ogilvy Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 does anyone see a difference between deconverting from the church, or church groups, or christian organizations, or fundamentalists, and deconverting from christianity itself as presented in the bible? i do. i think the church/churches, and christianity are not the same thing. i dont have any objections to the church i left, my objections are to the bile itself, now. i wouldnt have considered pentecostal carryings on or fundamentalist hatred shown to gays to be 'christian' at all. i would have thought them to be nothing to do with christianity. i based my beliefs on the bible, and never accepted unquestionly 'church doctrines' of what ever church i was currently attending. i never found a church i thought had everything correct according to the bible, so it came to a point there was no point in leaving a church because it had a couple of things not biblical (IMO). i think that fundy bashing is a bit irrelevant to the issue of whether christianity itself is the truth or not. but shoot me down if you want, i'm often wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Not really no... Most of what you are told the bible means is Church dogma... if one just reads the bible, and drops the filter of what you were told it means, one really just walks away very bored and slightly confused due to the overwhelming contradictions and down home nastiness of the whole collections of documents... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogilvy Posted January 31, 2008 Author Share Posted January 31, 2008 Not really no... Most of what you are told the bible means is Church dogma... if one just reads the bible, and drops the filter of what you were told it means, one really just walks away very bored and slightly confused due to the overwhelming contradictions and down home nastiness of the whole collections of documents... yes thats an interesting idea about reading the bible without the filter. when i say i tried to follow it apart from church doctrine, i should have said that i read lots of different writers, more or less bible commentators, of different church backgrounds. yes, you're absolutely right, it would have been hard to make sense of without those. i was trying to 'walk in the spirit', but just by going on what is said about that in the bible, i wouldnt have got to what, say, andrew murray writes about it, and the same with some other topics, like 'victory over sin'. but still, to me, its nothing to do with 'fundies'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 No it's not hard to read without the filter... it's hard to swallow without the filter, and even then, it's largely turd polishing...if the commentators tells you that your understanding of english is wrong, then they're selling you a lie, or their version of 'The Truth' If a book, in English needs explaining in terms such as 'when they say 'kill all that breathes' they really mean God loves everyone' then there is something radically wrong... you're not 'reading the bible at all, you're reading what you're told it means... so it's extra scriptural dogma not independent thought at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophronia Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 I do know some Christians who are not "fundies" in the sense that they are loving people, as opposed to being filled with hatred or displaying hatred/intolerance toward others. But I have come to feel that such Believers have reached this state in spite of Christianity and the Bible, though they may feel that it is because of their religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogilvy Posted January 31, 2008 Author Share Posted January 31, 2008 No it's not hard to read without the filter... it's hard to swallow without the filter, and even then, it's largely turd polishing...if the commentators tells you that your understanding of english is wrong, then they're selling you a lie, or their version of 'The Truth' If a book, in English needs explaining in terms such as 'when they say 'kill all that breathes' they really mean God loves everyone' then there is something radically wrong... you're not 'reading the bible at all, you're reading what you're told it means... so it's extra scriptural dogma not independent thought at all... i didnt say its hard to 'read' without the filter, i said its hard to make sense of, i.e confusing. i was agreeing with you actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 If a book, in English needs explaining in terms such as 'when they say 'kill all that breathes' they really mean God loves everyone' then there is something radically wrong... you're not 'reading the bible at all, you're reading what you're told it means... so it's extra scriptural dogma not independent thought at all... I first read the bible through in 6th grade, and started getting in "trouble" soon after by asking the hard questions because I was being told stuff I didn't think followed from the text. I am very thankful I read that book at the age I did, because from then on I started comparing what we were told the bible said to my own understanding of what it said, which was radicly different even for a pre-teen. I've always had good reading comprehension, tested way above my grade levels every year. When I was told I'm taking something out of context I knew it was bullshit. Especially when my grades in both reading and religion were A's. I knew I knew how to read English and understand it. Soon after I started my own education by reading books on the history of xtianity and the bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogilvy Posted January 31, 2008 Author Share Posted January 31, 2008 I do know some Christians who are not "fundies" in the sense that they are loving people, as opposed to being filled with hatred or displaying hatred/intolerance toward others. But I have come to feel that such Believers have reached this state in spite of Christianity and the Bible, though they may feel that it is because of their religion. i used to feel when i was focusing on Jesus that there was no room for hatred or for judging others. thats why i find it hard to work out, who was i with at those times? the Holy Spirit, i thought. but if so, how can God be so cruel? he seemed like a peaceful spirit to me. now i dont know who God is at all. it just doesnt tie in with the horrilbe things he does/threatens to do to believers and unbelievers thru the bible ( and to animals)..its very weird how you can get both things from God in the bible, love and hate. some people say there has to be evil to show what good is but i cant agree. God should be only good. there should have been some way to organize it that there would only be good in creation, not even potential for evil and suffering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophronia Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 I do know some Christians who are not "fundies" in the sense that they are loving people, as opposed to being filled with hatred or displaying hatred/intolerance toward others. But I have come to feel that such Believers have reached this state in spite of Christianity and the Bible, though they may feel that it is because of their religion. i used to feel when i was focusing on Jesus that there was no room for hatred or for judging others. thats why i find it hard to work out, who was i with at those times? the Holy Spirit, i thought. but if so, how can God be so cruel? he seemed like a peaceful spirit to me. now i dont know who God is at all. it just doesnt tie in with the horrilbe things he does/threatens to do to believers and unbelievers thru the bible ( and to animals)..its very weird how you can get both things from God in the bible, love and hate. some people say there has to be evil to show what good is but i cant agree. God should be only good. there should have been some way to organize it that there would only be good in creation, not even potential for evil and suffering. These are some heavy questions. I have come to feel that "good" and "evil" are often relative. In other words, whether or not something is good or evil depends on your perspective. For instance, say I am a starving, homeless mother with a squalling infant to feed. I have the opportunity to steal some food, which I do, and give it to my baby. In a sense that was evil, because I stole, and perhaps deprived another child of food. But in a sense it was Good; certainly from the perspective of the infant who got fed, it would be Good. As for Jesus, I too am still coming to terms with how I feel about him. For a long time I have accepted the idea that though he might not be God, he was at least "a good teacher", that kind of thing. But sometimes I wonder if it might be one of these: 1. Jesus did not actually exist 2. The teachings of jesus have been so diluted, repackaged, and "spun" by other people that we will never know what he was really like, 3. Jesus was insane, or 4. Jesus did NOT teach pure love and peace. At times he preaches violence and other things that do not seem so Good. He also contradicts himself in various ways according to the accounts we are given. For instance check out this page which makes some interesting points: http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/jesus.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 No it's not hard to read without the filter... it's hard to swallow without the filter, and even then, it's largely turd polishing...if the commentators tells you that your understanding of english is wrong, then they're selling you a lie, or their version of 'The Truth' If a book, in English needs explaining in terms such as 'when they say 'kill all that breathes' they really mean God loves everyone' then there is something radically wrong... you're not 'reading the bible at all, you're reading what you're told it means... so it's extra scriptural dogma not independent thought at all... i didnt say its hard to 'read' without the filter, i said its hard to make sense of, i.e confusing. i was agreeing with you actually. Neat! If hard to make sense of because, without extensive apologetics and just generally saying that 'it doesn't mean what it says', it is inconsistent gibberish, selected to bolster the view of the one literate Christian in the room at the 1st Ecumenical council in 325. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWIM Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 I do know some Christians who are not "fundies" in the sense that they are loving people, as opposed to being filled with hatred or displaying hatred/intolerance toward others. But I have come to feel that such Believers have reached this state in spite of Christianity and the Bible, though they may feel that it is because of their religion. Not all religious people are fundies that is true. I have an uncle on my wife's side that is a full blown catholic preist, and he NEVER talks about religion, and is one of the nicest, most compassionate people you will ever met. I think it's a shame such a nice man is involved in religion, but it seems to work for him I guess... He wrote a letter to my brother in-law before he died, and after he died his mother let me and the wife read it. I wish I had it to post, it was non-preaching and heart felt. I was totally amazed. I think, that somehow secretly, he is not that big of a believer anymore, but being the nice guy he is, he is using his position to "actually" comfort and help people. I think his situation is extremely rare though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 It's an indoor job with no heavy lifting. If it weren't for the whole 'god' thing, I'd consider it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 does anyone see a difference between deconverting from the church, or church groups, or christian organizations, or fundamentalists, and deconverting from christianity itself as presented in the bible? I saw a clip of a comedian (don't remember who it was) who made an couple of illustrations about the Bible and Christianity. His first point was, if you'd never heard of God or the Bible or anything, would it be possible for you to walk into a used bookstore, discover a copy of the Bible, read it, and say, "Yes! This is the answer to all of my questions!!!" He was implying that it would be impossible to read the Bible with no commentary or assistance and be able to use it as a guide for life and what he had to say made a great deal of sense to me. If someone were to be isolated and study the Bible, it would ultimately be THEIR interpretation of the Bible and, therefore, their interpretation of Christianity itself as presented. I believe this is why there are so many demoninations and spin-offs. History has shown us that. Another point he makes is that Christians take what they like from the Bible and practice that. The parts they don't like, they disregard. I believe that to be true in every organization! A group's members will use what they think is appropriate to keep the organization moving along smoothly and within the framework of the original "rules"... until someone sees things differently. Then there is a spin-off. There will always be "rock stackers" who will follow organizational rules to a tee - even in the spin-off - so, in essence, what we have is really groups of mixed personality types trying to adhere to and yet push the limits of whatever the rules and guidelines are in every single type of organization or sect or denomination. So, in regards to your question, I'd have to say that my answer would be a resounding NO. My train of thought on this is that Christianity, as presented in the Bible, is not detailed enough for exact specification and will always be open to interpreting the standard operating procedure of what THE CHURCH should be and what Christians should actually be doing. Christianity IS the church and the church IS Christianity and that statement is valid due to the fact that the Bible isn't presented as a set of rules, but rather as a historical document inspired by a divine being who is able to be moved by the prayers of the followers and who seeks to give them guidance. That's my opinion. Another great topic for discussion!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophronia Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 I have known of a few people who have "deconverted from the church" in the sense that they reject organized religion, but still have a "relationship with Jesus" or try to live by his teachings. Some of these folks are okay really. There aren't very many of them. So I guess I would say that maybe it is possible to deconvert from religious dogma and follow one's own "muse" (if you will) or "conscience" whilst still involving Jesus/god. However, if one puts much stock at all in the Bible, this would be difficult it seems to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Captain Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 No it's not hard to read without the filter... it's hard to swallow without the filter, and even then, it's largely turd polishing...if the commentators tells you that your understanding of english is wrong, then they're selling you a lie, or their version of 'The Truth' If a book, in English needs explaining in terms such as 'when they say 'kill all that breathes' they really mean God loves everyone' then there is something radically wrong... you're not 'reading the bible at all, you're reading what you're told it means... so it's extra scriptural dogma not independent thought at all... Great quote that..... Like some of you I left xianity and the church simultaneously, alot of us realized that the church was not necessarily biblical. But the longer I studied the bible the more I realized the lack of truth contained therein. The church (all denominations) got it wrong b/c there was nothing to get right from such a faulty premise. In regards to our distaste for fundies, they are for the most part not happy with our lack of faith. They are the ones that insist on proselytizing, condemning and trying to maintain their mythology in government and education. If they were content to have their lunatic faith for themselves and live and let live there wouldnt be a problem, as is they want power which they agressively seek by foisting their dogma on others. Thats why I have a problem with fundies, even if I werent an Ex-C I would still have a problem with them, as I do with all people who force beliefs on others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 The church, the religion, it's all one and the same IMO. Maybe other denomenations aren't so bad, but the charismatic/evangelical mindset is Xianity still. I deconverted from that entire lifestyle and way of thinking. I hate it, I want nothing to do with it, and I don't want some other "version" of Xianity either. It's all one big basket o' fish and chips on top, but a pile of dogshit underneath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophronia Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 It's all one big basket o' fish and chips on top, but a pile of dogshit underneath. Well said. My feeling on the Christians I know who are indeed good, kind people... somehow they have managed to take the fish&chips off the top and have never gotten to the dogshit beneath, or have somehow managed to sift through it. Maybe that's all they had to eat. But why would I want to eat that fish&chips, knowing it had been in the basket with the dogshit? Eewww. I can cook up something better than that (being a kitchen witch ya know). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 But why would I want to eat that fish&chips, knowing it had been in the basket with the dogshit? Well, there you go. You grasped exactly what I meant when I wrote that. Churches do everything they can to make Xianity pretty and palatable, but to those of us who have gotten out of it we know it's ugly and it stinks when you really start digging in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Cue someone coming up with the 'Carnal mind' special pleading... by that argument, with the 'correct' mind, you could unlock the secrets of the universe with nothing more than the ingredients list of Cocoa Pops and a slug of strong coffee... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush country Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 I consider xianity and the church to be one and the same. Even so, when I look back I could say that I deconverted from the church first and xianity second. I was very involved in missions, small group leadership, choir, precepts classes, and was ready to start seminary. Since I didn't have the "joy of the Lard" I could not continue to go on missions to espouse something I didn't have. That dropped first, then the enrollment in seminary, then the precepts classes, then choir, and last the small group. I view xianity in any form to be a collosal waste of time and money. Think of all the resources wasted in just building the buildings. Then there is the wasted mental effort put forth by those studying the word, making themselves nuts trying to get a "real" relationship out of a non-existant entitity. Too bad the thought and academic process couldn't be used for something more worthwhile to help humanity. If someone really wanted to make a difference for the human race they would kick start something to get us off of this planet before our star burns out. Guess that is a little too far forward looking though. Maybe do something to help us survive long enough for the sun burning out to actually be a problem for humans. Or, closer to now, put that effort into a clean environment with a healthy and sustainable economy. Oh, guess maybe I should put some of this into the rants & replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogilvy Posted January 31, 2008 Author Share Posted January 31, 2008 [quote name='The-Doctor' date='Feb 1 2008, 12:53 AM' In regards to our distaste for fundies, they are for the most part not happy with our lack of faith. They are the ones that insist on proselytizing, condemning and trying to maintain their mythology in government and education. If they were content to have their lunatic faith for themselves and live and let live there wouldnt be a problem, as is they want power which they agressively seek by foisting their dogma on others. Thats why I have a problem with fundies, even if I werent an Ex-C I would still have a problem with them, as I do with all people who force beliefs on others. thanks, now i understand the distaste for fundies. i was thinking of fundamentalists as being those who believed the bible to be Gods word literally, like 6 days of creation, adam and eve being real people, jesus being born of a virgin and raised from death, as opposed to a liberal viewpoint in which the supernatural doesnt happen. where i live we dont have so much this kind of fundamentalist that you describe, except i guess, Fred Nile (a politician) and the Festival of Life. i have seen footage of some in tasmania yelling hateful things at gays. fundamentals in the sense you mention are rare in australia and not politically influential at all. i was thinking of 'fundamentalist' as simply believing in the fundamental teachings of the bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 TBH, the 'fundamentalist' bible person tends to be a vile cherry picking creature that makes up stuff to suit their prejudices... and it has nothing to do with the mess of pottage that constitutes the bible and everything to do with dogma of the sect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 I didn't find this thread until now. Pippa, on another thread you said you were Mennonite at one point, wearing cape dress and head-covering. That's the type of Mennonite I was, too. I was born into it and getting out of that kind of culture--things are set up so you think many times before you do it, unless you have family or friends who support it. Or if you're so adventursome or independent that you don't care about them. I was none of those things. That made my deconversion process very different from some people here. First, I'm not sure that I ever was a real Christian in that I always had doubts. Second, I was trapped inside a culture that defined my identity and I liked the culture and way of life; had no intention ever to leave. When I had to leave I had to deal with a major identity crisis. Third, when I left I still believed what I had believed while inside but people treated me like I had committed the worst of crimes--something worse than murder if you know what I mean. My "deconversion" at that point was more a parting than deconversion, and yet it was the worst thing that ever happened to me. I found ways of coping without them and with much time they got used to me the way I was. I kept seeking the truth about Jesus as the way of salvation. This had been a life-long burning question. Finally I was satisfied that I had searched out Christianity and I started investigating other possibilities. My church attendance had been very sporadic and I had gone through all the mental stages of deconversion while still officially a Christian. So I would say I deconverted from Christianity while still attending church. I think we have quite a few people like that here, people who have to go to church either because of leadership positions or to keep the peace at home. I was on my own and free to do as I wanted so I guess that would be different except I had had to go to church all my life when I didn't believe. I still enjoy studying the bible and theology. I think I have to do it to figure out exactly what is behind all this stuff that I tried so hard to believe all these years--and couldn't. When the christians started kicking me out I decided I must have deconverted. And that happened when I started investigating paganism--to them that was idolotry. Nevermind that the fundy worship of a book is bibliolotry. Not all Christians worship the book but those who hold to the inerrant infallible inspired Word of God doctrine, esp. those who believe that questioning the bible is blasphemy, etc.--I consider that to be worship of a book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts