Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/08/2019 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    Looks like Miriam's gone, but for the sake of outlining a poor application of logic I'm going to look at the last post. Obviously it doesn't require knowing absolute truth in order to call some one out on being wrong about absolute truth. If someone puts forward a claim about having absolute truth (a christian), and it turns out that the claim fails along the way and is not absolutely true, then that's it. Calling christianity failed at claiming absolute truth does not require that anyone else has absolute truth themselves. And in fact, it's entirely possible that everyone in question could be lacking knowledge of absolute truth all the way around. So what? That doesn't even factor in when it comes to demonstrating how and why something is NOT absolutely true. They are only biblical morals because human animals evolved these morals and then applied them to our religions. It's not the other way around. They didn't pop up out of thin air completely intact or handed down from a cloud. And the bible's morals are a mixture of outdated ideas which are bad, along with some that still hold weight today and so are still applied and in use. All of them, the good and bad, popped into existence via ancient human animals conceiving of various things and then applying them to socialization. Who's claimed to be objective and is actually not? Not the ex christians posting. You'd have to prove the claim before it's taken with any seriousness. A christian who's stuck with claims of absolute truth really has no business accusing others of "rigid beliefs." Yes you do know what you claim, and we all know that what you claim is untenable. Those of us who have moved on know something that you have yet to understand in any meaningful way. First and foremost being that christianity fails at absolute truth claims. A collection of errant and contradictory writings, spread across several thousands of years of various people's conflicting opinions (although tossed together into one book), did not equal an inerrant and fluid reading of absolute truth. And the more probable situation is that absolute truth is unattainable or further out ahead of us still awaiting the day of discovery. In this scenario the bible and christianity would represent nothing more than one more stumbling block along the truth seeking path. One more example of what's wrong, rather than an example of what's right. I say stumbling block because it can cause people to think (incorrectly) that they have already found absolute truth and the journey is over, when the journey is at best merely in infancy.......
  2. 2 points
    This is called 'spoon feeding', something not at all uncommon across the web concerning both christians + relevant information (largely from videos). I've been seeing apologetic posters use this tactic for well over the last decade, especially where it concerns things like videos to do with the mythical jesus debates. This actually went so far as one christian "coming out" (completely out of the blue as it were) as blind and unable to read the script of a relevant video. When asked how in the world he had been reading everything else prior to this new revelation, he floundered around. None of this may apply to what you're doing here, Miriam, but it does apply to the fact that demanding to be spoon fed information by christian posters is a thing, a very big thing on the web. So it makes sense to take that into consideration when either (1) taking the route of claiming you can't watch something and (2) acting surprised if other members don't knee jerk to spoon feed a christian poster under these kind of circumstances.
  3. 1 point
    Hi. I'm Karen. I now live in Tennessee, surrounded by all our old favorites--Amy Grant, DC Talk guys, Russ Taff, etc. In the nineties, I was a missionary with YWAM (what a cult!) and then was in Thailand with Asian Outreach. Some of the Thais I was witnessing to had questions that made me really want to get deeper into my Bible, even though I went to a Southern Baptist college and did missionary Bible training. That's when I saw some confusing things I just couldn't deny any longer. It was about a ten-year journey (fear of hell is strong!), but I'm out. Now a friend and I have launched a humorous podcast about leaving religion. We'd love for you to subscribe, rate us, and send in some of your own funny stories. https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/deconversion-therapy/id1438032991?mt=2 Website: www.deconversiontherapy.com
  4. 1 point
  5. 1 point
  6. 1 point
    Perhaps I should have said, "ever existed." In my view we have just as much reason to search for Arthur's sword or the golden plates of the Mormons.
  7. 1 point
    Short answer: No. But I'll go into more detail here: NO. See? One has all caps. Until they let people examine their supposed ark there is no way to know what they really have. There's no reason to assume, just based on their word, that they have anything at all. Even then I can't think of how you could actually prove an item, such as this that has lost all provenance, is a singular ark. I don't know what the tests would be. Maybe if you die if you touch it? That's about it. All other tests such as what it looks like and such are open to interpretation (and influenced by things like Raiders) and since we don't have a firm date for when it was made, since the bible isn't clear, dating it accurately would be difficult at best (we could get a date but would that date be the right date given the narrative...hopefully the dates line up with the most popular sets of dates that people believe the narrative takes place otherwise it's just another out of place item for biblical archaeology). mwc
  8. 1 point
    My only comment here is it that there can still be plenty of bias because we're still giving it our own meaning. Our human brains love to find patterns, even if there aren't any, and we mistakenly draw all kinds of conclusions that have nothing to do with the raw data. Example: Domestic abuse has gone up in recent years. Has it? Or has our definition of abuse changed, meaning more behaviors fall into the category of "abuse." That's why "science is changing" all the time, it's just us drawing new conclusions with new information. We're just monkeys trying to figure shit out lol, but the capacity for us to treat science just like we used to with the Bible with all this reverence is still there.
  9. 1 point
  10. 1 point
    No. Whether you choose to believe it or not, I am trying to help you here. But your constant misrepresentations are standing in the way of either one if us being able to make any forward progress with each other. At no point in my post did I indicate that I don't want to hear what you have to say. At no point in our interaction have I used your ignorance as proof that your understanding is rubbish. You are welcome to provide quotes of me making such statements if you want; and I will happily publish a public retraction. If not, kindly apologize for, yet again, misrepresenting my position. In the following quotes, you indicate that you do think you know what we think and believe: Quote from "open question to all--can you help?" Miriam said, "Oh, Margee! I do like you! But as I said in another post, I don't think you realise how you lot actually think here." Quote from "open question to all--can you help?" Miriam said, "Not trying to be condescending. But I'm really not a fool. You aren't as objective as you all think."   Quote from "open question to all--can you help?" Miriam said, "TS - Yes, you are all former Christians. I have read what you believed. I have been reading what you have been saying to me - all of it, carefully. But you have only asked me the questions you have asked a million times before. You don't know everything I think, you just think you do, and as you read that, now you think I am saying what you have heard before, all of it the same." Quote from "open question to all--can you help?" Miriam said, "both parties have to be willing to see the others point of view. I've seen yours - you don't want to see mine, because you've seen it all,"
  11. 1 point
    Perhaps that is because you have an agenda here and we don't. I neither want nor need for you to accept my view of life; but, per The Great Commission, it is imperative that you "make disciples", "let your light shine", "bear witness." In other words, whether you're willing to admit it or not, you're here to preach and try to win souls. I'm not sure why you have such a hard time admitting that, given that jesus said if you were ashamed of him, he'd be ashamed of you. But the present fact is, you want something from us; we want nothing from you. If you read my testimony with any sincerity, then you know it was a brutal, four-year travail. It was the destruction of my entire life. I would not wish that experience on anyone; and, I think most of the others here feel the same way. We have adopted and embraced the philosophy of "live and let live." Not many here would actively seek to deconvert you; for most had experiences as calamitous as mine. Remember that you came to our website. Although we welcome you here, you should keep in mind that we did not invite you, we did not come to you, we did not actively seek you out. You came to us. And we are not responsible for you. You are. If you feel that certain members, myself included, have been rude to you, check your own actions and take the responsibility of owning them. If you feel that some of us, myself included, have been more abrasive than necessary, check your own motivations and take responsibility for them. You will find that most people here, myself included, will literally do anything within our power for anyone who needs our help. But we have also learned that we have to take responsibility for our own lives, actions, words, thoughts, and deeds; because there is not a magical sky-daddy to offer us absolution. We expect the same from those who come in to visit with us. With the proper approach, you will find many people here, myself included, who are more than willing to help you, answer your questions, offer our perspective, and even engage in sincere and rational debate with you. But you are responsible for your presence here. If you make a claim, you are responsible for supporting that claim with evidence and sound reasoning. If someone makes a point, or counterpoint, you are responsible for accurately and honestly representing that point in your rebuttal. If you intimate that someone made a certain statement, you are responsible for providing the quote. Personally, I still have doubts about your sincerity here. But I'm willing to help you out as much as I can, while you're here. These pointers I'm offering you now will help you to be taken more seriously by the good folks here, myself included. A modicum of humility wouldn't hurt you, or me, for that matter. You don't always need to have an answer for everything (again, neither do I). It's okay for us both to say we don't know. But, if you're genuinely here looking for our answers, quit saying you already know how we think or what we believe. You really don't. You've never been an ex-christian; but every single one of us has been a christian. I hope this helps, TRP
  12. 1 point
    "I worry that homosexuality is a sin because our priests will suck one another's cocks. There is only one divine and holy cock to be sucked. We must never, as priests, take our mouths off of that most holy of cocks. We must lead our flocks to suck the divine cock. To fondle the balls which are the holy spirit and jesus christ our lord. I don't even want to think about sacred butt stuff." -- The Pope (and other religious nutters) probably mwc
  13. 1 point
    Mega, I've often wondered the same as well (where did all of these atheist-gang members-drug dealers all come from?) While I certainly haven't done a research project on the topic, I have often seen that these former so-called bad-asses who turned to Christianity were anything but. I think they are usually attention-seeking wannabes. "I was a hardcore atheist, for real, slingin dope, praisin Satan and burning churches..." said no atheist in all of known history;)
  14. 1 point
    I graduated from a Christian college. I didn't have a bad experience there, but now I get pissed sometimes when I think about my professors who told me things that even if they believed they were true, made me stay in ministry and religion longer than I would have because I figured they knew what they were talking about.