So Um... Why Don't The "devout" Xians Stick It Out?

[DarthOkkata]

Perhaps, but you were being condescending while complaining about someone being condescending. I viewed that as a little hypocritical.

 

The rest of the post was not necessarily a direct response to that particular issue. A bit of overkill in a topic like this doesn't really hurt anyone and I felt it was somewhat related, and at least a bit relative in relation to the general topic at hand.

 

I do that sometimes, and I'm not necessarily directing an entire post at any one person, even if parts of a post might be directed towards a particular person or response to a particular quote.

 

Sometimes you just go with the flow of things on a message board.

[doomguarder]

It seems like every time I lurk about there is a thread with the same topic. I would say each has their own individual reasons.

 

Some of the more interesting are:

Those already questioning their faith and looking at the arguments (there have been a few deconversions among this group on this very board...I will not name names, but I have been lurking a while. Funny thing is this group can be the most vehement opponent until the very moment he/she knows they have gone to the other side of the 'either/or' of xtian religious belief),

 

Some are looking for an fight (the fun kind , they stick around long enough for a real dust up. This often reverts to name calling when none of the board members bend over for the lawd. If they make it through more than one thread the likelihood they fall into the first category rises significantly.),

 

Others are testing their skills at debate and/or conversion (seminary students, young ministers. Normally start off with a 'logical' proof for gawd and then ignore all posts that point out the error of their ways. Rarely make it past 10 posts, guess they lose their taste for it),

 

The 'Hit and Run' just dropin off a load for the lawd (not even worth replying to but have some of the most hysterical arguments, makes ya think, 'wow, your kidding right? someone thinks this is real'),

 

All of these and the many many more categories represented in the archives and boards of this site make the rare liberal, open minded, ready to talk in a calm non-condemning manner about religion/faith or any other topic, xtian a golden find indeed.

 

There could also be a few who are here (or lurk and read) for the same reason I do, curiosity about people with experiences that differ from mine. I am a person who is always trying to understand the human condition and there is much I don't know. Looking for common ground happens on both sides of the fence.

 

Doom

[rayskidude]

"Aside from the brutality, all I can think of is the intellectual level Ex-Xians have and Xians can't compete because they don't have that level of thinking, but I might be wrong. Myself, I love a challenge, but I noticed the more intellectual response from Ex-Xians go unresponded to by Xians who come here and attempt evangelism.

 

I have noticed when Xians are challenged they beg-off, cop-out, or leave. Those Xians that are still here, and I know there still are some, might want to respond to this. Of course, Ex-Xians have their own ideas too, just as I do and stated above.

 

We only see Evangelicals. We have yet to read anyone say they are not. I know there are some Ex-Episcopalians here, even though they are a minority, who would love to debate someone on their level, but all too often many Xians who do come here are Evangelicals, like many of us are ex-Evangelicals or combination of ex-liberal Xians and ex-Evangelical, wanting to evangelize and are too chicken to actually debate us and maybe learn something. Personally, I'm waiting for someone to prove me wrong and not run out or cop out when challenged. All I can think of is that they are not intellectually competent enough or are too chicken, probably because they fear losing their "faith" if they accepted a challenge."

 

Allow me to respond:

 

I think the Christians that get on these threads would have the desire to defend the Christian Faith, so that people will see the truth and turn to Christ for salvation. And engaging in polemics is part of Christian history, as many Early Church Fathers wrote tracts in defense of Christianity and against other religions.

 

Another desire is to turn folks from spiritual deadness & irreligion to Jesus Christ as LORD & Savior. God's word certainly encourages such activities, and He instructs His followers to maintain Christian ethics during the discussions:

Jud 1:22 And have mercy on those who doubt;

Jud 1:23 save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh.

 

2Ti 2:24 And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil,

2Ti 2:25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth,

2Ti 2:26 and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.

 

Once they get involved in some of these discussions, some Christains may be taken aback or become uncomfortable with the level of vitriole and blasphemy. They may consider that they're simply casting spiritual pearls before swine and otherwise engaging in fruitless discussions:

 

Mat 7:6 "Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.

2Ti 2:16 But avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness,

2Ti 2:17 and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus,

2Ti 2:23 Have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels.

 

Tit 3:9 But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless.

