R. S. Martin Posted July 11, 2007 Share Posted July 11, 2007 Why do his kids have to do all the talking? Why can't god do his own converting if converting needs to be done? Just got another fat pack of sermons from family. I didn't read them. Just looked until I had proof that it really was religion they were talking about. Satan can make us believe hell and heaven are not real. Satan can give us peace, too. That's the kind of thing they are saying. I guess the Holy Spirit prompts them to write this kind of crap. I wonder, if god is all-knowing and almighty why he can't do his own talking? Why can't they just commit my soul to god's care? Surely god isn't afraid to talk to me or is he? Cat got his tongue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnceConvinced Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 Yes, one of the biggest flaws in Christianity is the fact God needs people to do the talking for him. God is quite capable of talking from the heavens and giving the messages he needs to, but for some reason he chooses humans to do it for him and often it's done in archaic English (as if that makes it more authentic). Christians try to claim that God is speaking through those people, but how are we supposed to know that really? Should we really trust what comes out of someone's mouth in the name of God, when it could be just their own thoughts? I know as a Christian, I wanted desperately for God to give me words of wisdom to give to others in church and cell groups, but it seemed like such an effort that I refrained from doing it for fear it was just me trying to conjure something up. I think for some Christians, godly verbal diaohrea comes more naturally. Another thing that pisses me off when Christians claim God doesn't use his own voice because it might terrify us. We wouldn't be able to handle hearing it. I mean what kind of crap is that? No doubt we'd soon get used to it and no one would have any doubt God existed. No one would ever be able to flag it away as not being from God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 As I've said any number of times, once their god manages to deliver a uniform message to everyone at the same time, and this same message is delivered so that people are simply born with it from that point on, then and only then will I listen to it. Shouldn't "knowing" god be as natural and universal as breathing after all? Their own book claims their god is not a god of confusion but with nearly 30,000 sects (not counting Judaism or Islam) it seems that their god, if not a god of confusion, sure allows it and doesn't seem concerned with it at all. Even the sign for the "real messiah" claims the Law will simply be on people's hearts so that it doesn't need to be taught or learned and that hasn't happened. I have to admit even that would be something pretty amazing since it would be universal and there would be no room for mistakes in that system. But, as it is, it is simply a bunch of anonymous dead people telling me through some writings what they claim god told them to tell me and that I should obey or the god that never says or does anything might actually do, but not say, something bad to me...if not now then after I die when I really can't do anything about it so I'd better conform. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 Where's God's Tongue? Cat got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbobrob Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 They use it to make the leather-bound editions of their Babble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted July 13, 2007 Author Share Posted July 13, 2007 They use it to make the leather-bound editions of their Babble Hey I love that double pun or metaphor or whatever. Tongues babble. Must be wholy spook. Where's God's Tongue? Hans:Cat got it. OHHH!!!!!!!!! *shrieks* God must be REAL!!!!!!!!!! *breathes heavily* Maybe it was meant to be a joke. *deep breath* Yeah, I'm sure it was. Just a joke. By the way, that quote about us not being able to tolerate hearing god's voice is total crap. Doesn't the bible say thunder is his voice? Like when Mt. Sinai shook and smoked and thundered. I like thunder. There's something so archaic about thunder. It resonates with something deep inside of me. Now-a-days when I hear the thunder I feel like its the bond between me and mother earth. It makes me feel like part of the natural system of our planet. Someone just got it wrong when they said we couldn't tolerate god's voice. The other problem about the whole idea of god talking to me through another person is this: If god can talk intelligibly to that other person, he can talk just as plainly to me when and if there is something I should know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted July 13, 2007 Author Share Posted July 13, 2007 I wrote a reply to their sermons. I might not send it but I will post it here: You obviously believe in an almighty, all-knowing, omnipotent God. Would not such a God be able to talk to me directly? I don't quite understand why you (and others) feel the need to speak for God. I'm sure if God has a message for me he will let me know very clearly. The Bible says in both the Old and New Testaments that God's Word is on every human heart. Surely you don't assume that your own letters are more effective than God's own voice, do you? Another point: Your letters are sermons. I listened to forty years' worth of sermons. And none of them answered my questions. What makes you think that the sermons you write are more effective? You know the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. You claim to love me. You seem to think that preaching at me is an expression of your love. Here are some things about love in 1 Cor. 13 (my comments are in brackets): v. 4: Charity suffereth long and is kind. [so if preaching at me is loving and kind, I guess I should preach my beliefs at you?] ...is not puffed up [but aren't you puffed up when you imply that your beliefs are better than mine?] v. 5:Doth not behave itself unseemly [You know that I don't want that kind of letters. But you do not respect my wishes. Being disrespectful of another human being is unseemly.] ...thinketh no evil [You think about your own sister languishing in a lake of fire for all of eternity, of which ten thousand years is barely the beginning. (Read the story about that in "Touching Incidents.") How is that kind of thinking not evil?] v. 7: Believeth all things [You fail utterly in believing the word of your own sister when she talks about her personal experiences.] I could go on but that is enough. You very obviously do not love me. Please stop lying. ******************* While those answers should make them stop and think, it probably won't work that way. They will only take it as evidence of how completely Satan has blinded and deceived me. No sense in giving them more fuel for the fire (fires of hell????). They will feel better so long as they don't think I have mocked the Holy Spirit. I am afraid they might take some of the opening stuff as mockery of God, and by extension the Holy Spirit. Mennonite beliefs on this are slightly different from the Baptists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted July 13, 2007 Author Share Posted July 13, 2007 I'm still thinking about this--as though we'd ever stop. In my last letter to my sisters I tried being really friendly. They have already shown that they take any act of kindness or decent human feeling as sure evidence of God talking to me and convicting me of the error of my ways. Maybe they took that friendly letter the same way. Maybe those long sermons are the only way they have of