in the mind of most atheists.

3. Most atheists I know are more focused on making the now better for humanity than trying to stifle our eating, drinking and merrimaking, or trying to convice us to store up treasures in Heaven like Christians do, putting off our enjoyment for some magical future that may never come.
 

On Fire

New member
Originally posted by wickwoman

If you're not a better person as a Christian, then what's the point? Is the only truly meaningful pursuit that of the afterlife?

You really don't know? All your years of "searching" and "learning" and you haven't picked up on this? :shocked:
 

Gerald

Resident Fiend
Originally posted by On Fire
You really don't know? All your years of "searching" and "learning" and you haven't picked up on this? :shocked:
If the afterlife is the only meaningful pursuit, then you won't try to prevent your life from ending, under any circumstances.

I suspect that you're no more eager to die than I am...
 

On Fire

New member
Why do we love Jesus?

Because he "gave himself for us."
We have life through his death;
we have peace through his blood.
Though he was rich, yet for our sakes he became poor.

Why do we love Jesus?

Because of the excellency of his person.
We are filled with a sense of his beauty!
an admiration of his charms!
a consciousness of his infinite perfection!

His greatness, goodness, and loveliness, in one resplendent ray,
combine to enchant the soul till it is so ravished that it exclaims,
"Yes, he is altogether lovely."

Blessed love this- a love which binds the heart with chains
more soft than silk, and yet more firm than adamant!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top