Tit 3:10 As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him,

Tit 3:11 knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

 

And they may consider that we've come to a time when this type of outreach to be completely ineffective;

 

2Ti 4:3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions,

2Ti 4:4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.

 

I agree with you that many Christians do not think on the analytical level that many Ex-ers here do. Most Christians study Scripture to learn about God's nature, character, purposes, etc - and hopefully how to be more Christ-like in their daily lives. As such, their study is primarily devotional and not in Christian Apologetics, or Systematic Theology, or Biblical theology. Therefore, they may see themselves as academically insufficient for such discussions.

 

But I believe that Christians must engage in these discussions, that the Bible & Christianity are from God, and are internally consistent, and are the only hope for eternal life - but they also pose some difficulties and seeming inconsistencies that Christians are responsible to think through and defend to those outside the Faith;

 

1Ti 1:3 ... that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine,

1Ti 1:4 nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith.

1Ti 1:5 The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

1Ti 1:6 Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion,

1Ti 1:7 desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions.

 

Notice also that Paul spends most of I Corinthians 15 defending the doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus Christ and His followers.

 

But I also think that as a believer, whenever I post something - there are several, if not a dozen, responses. And then I feel an obligation to answer each one - which can be very time consuming. Now - I don't blame anyone for this fact - it is the nature of what we're doing. Everyone has the right and desire to be part of the discussion - I do the very same thing whenever I'm in on a discussion as part of a majority. This is just an acknowledgment that being involved in several conversations simultaneously can be a challenge.

 

However, like yourself, I welcome challenges.

 

Finally re: liberal Christians, since I am an Evangelical, I cannot say with any certainty - but IMHO, from conversations that I have had with various folks, they don't consider Christianity & the Bible exclusively as God's truth - they think that there are many paths to God - not as Jesus claimed when He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one can come to the Father but by Me."

 

So I would think that they believe anyone doing the best they can with the spiritual light they've received will receive salvation.

[RationalOkie]

I think the Christians that get on these threads would have the desire to defend the Christian Faith

 

Well why don't your march your happy ass over to the Science vs. Religion section and take on my challenge of explaining your theory alternate to Evolution? It's called 'Don't Believe In Evolution?....give Us Your Theory Christians '

 

By all means, defend away….

[Mriana]

Allow me to respond:

 

I think the Christians that get on these threads would have the desire to defend the Christian Faith, so that people will see the truth and turn to Christ for salvation. And engaging in polemics is part of Christian history, as many Early Church Fathers wrote tracts in defense of Christianity and against other religions.

 

Well that would explain why they eventually ignore me, on so many levels.

 

Another desire is to turn folks from spiritual deadness & irreligion to Jesus Christ as LORD & Savior.

 

How do they know that people have spiritual deadness? I have not seen anyone actually talk to each other and share thoughts. All too often I see one attack the other and the other attacks back. Sometimes, even though Dawkins calls it "sexed up atheism", pantheism, for example, can be very spiritual, almost to the point of being like a religion and in some cases, one is a Pagan with very strong spiritualism. Maybe if the Xians allowed others to share their views, without any attempts to convert, maybe they would learn something. Over my lifetime, I have learned that if one does not choose a belief system (or lack of one) for themselves, it does not mean anything and it is not as valued to them. What a person chooses has to have meaning to them so they can claim it as their own or one does suffer "spiritual deadness", even if they are in Christianity. Sometimes Xianity is the worst thing for a person.

 

I agree with you that many Christians do not think on the analytical level that many Ex-ers here do. Most Christians study Scripture to learn about God's nature, character, purposes, etc - and hopefully how to be more Christ-like in their daily lives. As such, their study is primarily devotional and not in Christian Apologetics, or Systematic Theology, or Biblical theology. Therefore, they may see themselves as academically insufficient for such discussions.

 

All too often it appears they believe their god concept is the only one- the right one. However, I know from experience, not all Xians have the same god concept, much less worship the same concept- ie Pat Robinson v. John Shelby Spong, just to give one example. I think some Xians get frustrated with me because I can argue from both an atheist POV and the POV such as Spong's "non-theism". They are already arguing the Fundie POV and I really don't care to argue that for that, but there are times I wish someone who had a POV much like an Episcopalian, pop on here, because the debate would be at a higher intellectual level (no insult is meant- it's like high school v college, in debating most Fundies, while liberal Xians, in many cases, is like college v. college level)

 

But I believe that Christians must engage in these discussions, that the Bible & Christianity are from God, and are internally consistent, and are the only hope for eternal life - but they also pose some difficulties and seeming inconsistencies that Christians are responsible to think through and defend to those outside the Faith;

 

Oh, Spong/Episcopal hate: The Bible and Xianity are inspired and created/written by humans. The Bible is not the inerrant word of God and God is nothing but a human concept. Here again is an example of different Xian thinking and POV.