expressing love. Even if that is the case, I think I have the right not to subject myself to more of the same. I just find it utterly amazing how that mindset works. It's as though they are taking black and white and untested thinking to it logical conclusion. It seems they begin with the untested premise that atheists are of necessity evil and incapable of human decency. That being the case (in their minds), it stands to reason that they interpret any act of human decency as conviction and "hope" that I will reconvert. It occurs to me as I write that such a level of ignorance is as imprenatrable as a black moonless night with a very heavy fog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev R Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 You'll probably get the response that "God" is talking to you all the time, you just aren't listening. Some stuff about how "He" speaks directly to your heart and that you just need to believe in order to hear. Old hermit in a mountain cave type of stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr_funkenstein Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 When I was a brainwashee the mantra that got drummed into us was that we could talk directly to god through our prayers, but that everything god would ever want to say to us was in the bible, so we had to just read it every day so there'd be a two-way conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycorth Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 Cat got his tongue? Mary's snatch must've bitten it off during foreplay 2000 years ago. No wonder Jebus was sooo important in order to convey God's Word "It's so angry!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 Where's God's Tongue? Hans:Cat got it. OHHH!!!!!!!!! *shrieks* God must be REAL!!!!!!!!!! *breathes heavily* Maybe it was meant to be a joke. *deep breath* Yeah, I'm sure it was. Just a joke. Just reconfirmed that you're absolutely correct in your conclusion. Cats and dogs/gods ya know. Some gods were depicted as bulls, and they say the tongue is a delicacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted July 13, 2007 Author Share Posted July 13, 2007 This morning I finally got an idea on how to handle the issue. I prepared all my lines ahead of time, rung them up, and "bit the bullet." I asked, "What do I have to do to satisfy you so that there won't be any more letters like this?" That opened the way for some really frank conversation. She found it really difficult to answer my question and respond to further comments and questions from me. I gave her all the time she needed to figure out what to say and it worked. She seemed really distressed, though, to just let me go, given the way she sees the situation. I then reminded her of her beliefs--maybe I put it as a question so as not to build on presumptions. When it was clear that she believed in God's power and ability to communicate directly with me, I suggested about committing me to God. That seemed to give her peace. You'll probably get the response that "God" is talking to you all the time, you just aren't listening. Some stuff about how "He" speaks directly to your heart and that you just need to believe in order to hear. Old hermit in a mountain cave type of stuff. I had an answer ready for this type of reply. It didn't come up, but if it did, I had been going to take a hardline and tell her: It's between me and God. I am not accountable to you. It never came to that. I think we parted with good feelings. I asked if she would explain things to the other sister. She told me the other sister didn't write about religion. So I guess that was a misunderstanding on my part. I read the other letter and it was just sisterly sharing of life. It was steeped in the religious mindset and I am trying to think how to deal with that. For example, if she is allowed to say things about how she is learning to submit to God, is it okay for me to talk about my feelings of connection with the earth and nature in general? We'll get this figured out. It's a major relief that this conversation went so well. Dr. Funkenstein, I used to believe (and so did my mother and perhaps others) that God impresses messages on our minds. That made prayer a two-way conversation. I think now that it was probably just one part of my brain talking with another part of the same brain, but it really did seem like a two-way conversation between me and God. I cannot say like some do here that none of my prayers were answered because I felt I received a lot of leading and guidance via prayer and this intimate conversation with God. Funny thing is it keeps on happening ("god" talking to me). The final stage of my deconvertion was to realize that it was different parts of my own self communicating. Some gods were depicted as bulls, and they say the tongue is a delicacy. I'm from the farm and we used to butcher our own beef. Taurus's tongue is a delicacy. Yummmm!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnceConvinced Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 Dr. Funkenstein, I used to believe (and so did my mother and perhaps others) that God impresses messages on our minds. That made prayer a two-way conversation. I think now that it was probably just one part of my brain talking with another part of the same brain, but it really did seem like a two-way conversation between me and God. I cannot say like some do here that none of my prayers were answered because I felt I received a lot of leading and guidance via prayer and this intimate conversation with God. Funny thing is it keeps on happening ("god" talking to me). The final stage of my deconvertion was to realize that it was different parts of my own self communicating. Yep. Similar conclusion to what I came to. I remember I used to have good old chin wags with God all the time. But that was just me talking to myself. Lol. I always remember my Uncle telling me how he would be having a good old yack with the Lord as if they had this great relationship. And I used to think I was pretty cool too because I used to do the same thing. Now I think back and think... what a load of bullshit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted July 16, 2007 Share Posted July 16, 2007 I realized after a while that prayer was just me talking to another part of myself. As you say, Ruby Sera " The final stage of my deconvertion was to realize that it was different parts of my own self communicating." I decided since part of the definition of a Christian would be someone who prays, it would be dishonest if I were to continue to act like I was praying when I did not believe in anything of the kind. This whole idea of a special revelation from God given to someone just is so false. How do they know it is God? Even if it is, is the message right, is it moral? How does it effect how human beings treat each other? Doesn't giving a so-called revelation make the person giving it an importance that he/she didn't have before? Isn't it an ego thing? I wish these folks would honestly examine themselves and their motives before revealing their special revelations from God to the rest of us folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnceConvinced Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 Yeah, I fully believe it is an ego thing. If you give words of wisdom, scriptures, words of encouragement that you claim is from God, it makes you look super spiritual. It's what every Christian wants. I used to love telling people I had been a Christian for 30 years. Sounds very impressive to other Christians and they tend to take you seriously in discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts