Why Do You Remain A Christian?

[Akheia]

.. More than a few actually. And not all of them have crosses in their profile, I'm afraid.

 

With regard to science, I'm reminded of that book about Mithraism's origins that I just finished reading a week or so ago. Imagine being the astronomer who realized that the whole cosmos appeared to be shifting and moving over time! Imagine the gasp of surprise and awe that he must have let out, imagine the wonder as he contemplated the mystery before him.

 

At the time, geocentrism was the opinion of the day. Nobody really understood why sometimes stars jumped or moved backward, or why sometimes constellations didn't quite appear in the right places over eons, so the solution was simple: a god--the most powerful god in the entire universe, and moreover a hitherto largely-unknown god--must be shifting the cosmos to some elaborate dance that only he understood. The mystery of this movement and discovery of a whole new god must have blown ancient scholars away. But they didn't deny it. They moved it forward, this idea, this religion, and they tried to elaborate on it and build upon it.

 

Now, two thousand years later, we know that geocentrism is false. But to say that a religion's scientists prove the validity of that religion is a genuinely sad and sorry mistake to make. These Mithraic scientists discovered something so incredibly monumental that it could only be a new god to them, but we do not hold their discovery of precession to be a proof of Mithraism!

 

Try again.

[♦ ficino ♦]

.. More than a few actually. And not all of them have crosses in their profile, I'm afraid.

 

With regard to science, I'm reminded of that book about Mithraism's origins that I just finished reading a week or so ago. Imagine being the astronomer who realized that the whole cosmos appeared to be shifting and moving over time! Imagine the gasp of surprise and awe that he must have let out, imagine the wonder as he contemplated the mystery before him.

 

At the time, geocentrism was the opinion of the day. Nobody really understood why sometimes stars jumped or moved backward, or why sometimes constellations didn't quite appear in the right places over eons, so the solution was simple: a god--the most powerful god in the entire universe, and moreover a hitherto largely-unknown god--must be shifting the cosmos to some elaborate dance that only he understood. The mystery of this movement and discovery of a whole new god must have blown ancient scholars away. But they didn't deny it. They moved it forward, this idea, this religion, and they tried to elaborate on it and build upon it.

 

Now, two thousand years later, we know that geocentrism is false. But to say that a religion's scientists prove the validity of that religion is a genuinely sad and sorry mistake to make. These Mithraic scientists discovered something so incredibly monumental that it could only be a new god to them, but we do not hold their discovery of precession to be a proof of Mithraism!

 

Try again.

Hi Akheia, you're not referring to Ulansey's The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries, by any chance, are you? I understand that astronomers have pretty much refuted Ulansey's interpretation.

[Guest Valk0010]

.. More than a few actually. And not all of them have crosses in their profile, I'm afraid.

 

With regard to science, I'm reminded of that book about Mithraism's origins that I just finished reading a week or so ago. Imagine being the astronomer who realized that the whole cosmos appeared to be shifting and moving over time! Imagine the gasp of surprise and awe that he must have let out, imagine the wonder as he contemplated the mystery before him.

 

At the time, geocentrism was the opinion of the day. Nobody really understood why sometimes stars jumped or moved backward, or why sometimes constellations didn't quite appear in the right places over eons, so the solution was simple: a god--the most powerful god in the entire universe, and moreover a hitherto largely-unknown god--must be shifting the cosmos to some elaborate dance that only he understood. The mystery of this movement and discovery of a whole new god must have blown ancient scholars away. But they didn't deny it. They moved it forward, this idea, this religion, and they tried to elaborate on it and build upon it.

 

Now, two thousand years later, we know that geocentrism is false. But to say that a religion's scientists prove the validity of that religion is a genuinely sad and sorry mistake to make. These Mithraic scientists discovered something so incredibly monumental that it could only be a new god to them, but we do not hold their discovery of precession to be a proof of Mithraism!

 

Try again.

Hi Akheia, you're not referring to Ulansey's The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries, by any chance, are you? I understand that astronomers have pretty much refuted Ulansey's interpretation.

And wait didn't ptolemy know about precession and its why he invented the epicycles the way he did.

[Akheia]

.. More than a few actually. And not all of them have crosses in their profile, I'm afraid.

 

With regard to science, I'm reminded of that book about Mithraism's origins that I just finished reading a week or so ago. Imagine being the astronomer who realized that the whole cosmos appeared to be shifting and moving over time! Imagine the gasp of surprise and awe that he must have let out, imagine the wonder as he contemplated the mystery before him.

 

At the time, geocentrism was the opinion of the day. Nobody really understood why sometimes stars jumped or moved backward, or why sometimes constellations didn't quite appear in the right places over eons, so the solution was simple: a god--the most powerful god in the entire universe, and moreover a hitherto largely-unknown god--must be shifting the cosmos to some elaborate dance that only he understood. The mystery of this movement and discovery of a whole new god must have blown ancient scholars away. But they didn't deny it. They moved it forward, this idea, this religion, and they tried to elaborate on it and build upon it.

 

Now, two thousand years later, we know that geocentrism is false. But to say that a religion's scientists prove the validity of that religion is a genuinely sad and sorry mistake to make. These Mithraic scientists discovered something so incredibly monumental that it could only be a new god to them, but we do not hold their discovery of precession to be a proof of Mithraism!

 

Try again.

Hi Akheia, you're not referring to Ulansey's The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries, by any chance, are you? I understand that astronomers have pretty much refuted Ulansey's interpretation.

 

I was indeed. I hadn't heard about refutations of it--I will check it out. His ideas sounded pretty sound, at least till the end of the book. I'm sure there's been a lot of discussion about it since the book came out.

 

And yet again we learn more, grow more, improve more. That's what it's all about.

[♦ ficino ♦]

.. More than a few actually. And not all of them have crosses in their profile, I'm afraid.

 

With regard to science, I'm reminded of that book about Mithraism's origins that I just finished reading a week or so ago. Imagine being the astronomer who realized that the whole cosmos appeared to be shifting and moving over time! Imagine the gasp of surprise and awe that he must have let out, imagine the wonder as he contemplated the mystery before him.

 

At the time, geocentrism was the opinion of the day. Nobody really understood why sometimes stars jumped or moved backward, or why sometimes constellations didn't quite appear in the right places over eons, so the solution was simple: a god--the most powerful god in the entire universe, and moreover a hitherto largely-unknown god--must be shifting the cosmos to some elaborate dance that only he understood. The mystery of this movement and discovery of a whole new god must have blown ancient scholars away. But they didn't deny it. They moved it forward, this idea, this religion, and they tried to elaborate on it and build upon it.

 

Now, two thousand years later, we know that geocentrism is false. But to say that a religion's scientists prove the validity of that religion is a genuinely sad and sorry mistake to make. These Mithraic scientists discovered something so incredibly monumental that it could only be a new god to them, but we do not hold their discovery of precession to be a proof of Mithraism!

 

Try again.

Hi Akheia, you're not referring to Ulansey's The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries, by any chance, are you? I understand that astronomers have pretty much refuted Ulansey's interpretation.

 

I was indeed. I hadn't heard about refutations of it--I will check it out. His ideas sounded pretty sound, at least till the end of the book. I'm sure there's been a lot of discussion about it since the book came out.

 

And yet again we learn more, grow more, improve more. That's what it's all about.

Yes, I agree! There are some references to critiques of Ulansey cited here:

 

http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1995/95.09.10.html

[Akheia]

Thanks! What I love about history and science is that it really is a long process of figuring shit out. Plus, while Googling I ran into a Yahoo group devoted to Mithraism.

 

It doesn't invalidate my point though: the presence of extraordinary adherents doesn't make a religion more valid. Saying that leads the Christian down some really uncomfortable paths! If I found out tomorrow that you, for example, had become a Pentecostal, it wouldn't make me convert or give that faith more credence, though I'd at least be curious about what'd made you do that.

[bornagainathiest]

.. More than a few actually. And not all of them have crosses in their profile, I'm afraid.

 

With regard to science, I'm reminded of that book about Mithraism's origins that I just finished reading a week or so ago. Imagine being the astronomer who realized that the whole cosmos appeared to be shifting and moving over time! Imagine the gasp of surprise and awe that he must have let out, imagine the wonder as he contemplated the mystery before him.

