◊ Platinum Patron ◊
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

95 Good

1 Follower

About TinMan

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    South Korea (just living here temporarily)
  • Interests
    Academics; knowledge; golf.
  • More About Me
    Became Christian ever since I went to Iraq in 2003 (fear of death and possible subsequent assignment to hell). It has only been recently (past year) where I started to question the validity of my worldview. I am on the slippery slope. I cannot seem to figure out where I fit in. I know I cannot go back to fundamentalism, it was just too crazy and nothing but a bad experience.
    ***Update*** I have definitely moved from "Christian Agnostic" to Agnostic/Atheist.

Previous Fields

  • Still have any Gods? If so, who or what?

Recent Profile Visitors

498 profile views
  1. No need to apologize. The first few steps out of religion are usually emotional.
  2. “You can love God all you want, it does not mean he loves you back.” ~The Author of this Topic~ Hell. It strikes fear in the heart of the believing and the unbelieving. This doctrine has to be the most terrifying aspect of any religion, but it is especially true for those who grew up in the Christian tradition. If I had to speculate, I would say everyone gets into, and stays in, Christianity because of the dread hell creates in people. During my time in Christianity, all I wanted was an assurance that hell would not be my eternal fate. If there is one thing I learned while I obsessed over dogma, it is this: there is no guarantee, and there never will be. I want to talk about the fear of hell because it is something that borderline debilitated me mentally as a human, and I know it has the same effect on others. Hell did not terrorize me just because of my own personal desire not to be in pain forever, but I could not stomach it for the sake of others as well. When I was a Calvinist, I got to a point where I could not mentally handle the idea of God firing people into the pits of hell. It was too troublesome, too grotesque, and too unmerciful. At some point in time, surely God’s blood lust should be sated; surely God would grow tired of sustaining his pure hated for others. Based on mainstream Christian theology, this is the only way hell could exist. If YHWH created, and therefore sustains everything, then hell cannot be a place absent of YHWH; therefore, for eternity, YHWH is displaying love for some, and active hate and malice for others. If this premise is true, then God does not love his enemies as he commands us to love them. How do we escape this fate? How can we find ourselves in God’s good graces? My conclusion is that no one could ever know, not in this life anyway. I want to go through a few different talking points to demonstrate that there is no resolution, no assurance, and definitely no guarantee that being a part of the Christian nation will prevent you from going to hell. I bring this up because I know a lot of people, myself included, waver in their decision to leave the Christian faith. The threat of hell hangs over our heads, and at times we want to run back to the illusion of the safety net provided by belief. Personally, I did not just decide to leave the faith one day. It is not as if I packed my bags and headed out the church to never return. What happened to me is that I wanted to know the truth. What is the truth of the reality I observe? How can I know what is true? My problem with religion is epistemological. Because only knowing what is true can I escape my true problem, which is avoiding hell, or rather, eternal suffering. This is the basic problem Christianity sets before us, and what we seek to solve. Christians will say that you can avoid hell by being saved. Well, what exactly is being saved, and how can we know if we are saved? What is the standard response to this dilemma? The sinner’s prayer. We all know it, get on your knees, accept the tenets of the faith (for the sake of this argument, we will assume the Apostolic Creed), beg Jesus (or Joshua, or Yeshua really) for forgiveness of sins, and accept the atoning sacrifice of Yeshua. As long as you petitioned, and believed, with your whole being, it took. Nine time out of ten, this is the standard answer I get when I ask the question. This theological concept runs parallel with the notion that salvation comes through faith, and not of works. For right now, we will just say faith is accepting the truths of the tenets of the faith, and trusting in the finishing work of the atonement. Seems easy enough, and overall, nothing too taxing of the believer. But is this really all there is too it? Does this really do the trick? Is there any way to back this up? Short answer: no. Naturally, the same Christians who told us that this is all there is to the faith will then say the Bible supports the simple plan of salvation. Yet, when I turn to the Bible, I see some evidence for this, but I see a lot of evidence pointing away from this simple plan of getting right with God. When Jesus was speaking to the crowds, and his own disciples, some key comments stick out in my mind. “Be perfect as your father in heaven is perfect.” “Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees, you cannot enter the Kingdom of God.” “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.” I am sure I do not need to go on, just these few statements get the point across. What about other books of the Bible, what do they say about just having faith? “Faith without works is dead.” – James “…not to associate with anyone who bears the name brother if he is guilty of immorality, or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber – not to even eat with such a one.” 1 Corinthians There is a fairly consistent theme through the OT, and the NT, that it is not just about having faith. It is faith and living holy, being a living sacrifice, etcetera. I just do not see any other way around it. Then the question becomes, what is the threshold? How much do I have to sacrifice, how forgiving do I have to be, how can I know where I stand with YHWH? Even if you believe in Christianity, and want to live out the faith, you will never know how you rate with God. We can conclude that just having faith does not solve our dilemma in attempting to avoid hell. If we are to avoid our problem of hell, we must have faith, and we must be doing some other step-actions to satisfy YHWH. But what are they, and how do we figure them out, let us go back to the Bible. First and foremost, attempting to find a congruent thought in Christianity is quite frankly untenable. I find the Bible has more in common with Wonderland from Alice in Wonderland than it does with our perceived reality. For the sake of this discussion, let us say the 66 books of the Protestant Bible are all we have to work with. That being the case, we are going to attempt to make sense of it, as only humans are capable. No matter what, humans are bound by solipsism. The most basic assumption is that we know we exist, and the only tools we have to evaluate the world around us is our observations, filtered through our understanding of reason and logic. Even when evangelicals tell us we have to abandon our reason and logic when reading the Bible, it is an impossible task. Everything gets ran through our logic filters, it is not possible to just turn it off. Allow me to expand upon the various reasons I find that the Bible could only be true outside of our perceived reality. For the Bible to be consistently true, it could only be true in another reality, another universe that is bound by a different set of rules, it cannot be true in our reality. Consider the Gospel of John where it states, “God is love.” How can God be love and then he assigns his creation to eternal torment? Not even a few, but most of his creation is in hell – remember....narrow is the way. If hell is eternal torture, then in our reality, God is not love. The meaning of love is now meaningless to us. It takes on some definition that is outside of human experience and knowledge. But yet, how does the Bible define love? Paul has something to say of it in 1 Corinthians 13: “Love is patient and kind; love is not jealous or boastful; it is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.” Haha, what!!!!!??? If God is love, and love is what we just defined, then what is the deal with hell? I will go even further and say that is not a systematic definition of the God we find scattered through the Bible. What God is the author of 1 Corinthians 13 even talking about? Why does the evidence we find in our perceived reality not match up with the stories relayed in the Bible? If God created the universe in six days, why does our universe look old? Why doesn’t Noah’s flood match up with paleontology and geology? Why are we so close in genetics to apes? Why does it appear that all living organisms share common ancestry? Why aren’t miracles, or rather interactions with a god being, or angels, a part of our daily experience? Why doesn’t prayer work? 1 Kings 22 presents another problem, what if God sent you a lying spirit? For all those Christians who say the Holy Spirit is talking to them, guiding them; how do they know? Thousands of different denominations attest to the fact they cannot all be right, but they could all be wrong. Who has the Holy Spirit, who is deceived, and who is God purposely sending a lying spirit to? How could anyone know if they were actually following the right way? What method could we employ to figure out the "truth?" Apparently YHWH has no problem letting people be deceived, whether through their own actions, or he simply sent a lying spirit to throw them off track. If God wants all to repent and come to the truth, why allow us to be deceived? And the big question, why in the world would you let a spirit deceive us! Especially if the one seeking the truth has honest intent? This only further substantiates our inability to find a resolution for the stated problem: How do we avoid hell? To summarize the biblical issue, Protestant denominations state the Bible is inerrant, infallible, and true in every aspect, then that could only be true in some other universe where logical contradictions are all simultaneously true, and that quite frankly is outside of our ability to conceive. We are being asked to believe in something that is not possible for us to actually believe. I would argue we are physically incapable of doing so. Do with that what you will. The problem we have is that the most reliable method humans have to test what is true cannot be applied to biblical stories, and theological concepts. That method is the scientific method: Make an observation Create a hypothesis Test hypothesis with an experiment Record results Refine hypothesis if experiment did not yield conclusive results Application of the scientific method is how we know something can be demonstrated to be true in our perceived reality. Our knowledge of the demonstrably true then feeds our ability to construct logically true premises and conclusions. All of which are tentative based upon new evidence. By now, I am sure anyone can see there is no conclusive way to know whether or not you are going to hell. In this regard, I think the Catholics and Eastern Orthodox have something over Protestants. We may be in a universe where we have a god like Angra Mainyu, who is going to torture all of us just for kicks. We do not know, and right now, we cannot know. We do not have the ability to test such a thing. When it comes to Christianity, unless we actually went through some kind judgement day, had the sheep and the goats separated, and then ended up somewhere, it is all degrees of possibility. Personally, this is how I deal with it - I just accept that I cannot know. I would like to know, I would like to have an assurance that an afterlife would be eternal bliss versus pain, but I realized that there is nothing I can do to guarantee that. All I can do is weigh the evidence, and hold a tentative conclusion on what is probably true based upon the evidence. If there is a hell, then the god who created it put us in an impossible position; we were set up for failure. We have no ability to sift through the data and come to the correct conclusion. As shown already, saying a prayer, having faith, and apparently even performing miracles is no way to know where you stand with God (Recall those individuals on judgement day pleading with Christ because they did miracles in his name, "Depart from me, I never knew you" - Jesus). Only this god could give me the wisdom needed to one: figure out what he wanted; two: be okay with the majority of humanity suffering forever. I could not be in heaven having a good time knowing billions of others were suffering. I am incapable of it. That means God would have to change my whole framework of how I see everything. When I was leaving Christianity, I often prayed that God would just make me a spiritual zombie that believed whatever he wanted me to believe and do all the time. I was more than happy to give up my freewill because it just seemed that my personal freewill was a waste of my time, and God’s time. But that has not happened so if there is a hell, I am powerless to do anything to avoid it, therefore, why should I spend every waking moment dwelling on it? I am not the kind of person who dwells on situations I have no power over. If there is a hell, it is inevitable I am going there, and I will just have to deal with it when I arrive. What are you going to do? It is a hopeless situation. For those who are terrified of hell, I want you to consider what is it about hell that scares you? Is it the pain? Is it that you think you will never experience any good again? You will never stop being terrified of hell if you do not know what exactly about it that bothers you. I used to be afraid of the pain aspect of hell, of being on fire all the time. When I really thought about it, in some way, the pain might be so excruciating you do not even feel it. Perhaps it is so intense you are almost frozen in time. And, at some point in time, I would think the nerves would be destroyed so now you are on fire and you do not even feel it. I have heard some Christians say the body just keeps regenerating so you feel it all over again – so loving. Throughout history, some Christians have really painted a pretty grotesque picture of hell, and I can tell you they delighted in it because they did not think they were going there. I have bad news for them, they do not know that. I bet if more people really thought they might ended up in God’s Toyland of Torture, they would be trying to temper all of the horrific aspects. Even those in the holiness movement never actually think they will end up on the spit, it only holds true for everyone else. As I said in my quotes at the start of this, you can love God all you want, it does not mean he loves you back. Telling yourself you are one of God’s special kids is a statement you can never prove to be true. It is all speculation and wishful thinking. Knowing this is what really drove me to investigate the claims of Christianity, I wanted to know I was in God’s good graces. I wanted to know I was going to heaven. I wanted to know God was good, and merciful, and kind. For all the reasons stated above, I could not, and cannot, know any of it.
  3. If Christianity is true, quite frankly, it is beyond me to understand it. I was just listening to a debate involving Laurence Krauss and two proponets of intelligent design. One of the debaters advocating ID stated he was and evangelical, who believed the Bible was the word of God, and he finds the evidence for evolution overwhelming. I am perplexed how this man is able to hold so much conflicting information in his head at any one time. How can he say he believes the Bible, but definitely does not think Genesis creation accounts are literally true, but then evaluates other parts of the Bible as literally true. Exactly what method does he employ to know when to take the Bible literally, when to take it figuratively, and when it just becomes a divine mystery. In my experience, talking to people in the church is like taking a survey of the mentally insane. People believe all kinds of whacky ideas that sound like the ravings of a mad man. My reason for mentioning this is that the church, viewed holistically, cannot even agree on what Christianity even is. No two believers believe the same thing. There is no agreement on the "essentials" from one church to another. Before I could even question whether or not I find the claims of Christianity good enough, I would have to know what Christianity even is. Most popular answer you hear is "a personal relationship with God." I have no idea where that rabbit comes from, because nowhere in the NT does that little piece of theological magic make itself apparent. And let's be frank, a personal relationship with God is not what people believe to be the bottom line, the dogma takes precedence. Then we are back to square one, what is the dogma of Christianity? Nobody can agree, just have a heart to heart relationship with God......YAY!!!
  4. The three you listed were pretty good. I would take those. Number 2 and 3 especially hold true for me. When I was making my way out of Christianity, I would often beg the biblical God to give me one hour of his time to tell me what is orthodoxy, what is orthopraxy, and perhaps and a couple questions I had about moving forward. I was so desperate, I even asked for a talking deer or something similar, anything but another fallible human. Still waiting.
  5. It is coming up on a year since I left the faith and became agnostic in my view of religion, and specifically Christianity. In the past few months, I had a few conversations with family members and co-workers who are still in the faith about the cerebral problems I have with cogency of Christian theology, science versus biblical narratives, higher biblical criticism, as well as lower criticism, and through it, I have picked up a few trends I keep running into. Usually when I start honing in on various problems, the biggest rebuttal I hear is, “it is all about faith/trust in Jesus.” This is especially true whenever I start discussing church history regarding differing views on marriage versus celibacy, poverty versus riches, defining sin, and etcetera. I take issue when I hear it is all about just having faith, because all Christian groups do not actually believe this is the bottom line, there is always a catch. Let us be frank, after you “have a little talk with Jesus,” then you need to conform to a certain set of rules depending on which denomination you are dealing with. If it was really just about having trust in Jesus to save you, then why do people get so bent about sex, movies, language, ethics, and the rest of the gambit? At the end of the day, it cannot be just about having faith, and nobody really believes that. It is speaking out of both sides of the mouth. This kind of double talk is rampant when I am in these discussions with believers. My favorite times are when they retreat to ambiguity, or will start saying the Bible does not teach mainstream orthodoxy beliefs. For example, I have had a few discussions with a colleague at work who constantly contradicts himself sentence by sentence, to rationalize his belief system. The other day I had him cornered in his argument when I asked him why an all loving, all knowing, omnibenevolent, omnipresent, God who supposedly hates sin so much he is going to put sinners on a spit and roast them for eternity, would actually create the capacity to sin in the first place. My thought on this was that if we take a really high view of a constant theme in the Bible, it is that God is just super upset about sin, rebellion, whatever you want to call it. If that is indeed the case, I find it extremely myopic that said God would then create creatures even capable of committing sin. I know the typical apologetic response will be, “freewill.” Yeah, that is great, but surely a solution would be to create beings with freewill who are only ever able to make choices that fall in the domain of acceptable to YHWH. Considering this further, if YHWH created everything, then he also created the capacity for his creation to sin, then he must not hate sin that much; for if he did, then the capacity for sin would not exist. Created beings could only ever choose “good.” How would that not be a win-win for everyone? Whenever I bring this argument up, I can see the mental squirming. My colleague said, “The Bible does not teach that.” When I asked him “what,” he basically stated the Bible does not teach that God contains all those characteristics I stated above. I could only give him a blank stare because he knows that is not what he believes, nor any other Christian you talk to, and he only said it to get out of a tight spot. Maybe my argument is flawed and I have not considered other possibilities, but it just strikes me odd that the God of the Bible who hates sin so much that he is willing to torture people, who he supposedly loves so much, but he never took steps to make sure such a horrific scenario did not play out.
  6. Thank you for your quick interpretation of what this text means, and exactly my issue with all of it. @Thumbelina you are making a knowledge claim for which you have no evidence to back it up. And when I say evidence, I mean going all the way back and establishing point by point that the collective writings that compose the Bible are indeed inspired (whatever that means) by a diety in our universe. That quite frankly would just be the starting point, then we would have to have a systematic way of interpreting these text since everyone who reads it comes to different conclusions. Guarantee I could find ten denominations in five mintues that say you are wrong in your theology, your interpretation, orthodoxy and practice. And you are going to hell because of it. I know because I spent years trying to figure all this out and realized there is absolutely no way to actually know if any of this is true. Multiple passages in the Bible do not comport with our knowledge of the earth, or the universe, nor is it even internally cogent and consistent. A literal interpretation of Genesis is impossible unless all of our current scientific knowledge in every field is wrong on almost every account, and I am not sure how that would even be possible. Miracles, oracles from God, talking donkeys, angels, demons, etc. are not an obvious part of our lives, but these occurences are scattered through the NT and OT. If these things did happen and are real parts of our universe, why are they not happening for all to see? Too much to ask from a loving God? All I want is the same revelation these biblical characters supposedly had. Why can I not hear it from the horses mouth? Why should I believe the stories of ancients? The ancients had a pretty good track record of making things up. I know right now you think you have figured it all out, but your conviction of knowledge does not mean you have knowledge. You are making knowledge claims that are really just theology claims. You do not know if your claims are true, somebody either told you they were, you believe they are, or it just feels right. None of those equal actual knowledge. I am guessing you are from a Protestant background, did you know that Martin Luther thought very little of Revelation? He actually thought it should be tossed out of canon, quite literally into the Elbe river. I mention this because you are making claims with such confidence as if all the weight of church history backs you, and it does not. I recommend reading "Lost Christianities," by Bart Ehrman. Even the earliest known Christian movements did not agree about major theological issues. The divinity of Jesus just being one.
  7. TinMan

    Many gods in Bible

    @Blood Great reference. I heard Robert M. Price mention this a few times, but I always forgot the passage.
  8. TinMan

    Faith healing

    Interesting topic. I am always frustrated by the lack of being able to know the answer. That was my biggest hangup in Christianity as well, I just wanted to know the answers, and to understand them. My initial deconversion started when all the various compartmentalized boxes of theology and reality started to overflow into each other. I could not mentally deal with so many contradictions coexisting at one time. I am still plagued by my desire to know. But more and more, I am trying to be okay with the fact that anything I may know is always tenative. This ties into the whole spontaneous healings. How is that accounted for in a strictly naturalistic world, it defies current science. As others stated, it could just be the brain doing something wacky, but how the hell does that happen? Wish I knew, like always.
  9. TinMan

    My Story

    @jvstater Totally understand the Religious OCD aspect. I suffered from it for the better part of 15 years. The constant stress, anxiety, intrusive thoughts....it was a nightmare. I started to come unglued after a while. What you will come to find out is how much peace you will have months down the road. There will be some ripple effects, every now and then you will get yourself worked up wondering if you made a bad choice to leave the religion, I can only recommend that you keep learning about Christianity, it's orgins, what scholars actually have to say about the Bible, etc. Look into books on Biblical criticism and it will open a whole new world for you that loosens the death grip of fear. Because lets be frank, that is the real god of Christianity, fear.
  10. TinMan

    Hello all

    @Stargazer95 I highly recommenr listening to "The Human Bible" podcasts by Dr. Robert Price. I guarantee that after listening to a few of those podcasts, you will see the Bible completely different.
  11. TinMan

    The epistles of John.

    Any time. I saw your post and wanted to respond, but I did not have any resource material in front of me. As I stated earlier, I am fairly certain I know where you are mentally because of the way you framed that question. I am guessing right now you have doubts, but you are still not able to see the Bible any differently than you did before because the Evangelical glasses of which you viewed the world are the only ones that help to see it clearly, or so you believe. Part of the fundamentalist party line is giving the Bible all kinds of authority, i.e., inerrancy. Just to get you started, did you ever realize there are two different sets of "The 10 Commandments?" No kidding, look at Exodus 34 (I forget the verses), literally lays out 10 different commandments than the ones you see everyone raving about as being the pillars of civilization. Most people (Christians) have no idea what the 10 Commandments in Exodus 20 (or is it 22) even say, let alone what they may mean. For example, what does it mean that "Thou shall not have any other gods before me." In the 21st century theology, the church would say this means that you should not put material possessions over God, your idols if you will. But would have ancient people have understood that, especially ones that supposedly just came from Egypt (zero archeological evidence that over a million muldoons troped through the desert for 40 years) where they were exposed to multitudes of gods. In this case, might the Bible actually implicitly indicate there other gods but YHWH is the God if Israel? Also, what about taking God's name in vain. This might simply mean not swearing an oath in the name of YHWH and then backing out. Think about it, God is simply a title, it is not a name. So if you swear and use the title God, how is that taking God's name in vain? My point is, you have been told time and time again what "truth" is and I just made an example of how that is not so. Read Psalm 137 (if anyone has the verses handy, feel free to provide them. Again, I do not have my stuff in front of me). In it, the author talks about smashing little ones against rocks in revenge for the Babylon conquer and exile....does that sound like divine inspiration or some guy who's village was ransacked. In Isaiah, the author includes this speech where YHWH states he gave Israel commandments that were horrible and unbearable (probably relating to the child sacrifice of the firstborn) so that they may know he is the Lord......what!? Convenient how modern day theology just passes this one right over. All this talk of love and I am always asking who in the world they are talking about, because that does not describe Jesus or YHWH.
  12. I thought of something as I was deconverting that really resonated with me and I wanted to share it here. Let's suppose there is a God and some kind of eternal reward and punishment, and this God has a expectation of what you believe and what you do. Your destiny hinges on getting these two keys areas correct. Just based on that premise, picture the predicament humans are really placed in: One: How does one even establish there is a God, let alone what its character is like, therefore how could you actually know what you were expected to believe about God, let alone anything else. Two: If there was one true faith out there, what possible tools could humans employ to figure it out. I suppose if there was only one religious belief system out there and its beliefs were cogent and consistent amongst its believers, that would at least narrow the choice down to a 50/50 chance of being right. But that is not the case, there are literally thousands of religious systems all claiming to have a corner on the truth. Nearly all of them are unable to be tested for veracity, so we are all stuck again trying to figure out the true faith with no real way of knowing how to do that. This is really the situation is with Christianity. So if God really is up there, he has put this burden on humanity to figure out who he is, what he wants you to believe, and what he wants you to do. And if you get it wrong, you are going to burn forever. That is quite literally an impossible task. How could you possibly figure out any of these things? And when I say figure them out, I mean you know them to be true, not that you have faith they are true. I always put this scenario to believers. They are so confident they have it all figured out and they are sitting comfortably in God's back pocket. To which I say, how could you possibly know that to be true? If there is a God, they have no idea if they are pleasing him. In reality if the scenario is true and there is a God with all these expectations, then anyone who got it right really just got lucky. That is why I do not believe in hell. There is no way a reasonable, let alone loving God would put us in such an impossible position. I could only see this being remotely true if everyone received direct revelation and signed some kind of contract indicating both parties fully understood expectations and consequences....not a cosmic guessing game.
  13. TinMan

    The epistles of John.

    SB: There are a lot of scholars who actually think John's gospel is a very gnostic writing which incorporates a very high Christology not seen in the synoptic gospels. Most believe the epistles of Peter are fakes, meaning someone wrote them and slapped the name Peter on it to give it more credibility. I know what you are looking for right now is some real answers, answers that go into depth on why scholars actually think these writings were not first hand witnesses to the events described. Robert M. Price has a podcast called The Human Bible, you can download 35 episodes for free, but the rest you have to be a Patreon supporter. I bring this up because I have a good idea of the position you are in right now. You only know one way of framing the Bible, likely because you have been taught your whole life to see it one way. Listening to Dr. Price's podcast really opened my eyes and gave me the ability to start viewing the Bible more critically and to tease out different ways to read a passage. I did have a question for you in return, in James, it states that if anyone is sick, the elders should anoint the sick one with oil and pray over them, and they will be healed....have you ever seen anything like that happen? In my 15 years of fundamentalism, I never came close to seeing that particular verse being put to the test....and for good reason. If this is indeed bogus, should we take anything else in James seriously? Also, I cannot believe the weak harmonization argument that James and Paul were saying the same thing when it comes to works, they were not. I would advocate they were not even playing the same game. If we want to be real about it, James had a very Jewish way (like the gospel of Matthew) of living Christianity and Paul did not. Perhaps James and his church were the ones Paul warned about in Galations? It's observations and questions like these that broke the spell of reading the Bible as I was indoctrinated to read it and started to critically analyze it. Reading the Bible as a fundamentalist is a really weird kind of exercise. How many times do you gloss over a passage and think, "oh, that's how it used to be," or "no, that does not apply anymore," or "what does that even mean." You read back into the Bible what your 21st century theology tells you to understand opposed to letting the text speak for itself. Getting past this part of the thinking trap is really difficult, I know, I was in it for a long time.
  14. TinMan

    On Healings

    I can understand how fundies might consider God is throwing them free chicken if they think about it in a vacuum, but once you look at the grand picture, surely the idea God is kicking a breeze your way while thousands are sucking has to strike you as silly.
  15. TinMan

    On Healings

    Do you have any references for healings in othrr religions? It's hard not to find a bunch of biased websites.