 

Notice also that Paul spends most of I Corinthians 15 defending the doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus Christ and His followers.

 

Yes, but it was not an actual literal resurrection, but a spiritual resurrection "Christ rose into the meaning of God" according to Spong. Again, it depends on one's POV and which Xian POV they prefer. I don't have to argue a non-believer's position, just because I no longer buy into the Anglican theology. I can show both POVs (non-theism and liberal/progressive Xianity) to the best of my ability. However, I cannot buy into a guilt producing, mentally abusive theology, which Fundamentalism all too often is.

 

But I also think that as a believer, whenever I post something - there are several, if not a dozen, responses. And then I feel an obligation to answer each one - which can be very time consuming. Now - I don't blame anyone for this fact - it is the nature of what we're doing. Everyone has the right and desire to be part of the discussion - I do the very same thing whenever I'm in on a discussion as part of a majority. This is just an acknowledgment that being involved in several conversations simultaneously can be a challenge.

 

Yes, esp when I am personally addressed, I feel the same way- I feel I must respond, when I rather just live and let live instead of arguing with someone.

 

However, like yourself, I welcome challenges.

 

Finally re: liberal Christians, since I am an Evangelical, I cannot say with any certainty - but IMHO, from conversations that I have had with various folks, they don't consider Christianity & the Bible exclusively as God's truth - they think that there are many paths to God - not as Jesus claimed when He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one can come to the Father but by Me."

 

Yes, this is true. Liberal/Progressive Xians do believe differently. Before I left home (left my mother's home at 19) I was exposed to Evangelicalism, and hated it with a passion, BUT after I left home, I fulfilled my relatives requirement, though they did not like my choice, via the Episcopal Church. It was better, but after a while, after much study and research in theology, religion, and mythology, I found I could not believe- it wasn't a choice, it just was and I had no god concept of my own. However, it was in that church I was free to explore and learn, in order to figure out what I do believe. I was not tied down intellectually. I agree wholeheartedly that there are many paths and none of them are necessarily wrong. IMO, they become wrong when they become abusive. For all I care, one could be Buddhist, but as long as there is no abuse to oneself or others, or even said belief imposed on others, I am fine to allow the person to believe what they want. I have big issues about imposing one's belief on others, instead of allowing others to find their own path- BUT this view I have, I will admit comes out of my liberal Xian path as well as a study of religious history, in which religion was imposed clear to the point, in some cases, to genocide. There is a problem with a theology that allows that (and sadly the OT does have at least one story where God even approved such slaughter), but keep in mind, humans wrote the Bible.

 

Also, there are many liberal Xians who don't believe in hell. The idea of hell was a creation of the Church to control people. It does not exist (keep in mind, I'm pointing out a Liberal Xian view). It makes no sense, I realize that, but then again, IMO, Evangelical Fundamentalism makes even less sense. After a while, when one can poke so many holes into doctrine and alike, as well as hurl (vomit) at much the violence involved with Abrahamic religions, it becomes even less and less believable.

 

So I would think that they believe anyone doing the best they can with the spiritual light they've received will receive salvation.

 

I don't know about salvation. I don't even know what that is (don't even try to give a definition, please, because that does not help). I will however, leave you with my saying (as an agnostic), I don't know what God is, IF there is one, but I know what it is not and it is not any human concept or any religion created by humans. For all I know, god is nothing more than chemistry, which is not a god at all, but very much part of nature, the universe. Chemistry, be it in nature or in the human brain, makes more sense to me than some anthropomorphic thinking created by humans, in which case, no religious text is needed at all. Any god belief can be explained by neurology. Such neurological explanations do not make said belief null and void, it just explains it.

[Snakefoot]

I don't even know what that is (don't even try to give a definition, please, because that does not help). I will however, leave you with my saying (as an agnostic), I don't know what God is, IF there is one, but I know what it is not and it is not any human concept or any religion created by humans. For all I know, god is nothing more than chemistry, which is not a god at all, but very much part of nature, the universe. Chemistry, be it in nature or in the human brain, makes more sense to me than some anthropomorphic thinking created by humans, in which case, no religious text is needed at all. Any god belief can be explained by neurology. Such neurological explanations do not make said belief null and void, it just explains it.

 

:goodpost:

[Deva]

I think the Christians that get on these threads would have the desire to defend the Christian Faith, so that people will see the truth and turn to Christ for salvation. And engaging in polemics is part of Christian history, as many Early Church Fathers wrote tracts in defense of Christianity and against other religions.

 

Another desire is to turn folks from spiritual deadness & irreligion to Jesus Christ as LORD & Savior. God's word certainly encourages such activities, and He instructs His followers to maintain Christian ethics during the discussions:

<snipping useless Bible references>

 

It is as useless as any activity you could ever engage in. Then again, I suppose it is your time to waste.

 

Your assumption that we are all "spiritually dead" is really quite laughable. Define "spiritual" if you please. If it has anything to do with splitting off parts of the world and labeling them "spiritual" while other parts are "unspiritual" then yes, we are quite beyond that point.

 

If spiritually dead means we have discarded a Platonic view of some perfect being that's out there and going to save us then, yes, we happily plead guilty to being "spiritually dead". What a childish language game you have going on. Please save your pity for someone who might care.

[Ouroboros]

Your assumption that we are all "spiritually dead" is really quite laughable. Define "spiritual" if you please. If it has anything to do with splitting off parts of the world and labeling them "spiritual" while other parts are "unspiritual" then yes, we are quite beyond that point.

The spirit was never alive (as you know). And it's dead in them too, but they have created a religious belief system to give themselves an illusion of some "living" spirit. How sad is that...

 

If spiritually dead means we have discarded a Platonic view of some perfect being that's out there and going to save us then, ...

(Just a side note: I don't think Plato saw The Ultimate Good as a "being" necessarily, nor that it was going to save us. IIRC.)

[Mriana]

I don't even know what that is (don't even try to give a definition, please, because that does not help). I will however, leave you with my saying (as an agnostic), I don't know what God is, IF there is one, but I know what it is not and it is not any human concept or any religion created by humans. For all I know, god is nothing more than chemistry, which is not a god at all, but very much part of nature, the universe. Chemistry, be it in nature or in the human brain, makes more sense to me than some anthropomorphic thinking created by humans, in which case, no religious text is needed at all. Any god belief can be explained by neurology. Such neurological explanations do not make said belief null and void, it just explains it.

 

:goodpost:

 

Thank you.

[rayskidude]

How do they know that people have spiritual deadness? I have not seen anyone actually talk to each other and share thoughts. All too often I see one attack the other and the other attacks back. pantheism, for example, can be very spiritual, almost to the point of being like a religion and in some cases, one is a Pagan with very strong spiritualism."

 

I agree that non-Christians can be very spiritual; but in Christianity the concept of 'dead' = 'separation' >> as an example; when we die, our spiritual soul separates from our physical body. SO we are dead. But note that the word dead does mean non-existence or ceasing to exist, it means separation. Because our soul lives on forever.

 

To be spiritually dead means that a person is separated from God, specifically the God of the Bible. And this separation is caused by our sin - both our sin nature and our sins committed.

 

Eph 2:1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins

Eph 2:2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience--

Eph 2:3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.

 

1Ti 5:5 She who is truly a widow, left all alone, has set her hope on God and continues in supplications and prayers night and day,

1Ti 5:6 but she who is self-indulgent is dead even while she lives.

 

Isa 59:1 Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save, or his ear dull, that it cannot hear;

Isa 59:2 but your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you so that he does not hear.

 

Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden,

Gen 2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

 

Note that Adam & Eve went on to live for hundreds of years - but their sin had separated them from God, as they were cast out of the Garden. The Hebrew says, literally; "you shall die, die" Meaning "dying, you shall surely die." So they died spiritually that day, and began the process of physical death.

 

"Maybe if the Xians allowed others to share their views, without any attempts to convert, maybe they would learn something. Over my lifetime, I have learned that if one does not choose a belief system (or lack of one) for themselves, it does not mean anything and it is not as valued to them. What a person chooses has to have meaning to them so they can claim it as their own or one does suffer "spiritual deadness", even if they are in Christianity. All too often it appears they believe their god concept is the only one- the right one."

 

We as Christians believe the Bible to be God's word - which promises salvation/rescue/deliverance from Satan & sin & self and gives the gift of eternal, spiritual life ONLY through faith in the Person & work of Jesus Christ.

 

Eph 2:4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us,

Eph 2:5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved--

Eph 2:6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

 

Col 2:13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses,

Col 2:14 by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.

 

Joh 5:24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

 

"Yes, but it was not an actual literal resurrection, but a spiritual resurrection "Christ rose into the meaning of God" according to Spong."

 

I would respectfully disagree - look at the accounts of Christ's appearing to His disciples in Luke 24 and John 21, Jesus did some very specific things to show that His resurrection was physical. He had risen from the dead with His Glorified heavenly body. See Philippians 3:20,21

 

"I was exposed to Evangelicalism, and hated it with a passion"

 

Why??

 

"I agree wholeheartedly that there are many paths and none of them are necessarily wrong."

 

But so many religions are exclusive - so they cannot all be right. Though they can all have some level of truth - they cannot all lead to the same place. They disagree with one another.

 

"I have big issues about imposing one's belief on others, instead of allowing others to find their own path"

 

But what if others are wrong or misguided? Shouldn't we have a sense of responsibility & love towards others to point out error and keep them from heartache?

 

"The idea of hell was a creation of the Church to control people. It does not exist"

 

Jesus Christ would disagree with this statement.

 

"I don't know what God is, IF there is one, but I know what it is not and it is not any human concept or any religion created by humans."

 

I agree wholeheartedly, man has invented many false gods to worship. But the God of the Bible has chosen to reveal Himself to us, and He has condescended to our language to explain Himself to us - His Divine Nature, His Person, His purposes.

 

"For all I know, god is nothing more than chemistry, which is not a god at all, but very much part of nature, the universe."

 

This is not a god worthy of worship, adoration, devotion, or living for >> and there is no gravitas, no significance, no meaning, nothing worthy of our lives in this concept of god. But if you're OK with it - that is the right of everyone - to choose their own path, wherever it leads.

[Snakefoot]

(babble crap quotes and stuff snipped)

 

Please knock off alll the scripture crapola and just discuss the topic. Scripture of any origin is meaningless to most of us here. We are far more interested in the ideas of the individual rather than the aggregation of the thoughts of bronze age goat and camel herders.

[Mriana]

I agree that non-Christians can be very spiritual; but in Christianity the concept of 'dead' = 'separation' >> as an example; when we die, our spiritual soul separates from our physical body. SO we are dead. But note that the word dead does mean non-existence or ceasing to exist, it means separation. Because our soul lives on forever.

 

To be spiritually dead means that a person is separated from God, specifically the God of the Bible. And this separation is caused by our sin - both our sin nature and our sins committed.

 

Excuse me for saying this, but that sounds not only illogical, but insane.

 

We as Christians believe the Bible to be God's word - which promises salvation/rescue/deliverance from Satan & sin & self and gives the gift of eternal, spiritual life ONLY through faith in the Person & work of Jesus Christ.

 

What good is it, if it is not freely chosen? If one does not claim it (any religion) for themselves, then it is meaningless. To force or impose a belief on someone is completely wrong.

 

"Yes, but it was not an actual literal resurrection, but a spiritual resurrection "Christ rose into the meaning of God" according to Spong."

 

I would respectfully disagree - look at the accounts of Christ's appearing to His disciples in Luke 24 and John 21, Jesus did some very specific things to show that His resurrection was physical. He had risen from the dead with His Glorified heavenly body. See Philippians 3:20,21

 

You can disagree, but that is one, probably more, but who has documented it, Episcopal minister's (Spong) opinion. Thus we are getting to the "why" you asked below.

 

"I was exposed to Evangelicalism, and hated it with a passion"

 

Why??

 

I assume you do not mean, "Why were you exposed to Evangelicalism", but why I hated it and do hate it with a passion. Stone Age barbaric mentality- to put it simply. That and I never believed, not even as a child, in a hell, a literal devil, or alike. The hellfire damnation crap is pure mental abuse and I wanted to run out of the church when my minister great uncle went into one of his hellfire damnation altar calls. It was dreadful. Not only that, too many people die from such teachings- murder (AKA Dr. Tiller), suicide (my grandfather killed himself by refusing psychological help, stating the drs were keeping him alive longer than God wanted, so he stopped taking his heart meds), my mother and aunt, esp since they lost their mother two years ago (natural causes at 94), are under the delusion that "this is not their home" and their mental and physical health is deteriorating greatly. My mother even attempted suicide twice just before my grandmother died. They believe they will literally see their mommy and daddy again.

 

Not only that, they treated my atheist great uncle like dirt. There is so much cruelty that goes on in Fundamngelicalism that it is not funny and they justify via the Bible and their God. I could go on forever and ever on the list, but I blogged about one thing and that was long in and of itself. To be specific on each one of those, I would end up giving you pages and pages of details, but in short, Evangelicalism is nothing but an abusive mind control game that wrongly instills fear and guilt in people. You can not only read books by Valerie Tarico and Marlene Winell on this, but John Shelby Spong too- Sins of Scripture and Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism.

 

Read him and it might tell you why I was an Episcopalian for about 13 years after I left home. It was for me a door out and I'm glad of the experience, even though religion in general was not a good thing for me. Evangelical Fundamentalism was the worst thing that could have ever happen to society and if you think this sums up my opinion about it, think again. I could fill this whole thread with answers to your "why" and I'm sure many here would assist me too.

 

(Note: I can't address all your statements in one post. Something about too many "quote blocks".)

[Mriana]

The rest of my response to Rayskidude:

 

But so many religions are exclusive - so they cannot all be right. Though they can all have some level of truth - they cannot all lead to the same place. They disagree with one another.

 

Oh dear! Think about what you just said. IF you were born in a predominately Islamic country you would probably be Muslim and say the exact same thing of Xians. Sorry, but that is tired reasoning that is simply a fallacy.

 

But what if others are wrong or misguided? Shouldn't we have a sense of responsibility & love towards others to point out error and keep them from heartache?

 

Wrong? Misguided? How can you be so sure? Because your dogma tells you so? Your holy book? Your minister? Your church? Sorry, but see the remark about Islam. Same scenario, different words. In fact, you have no responsibility to impose religious beliefs on anyone. To do so is abusive, whether you see it or not. You may believe there will be heartache, but the truth is, that is all a delusion. Not only that, Pascal's Wager has been debunked many times, even though you just asked it in a different way.

 

"The idea of hell was a creation of the Church to control people. It does not exist"

 

Jesus Christ would disagree with this statement.

 

JC never existed, as least not as told in the Bible, because IF he ever existed, he is so buried in myth, that the real Jesus can't be found. So how do you know? How can you be so sure said man would disagree? Quite frankly, it is nothing but a garbage dump- a perpetually burning garbage dump, called Gehenna.

 

"I don't know what God is, IF there is one, but I know what it is not and it is not any human concept or any religion created by humans."

 

I agree wholeheartedly, man has invented many false gods to worship. But the God of the Bible has chosen to reveal Himself to us, and He has condescended to our language to explain Himself to us - His Divine Nature, His Person, His purposes.

 

No God has revealed himself in any book. The Bible was written and inspired by Man- Humans. There is not divine being in the sky throwing down lightening bolts of written scripture- never was.

 

"For all I know, god is nothing more than chemistry, which is not a god at all, but very much part of nature, the universe."

 

This is not a god worthy of worship, adoration, devotion, or living for >> and there is no gravitas, no significance, no meaning, nothing worthy of our lives in this concept of god. But if you're OK with it - that is the right of everyone - to choose their own path, wherever it leads.

 

How do you know it is not a god worthy of worship etc? Isn't that a judgment call? BTW, your Moses worshiped a Volcano deity. There are many different Elohim in the OT that it is not funny and it isn't just Ba'al. To you, who have been taught a fairy tale, the laws of physics might not have any significance, but next time you gravity causes you to fall and bump your head, you'll think significance. There is nothing wrong with accepting science and knowing much of religious psychology is purely neurological. So before you criticize something that is not yours, one could cause your tiny god to be insignificant and meaningless with science alone- just as the volcano gods before it. I'm not sure if you comprehend what spiritual really is or even if you have studied the neurology behind it even. I can even reduce you god to simple protons, electrons, and neutrons, brain chemistry by the time I'm done and show you just how much is in your head. So I would not go criticizing other people's concepts, before you even have a comprehension of your own. Your concept is simply a human concept that is purely all in your head.