 

At the time, geocentrism was the opinion of the day. Nobody really understood why sometimes stars jumped or moved backward, or why sometimes constellations didn't quite appear in the right places over eons, so the solution was simple: a god--the most powerful god in the entire universe, and moreover a hitherto largely-unknown god--must be shifting the cosmos to some elaborate dance that only he understood. The mystery of this movement and discovery of a whole new god must have blown ancient scholars away. But they didn't deny it. They moved it forward, this idea, this religion, and they tried to elaborate on it and build upon it.

 

Now, two thousand years later, we know that geocentrism is false. But to say that a religion's scientists prove the validity of that religion is a genuinely sad and sorry mistake to make. These Mithraic scientists discovered something so incredibly monumental that it could only be a new god to them, but we do not hold their discovery of precession to be a proof of Mithraism!

 

Try again.

 

Sadly, not just at that time Akheia.

 

http://www.fixedearth.com/

http://www.geocentrism.com/

http://clr4u.org/CLR-seminars/340.html

http://www.geocentri...resp/index.html

http://www.galileowa...alileowaswrong/

http://geocentricbible.com/

https://sites.google...earthdeception/

http://www.creationi...icityPrimer.htm

http://www.reformati...nary-earth.html

http://www.lclane2.net/sungenis.html

http://www.ldolphin.org/geocentricity/

http://hypertextbook...eocentric.shtml

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2686447277698368881#

 

Today too.

 

BAA.

[Akheia]

Those links took my breath away with their ignorance. Oh, those poor people.

 

Apparently Christians really should be focusing their efforts on "Copernicanism," not on "Darwinism."

 

Though I must say, I agree wholly. In retrospect it doesn't actually make much sense that Christians would focus on Natural Selection when the entire cosmos proves it wasn't instantly created by a loving, omnipotent God who now cares mostly about abortion and TEH GHEY AGENDA. Both groups of nuts are idiots, but it'd become far more glaringly apparent to the rest of the country if fundies DID go on a rampage about the Earth being the center of the universe.

[Melancholy]

I guess I would still be considered a Christian, maybe. I think there is a higher power out there; though if it is the God the Christians think, I'm not sure. I think Jesus was at one point a good teacher, but people just kept twisting and messing up his words so that today we have no idea what he actually said. I know there are mistakes in the Bible; I know that things were put in and purposely left out over thousands of years. That is why I don't think that a lot of religions today have any idea what they are talking about. They could easily all be wrong- and most likely are. I don't think I believe what they teach. You know what? I know I don't. I just said, "I think" because I'm afraid...

 

I'm lonely, unsure of myself, and anxious. I have a natural inclination towards it. I feel empty and I don't like myself. I still believe there is a God out there because I guess... It makes me feel better to think that maybe the world is being watched after by someone. It's nice to think that there is a higher power out there who really gives a damn about us poor humans. I just started waking up to reality, and I am a young person. It's hard letting go of the beliefs you were raised with and it's sad. Maybe I will grow more sure of myself and be able to let go. Maybe not; but that is the reason why.

 

I think there are a lot of Christians out there who hang on for the same reasons I did for all these years. Not because of the faith issues, but because they are sad and afraid!

[mcdaddy]

I guess I would still be considered a Christian, maybe. I think there is a higher power out there; though if it is the God the Christians think, I'm not sure. I think Jesus was at one point a good teacher, but people just kept twisting and messing up his words so that today we have no idea what he actually said. I know there are mistakes in the Bible; I know that things were put in and purposely left out over thousands of years. That is why I don't think that a lot of religions today have any idea what they are talking about. They could easily all be wrong- and most likely are. I don't think I believe what they teach. You know what? I know I don't. I just said, "I think" because I'm afraid...

 

I'm lonely, unsure of myself, and anxious. I have a natural inclination towards it. I feel empty and I don't like myself. I still believe there is a God out there because I guess... It makes me feel better to think that maybe the world is being watched after by someone. It's nice to think that there is a higher power out there who really gives a damn about us poor humans. I just started waking up to reality, and I am a young person. It's hard letting go of the beliefs you were raised with and it's sad. Maybe I will grow more sure of myself and be able to let go. Maybe not; but that is the reason why.

 

I think there are a lot of Christians out there who hang on for the same reasons I did for all these years. Not because of the faith issues, but because they are sad and afraid!

 

Reality is, life is cold.

 

 

But it is also warm.

 

 

That's why we have to be there for each other. We're all in this boat together.

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

Those links took my breath away with their ignorance. Oh, those poor people.

 

Apparently Christians really should be focusing their efforts on "Copernicanism," not on "Darwinism."

 

Though I must say, I agree wholly. In retrospect it doesn't actually make much sense that Christians would focus on Natural Selection when the entire cosmos proves it wasn't instantly created by a loving, omnipotent God who now cares mostly about abortion and TEH GHEY AGENDA. Both groups of nuts are idiots, but it'd become far more glaringly apparent to the rest of the country if fundies DID go on a rampage about the Earth being the center of the universe.

 

Ummm... Sorry, but this could be you, me and The Stranger, all over again Akheia.

 

I just can't bring myself to see that these are "poor people" and that their ignorance comes thru being victims. Perhaps we'll just have to gracefully agree to disagree... again?

 

Anyway, my take is that (exactly like The Stranger) these folks are consciously, wilfully and deliberately refusing to accept what's right in front of them. It's Denialism. It's the stubborns-unto-death. The ignorance of these people is ignorance by choice, not be default. They're just as intelligent, well-read and eloquent as we are. They've just got some kind of 'internal' wall which they could dismantle if they were willing to - but they're not willing to.

And that's and end of it.

 

Here's another site to appall and perplex you. http://www.commonsen...scientists.html

 

This one's created and maintained by SCIENTISTS who, thru their unshakeable Christian faith, are forced to deny 'unacceptable' orthodox science, in favor of their own unorthodox, Bible-based 'science'. These people are not victims, Akheia. They are the perpetrators. That's why they've created a website to promote their, so-called truth. They hold the words of the Bible above any experimental results they get in their labs. Doing that is not inadvertant ignorance - it is deliberate and defiant stone-wall denial.

 

What they have to say about the Standard Model of particle physics... http://www.commonsen..._particles.html

...is interesting, especially in the light of the Higgs Boson data, announced just 48 hours ago.

 

You see Akheia, what they believe is the truth, not what their experiments tell them.

 

That remind you of anyone?

 

Sorry to put this so bluntly. I hope you aren't offended.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[Akheia]

I'm not offended. I don't think someone like OC wakes up though and thinks "Oh wow, how can I totally be a dead weight on the advancement of the human race today?" Though I err on the side of gentleness, I don't excuse the self-perpetuated ignorance of people like OrdinaryClay and Stranger. That said, I think when you get as far as making a website full of blinking text about the conspiracy of Jews against geocentrism you're heading well into "emotionally disturbed" territory. I don't villify the emotionally disturbed. People like that need treatment, not coddling or, for that matter, demonizing.

 

I still think it's a fucking hoot that in a way these geocentrists are right: why fundies concentrate on natural selection and a Young Earth and not geocentrism is actually a damn fine question. What do you think?

[♦ ficino ♦]

I think the fundies stand to lose or gain more on the issue of evolution than they do on geocentrism, because by the TOE the story of Adam and Eve looks very problematic at best. And then the doctrine of original sin, as BAA as pointed out, also is threatened. And if that goes, thinks the fundy, who will pay money to churches if they don't need to be saved? - except to liberal churches, which are so wishy washy they'll wither anyway?

[Akheia]

There's a very optimistic part of me that hopes desperately that church leaders aren't in it purely for the money, but I remember very well how very good at acting they can be. If their living depends upon church plates being passed, then it's got to be a consideration at some level.

 

It's telling that from a survey I read about, Christianity is hemorrhaging members--but the proportions of Christians are changing very quickly. Though the religion as a whole is losing people, more people who remain are identifying as evangelicals/fundies. So yes, the liberal denoms are withering and fast. In a way this is very good news because it means that the religion's shortcomings will be that much more apparent that much faster. As it stands, the Catholics who remain are having to some very fancy flying indeed to justify why they're still supporting child molesters and accomplices to murder (you guys did hear about that Roman girl who was kidnapped in the 80s whose disappearance has been linked to the Vatican, right? Apparently the Romans are really pissed about it, with good reason). And the fundies' ranks are constantly dealing with breakouts of scandal. People aren't that stupid. I mean, they're stupid, but not THAT stupid. Already most people know that "family values" is shorthand for "closeted, self-hating gay." I'm just wondering when they'll figure out that "Bible-fearing" is shorthand for "feckless hypocrite."

[mcdaddy]

It's nice to see the beginning stages of the undoing of xianity.....but dammit, I wanna be around for the knock out blow.

 

Hopefully soon....not bc all xians are bad people, but just so all of us here on this rock can come together under an umbrella of understanding about this "reality" with as few dividing walls as possible.

 

I HAVE A DREAM

[♦ ficino ♦]

yes, I was being sarcastic and don't believe that every fundy is motivated by desire for monetary gain. Lots of folks in the pews waste their money on the cult. I can't speak for the leaders... I had not heard about the Roman girl because at this point I don't follow sex scandals about clergy much anymore. But I agree that Christianity is becoming proportionally more fundy. I think that's happending in Judaism and Islam as well, though I don't have statistics at hand. Simply by breeding, for example, Hasidic Jews and their ilk are outpacing Reformed/secular Jews.

[★ Citsonga ★]

Stranger, I see you've moved and may not read this for a while, but I do want to respond to one thing. I suspect that eventually you'll be back and see it.

 

the Christian doctrine on once saved always saved is not biblicak.

 

Really? Do you not remember last year when I posted two things (either in this thread or the other one we were debating in) that I had written when I was a Christian and you praised them and said I could've been a pastor? One of those was on the very subject of eternal security, showing that it is biblical. Why are you now saying it's not biblical when you so enthusiastically supported that piece? Here it is again, to refresh your memory:

 

Can A Christian Lose His/Her Salvation?

 

The Bible tells us that we were saved by grace, through faith (Ephesians 2:8). We were buried with Christ through baptism into death in order that we may "live a new life" (Romans 6:4) and that "the body of sin might be done away with" (Romans 6:6). And, since "our old self was crucified with Him" (Romans 6:6), we have been "freed from sin" (Romans 6:7). "Since Christ was raised from the dead, He cannot die again" (Romans 6:9), and we are to, "in the same way," count ourselves "dead to sin but alive to God" (Romans 6:11), and to not let sin master us, because we are "not under law, but under grace" (Romans 6:14). Christ came to "set us free" from the law (Galatians 5:1).

 

We also read that no one who continues in a lifestyle of sin has "either seen Him or known Him" (1 John 3:6). "We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?" (Romans 6:2) "No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him" (1 John 3:9). These are clearly referring to a deliberate continuance in sin. Of course, this is not to say that Christians never commit any sin, for even the Apostle Paul had struggles with sin. It is significant to note, though, that the sins he struggled with were not things he wanted to do, but rather were things he actually hated (Romans 7:15). Why did he hate sin? It was his desire to please God, for he was "crucified with Christ" and he no longer lived, but Christ lived in him (Galatians 2:20).

 

Though we struggle with sin, we are clothed in Christ's righteousness (1 Corinthians 1:30) and thus are "made perfect forever" (Hebrews 10:14). This righteousness is "by faith from first to last" (Romans 1:17), meaning that it begins and finishes with faith rather than works. Since Jesus is the "Author and Perfecter of our faith" (Hebrews 12:2), it is God who makes us "stand firm in Christ" (2 Corinthians 1:21). The believer is marked in Christ with the "seal" (denoting ownership) of the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 1:13), who is a "deposit guaranteeing our inheritance" (Ephesians 1:14).

 

Jesus Himself said, "Whoever hears My Word and believes Him who sent Me has eternal life and will not be condemned" (John 5:24). As such, eternal life is something that the true believer presently possesses, and one cannot come to an end of something that is eternal. Jesus also said that those to whom He has given eternal life "shall never perish" (John 10:28). He said that His sheep listen to His voice and follow Him, and He knows those who belong to Him (John 10:27). Indeed, nothing in all creation can separate true Christians from "the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 8:38-39).

 

Scripture tells us that "those God foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of His Son" (Romans 8:29), and those who were predestined He also called, justified and glorified (Romans 8:30). Therefore, we can say with confidence that the believer is a "new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!" (2 Corinthians 5:17) Paul goes as far as to say that we who are born again are already "seated with [Christ] in the heavenly realms" (Ephesians 2:6).

 

Being this new creation clothed in Christ's righteousness, our faith requires action because "faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead" (James 2:17). If it really is faith, won't it be evidenced in actions? "Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit" (Matthew 7:17-18). A true, regenerated believer is the only one who can really, from the heart, bear good (Godly) fruit. In fact, our whole purpose is "to do good works" (Ephesians 2:10) and to "bear fruit to God" (Romans 7:4).

 

Although some say they know someone who used to be a Christian but now isn't, the Bible tells us that "if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us" (1 John 2:19). There is a clear distinction between those who "shrink back and are destroyed" and those who "believe and are saved" (Hebrews 10:39). If we do not "hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first," then we have not "come to share in Christ" (Hebrews 3:14).

 

Jesus plainly said, "First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean" (Matthew 23:26). And again, the Bible tells us, "No one who continues to sin has either seen Him or known Him" (1 John 3:6), speaking of a deliberate (defiant) continuance in sin.

 

The problem with modern churchianity is that we seem to have forgotten the true meaning of repentance. We seem to think that quoting a "sinner's prayer" and promising to do better will save us. However, our focus is on us praying and on us doing, but not really on what Christ has already done. But Jesus said, "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him" (John 6:44).

 

When we truly begin to grasp just who Christ is -- God the Son (Hebrews 1:8) -- and the fact that any righteous act of ours is but "filthy rags" to God (Isaiah 64:6), we begin to realize that we are nothing! The "poor in spirit" are the ones to whom is given "the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:3). We must realize how spiritually bankrupt we are before God (Luke 18:10-14). How can we try to stand on anything we've done, even if it is reciting a "sinner's prayer"? Without Christ's sacrifice, such a prayer wouldn't do anything!

 

Indeed, the Bible makes it abundantly clear that God knows who are His, and they are forever His. As the picture Jesus gave of a Shepherd and His sheep (John 10:11), so is the body of Christ. The sheep are totally dependent on the Shepherd (John 10:5), and no one can snatch them out of His hand (John 10:28). When one wanders, He goes and finds it (Matthew 18:12)! And when He finds it, it will follow Him (John 10:27).

 

In the one who is truly born again, "God's seed remains; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.... Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God" (1 John 3:9-10). "Everyone born of God overcomes the world" (1 John 5:4). God's grace doesn't run out, but it will change us.

 

Of course, there are a few passages that Christians use to counter these, but they typically have contextual explanations that fit rather well in the doctrine of eternal security (or Perseverance of the Saints). If any do not, then we have another contradiction within the already inconsistent Bible.

 

At any rate, I hope your move went well and that you're doing fine. Take care....

[Akheia]

So much for god yesterday, today, and tomorrow, huh? Even Stranger can't keep his doctrine straight.

[★ Citsonga ★]

I guess I would still be considered a Christian, maybe. I think there is a higher power out there; though if it is the God the Christians think, I'm not sure. I think Jesus was at one point a good teacher, but people just kept twisting and messing up his words so that today we have no idea what he actually said. I know there are mistakes in the Bible; I know that things were put in and purposely left out over thousands of years. That is why I don't think that a lot of religions today have any idea what they are talking about. They could easily all be wrong- and most likely are. I don't think I believe what they teach. You know what? I know I don't. I just said, "I think" because I'm afraid...

 

I'm lonely, unsure of myself, and anxious. I have a natural inclination towards it. I feel empty and I don't like myself. I still believe there is a God out there because I guess... It makes me feel better to think that maybe the world is being watched after by someone. It's nice to think that there is a higher power out there who really gives a damn about us poor humans. I just started waking up to reality, and I am a young person. It's hard letting go of the beliefs you were raised with and it's sad. Maybe I will grow more sure of myself and be able to let go. Maybe not; but that is the reason why.

 

I think there are a lot of Christians out there who hang on for the same reasons I did for all these years. Not because of the faith issues, but because they are sad and afraid!

 

Thanks for sharing your struggles. I'm sorry that you feel lonely, empty and unsure of yourself. I went through such a stage when I was in my deconversion process. It got better for me, and hopefully it will for you too.

 

What I would say is that you should not dislike yourself. Try to get past the self-loathing that religion pushes on us and realize that you have the power to be a good, decent, worthy person. In fact, I would suspect that you probably are already a decent person, so don't degrade yourself, but rest assured that you're fine. Again, you are a fine person. Just try to make the most out of this life you have and be the best person you can be, and that's all.

 

Religion fosters fear, and fear is a convenient mechanism to keep members in bondage, but there really is nothing to fear, because religion is man-made. From what you've said, it seems that you recognize that religion is man-made, so just take that to its logical conclusion and realize that the the fear it fosters is also man-made and no more rooted in truth than the religion it comes from.

 

I wish you well in your future endeavors. Enjoy the journey ahead of you.

[JayL]

It's nice to see the beginning stages of the undoing of xianity.....but dammit, I wanna be around for the knock out blow.

 

Hopefully soon....not bc all xians are bad people, but just so all of us here on this rock can come together under an umbrella of understanding about this "reality" with as few dividing walls as possible.

 

I HAVE A DREAM

 

 

Why? Do you have a problem with diversity??

[JayL]

Religion fosters fear, and fear is a convenient mechanism to keep members in bondage, but there really is nothing to fear, because religion is man-made. From what you've said, it seems that you recognize that religion is man-made, so just take that to its logical conclusion and realize that the the fear it fosters is also man-made and no more rooted in truth than the religion it comes from.

 

 

 

Perfect Love Casts Out Fear

 

by Joyce Meyer

Do you suffer from fear or insecurity? What about the fear of lack? Are you worried that God won't come through for you?

I have been there too.

I have been literally worried sick about so many things, including my past, my future, my finances, what people thought about me. And because I couldn't get my mind off of my problems, I found myself in a place of utter torment.

 

 

But we do not have to fear that God doesn't love us or that He won't come through for us in our time of need. We need to learn to accept the reality of His love for us, so that our fears do not control us.

First John 4:18 says that perfect love casts out fear. If you're afraid of facing a person or a situation in your life, God's love can help you put your fears to rest.

[JayL]

I think the fundies stand to lose or gain more on the issue of evolution than they do on geocentrism, because by the TOE the story of Adam and Eve looks very problematic at best. And then the doctrine of original sin, as BAA as pointed out, also is threatened. And if that goes, thinks the fundy, who will pay money to churches if they don't need to be saved? - except to liberal churches, which are so wishy washy they'll wither anyway?

 

 

I agree TOE is the main enemy. It forsters atheism and the view of a meaningless universe. TOE's main imperative is 'Survive!'. But for what - when the whole thing is a pretty meaningless accident.

[Guest Valk0010]

I think the fundies stand to lose or gain more on the issue of evolution than they do on geocentrism, because by the TOE the story of Adam and Eve looks very problematic at best. And then the doctrine of original sin, as BAA as pointed out, also is threatened. And if that goes, thinks the fundy, who will pay money to churches if they don't need to be saved? - except to liberal churches, which are so wishy washy they'll wither anyway?

 

 

I agree TOE is the main enemy. It forsters atheism and the view of a meaningless universe. TOE's main imperative is 'Survive!'. But for what - when the whole thing is a pretty meaningless accident.

Whats wrong with a meaningless universe? I don't actually ask this naively, I tend to think that the universe is just a brute fact and we are just making the best of it. But why is that wrong?

[Guest Valk0010]

I think the fundies stand to lose or gain more on the issue of evolution than they do on geocentrism, because by the TOE the story of Adam and Eve looks very problematic at best. And then the doctrine of original sin, as BAA as pointed out, also is threatened. And if that goes, thinks the fundy, who will pay money to churches if they don't need to be saved? - except to liberal churches, which are so wishy washy they'll wither anyway?

 

 

I agree TOE is the main enemy. It forsters atheism and the view of a meaningless universe. TOE's main imperative is 'Survive!'. But for what - when the whole thing is a pretty meaningless accident.

And do the words "arguement from consequence fallacy" have any meaning to you?

[JayL]

I think the fundies stand to lose or gain more on the issue of evolution than they do on geocentrism, because by the TOE the story of Adam and Eve looks very problematic at best. And then the doctrine of original sin, as BAA as pointed out, also is threatened. And if that goes, thinks the fundy, who will pay money to churches if they don't need to be saved? - except to liberal churches, which are so wishy washy they'll wither anyway?

 

 

I agree TOE is the main enemy. It forsters atheism and the view of a meaningless universe. TOE's main imperative is 'Survive!'. But for what - when the whole thing is a pretty meaningless accident.

And do the words "arguement from consequence fallacy" have any meaning to you?

 

I thought I was using reductio ad absurdum or something like that...