[Deva]

I agree that non-Christians can be very spiritual;

 

Again, what is your actual definition of the word "spiritual"? What does that actually mean?

 

There is no such thing as a "spiritual soul".

 

To be spiritually dead means that a person is separated from God, specifically the God of the Bible. And this separation is caused by our sin - both our sin nature and our sins committed.

 

Demonstrate by proof other than the Bible that any of this is true. Your continuing to quote this useless work of fiction isn't proof. There is no such thing as "sin". A person is dead when the body ceases to function and so you don't have a sense of self anymore, that is all. There is no such thing as a soul.

[Deva]

(Just a side note: I don't think Plato saw The Ultimate Good as a "being" necessarily, nor that it was going to save us. IIRC.)

 

I stand corrected, but you know that a lot of this baloney started with Plato.

[Deva]

I agree wholeheartedly, man has invented many false gods to worship. But the God of the Bible has chosen to reveal Himself to us, and He has condescended to our language to explain Himself to us - His Divine Nature, His Person, His purposes.

 

He did a piss poor job of revealing himself.

 

"For all I know, god is nothing more than chemistry, which is not a god at all, but very much part of nature, the universe."

 

This is not a god worthy of worship, adoration, devotion, or living for >> and there is no gravitas, no significance, no meaning, nothing worthy of our lives in this concept of god. But if you're OK with it - that is the right of everyone - to choose their own path, wherever it leads.

 

In your opinion only. Many of us do find inspiration in being a part of the whole. Your God, on the other hand, is not whole or complete - he requires worship and human belief.

 

"Wherever it leads" - what is that supposed to mean?

[Mriana]

To be spiritually dead means that a person is separated from God, specifically the God of the Bible. And this separation is caused by our sin - both our sin nature and our sins committed.

 

Demonstrate by proof other than the Bible that any of this is true. Your continuing to quote this useless work of fiction isn't proof. There is no such thing as "sin". A person is dead when the body ceases to function and so you don't have a sense of self anymore, that is all. There is no such thing as a soul.

 

He can't demonstrate his book is true, just as he can't prove the rest of what you said is not true. It would be far easier to show there is no soul than that there is one and when the body is dead the person ceases too.

[Ouroboros]

..., but you know that a lot of this baloney started with Plato.

Sorry to hear that. I have a different opinion.

 

I think Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were brilliant, however not correct in all their contemplations, but a lot of what they said have value. IMHO.

 

And I think that most of the baloney came from religious people mixing in their thoughts and beliefs into philosophy.

[Deva]

..., but you know that a lot of this baloney started with Plato.

Sorry to hear that. I have a different opinion.

 

I think Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were brilliant, however not correct in all their contemplations, but a lot of what they said have value. IMHO.

 

And I think that most of the baloney came from religious people mixing in their thoughts and beliefs into philosophy.

 

Look Hans, difference of opinion, can we still be friends? You know I you.

I actually do like Socrates.

[gypsy79]

They will actually cycle through emotions, intentionally, until they find one that is effective. It's some sort of natural ability inherent in most women to do this convincingly. It doesn't impress me any longer.

 

I called my mother on it once when she was bawling and raining tears about my loss of faith. As soon as I pointed it out, she calmed down, went quiet, and glared at me in irritation for a few moments. I've got her stone pegged on it now. I can tell the difference between genuine emotion and the 'turning of the cycle' in all the women in my family, including my mother and sister. My sister's husband still hasn't figured it out yet.

 

This is called emotional blackmail, and men do it as well. Your socially acceptable expressions of it in this culture include varying degrees of anger/rage and guilt manipulation, all with a heavy dose of persecution complex. In the end, emotional blackmail is a human thing. So long as it is pegged a women's problem, the problem isn't truly addressed.

 

Phanta

 

You are 100% correct, Phanta.

[Ouroboros]

Look Hans, difference of opinion, can we still be friends? You know I you.

Of course! I heart u 2!

 

I actually do like Socrates.

Especially his talent to challenge every preconceived and established notion in existence. (An iconoclast, just like us) No wonder they had to kill him.

[rayskidude]

He did a piss poor job of revealing himself."

 

When you see the world - with all the beauty & harmony in the balance of nature, with the abundant diversity of life forms, with all the joy in human love - both brotherly & romantic, with all the amazing things that Mankind has accomplished - what do you see as the source for all this? Random processes of chance and time?

 

"This is not a god worthy of worship, adoration, devotion, or living for >> and there is no gravitas, no significance, no meaning, nothing worthy of our lives in this concept of god. But if you're OK with it - that is the right of everyone - to choose their own path, wherever it leads.

 

In your opinion only. Many of us do find inspiration in being a part of the whole. Your God, on the other hand, is not whole or complete - he requires worship and human belief."

 

God does not require worship or human belief; as Paul said to the Athenians:

Act 17:23 For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, 'To the unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you.

Act 17:24 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man,

Act 17:25 nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything.

 

God doesn't require anything from us - He graciously created us that we might have a life of inexpressible joy of enjoying His Person & His Creation forever.

 

"Wherever it leads" - what is that supposed to mean?"

 

Where does your religion ultimately take you? Anywhere beyond the grave? Do you see yourself in the after-life, or do you find signiifcance in donating your molecules to whatever life forms feed on your remains?

[centauri]

...God does not require worship or human belief; as Paul said to the Athenians:

Act 17:23 For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, 'To the unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you.

Act 17:24 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man,

Act 17:25 nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything.

 

God doesn't require anything from us - He graciously created us that we might have a life of inexpressible joy of enjoying His Person & His Creation forever.

A person doesn't get to have that "joy" unless they believe, so contrary to your claim, belief is required.

John 3:36

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

[Ouroboros]

When you see the world - with all the beauty & harmony in the balance of nature, with the abundant diversity of life forms, with all the joy in human love - both brotherly & romantic, with all the amazing things that Mankind has accomplished - what do you see as the source for all this? Random processes of chance and time?

I see an amazing nature, and the universe as the source. Existence, Nature (as a whole), All and everything, as being the source of it. And it's amazing. Isn't amazing that time and a process led to what we are and where we are? I think it is. It doesn't get more amazing by inventing a fantasy to explain it. Accepting it, and seeing it for what it is, gives me a "spiritual" experience.

 

A wonderful piece of rock doesn't become more amazing because I believe a Rock-Gnome made it.

[Antlerman]

Aside from the brutality, all I can think of is the intellectual level Ex-Xians have and Xians can't compete because they don't have that level of thinking, but I might be wrong. Myself, I love a challenge, but I noticed the more intellectual response from Ex-Xians go unresponded to by Xians who come here and attempt evangelism.

 

I have noticed when Xians are challenged they beg-off, cop-out, or leave. Those Xians that are still here, and I know there still are some, might want to respond to this. Of course, Ex-Xians have their own ideas too, just as I do and stated above.

 

Now here's something else interesting... We only see Evangelicals. We have yet to read anyone say they are not. I know there are some Ex-Episcopalians here, even though they are a minority, who would love to debate someone on their level, but all too often many Xians who do come here are Evangelicals, like many of us are ex-Evangelicals or combination of ex-liberal Xians and ex-Evangelical, wanting to evangelize and are too chicken to actually debate us and maybe learn something. Personally, I'm waiting for someone to prove me wrong and not run out or cop out when challenged. All I can think of is that they are not intellectually competent enough or are too chicken, probably because they fear losing their "faith" if they accepted a challenge.

I'm just catching up a bit on things tonight with a busy work schedule and caught this topic. Very good topic.

 

There's lots of reasons for this. It's one of the dynamics of this site. There have been the more "enlightened" Christians who come through here. But the environment is for the most part a community of those who have come out of the more rabid forms of religious communities, looking to shed that "skin of evil" from ourselves. It's not a single view out there, and those who come from a view of "faith" that's dissimilar to the tragically familiar Conservative American Evangelical flavor of things, often find a disconnect of language, of perceptions on which to communicate. Discussion fails.

 

So normally what you see is those who somehow feel driven to justify their faith against the opposite view and try to "win" the debate. There's a lot of motive to propel them to argue their point. It's all driven by needing to feel vindicated in their choices. Powerful motivations. Yet I see it as weakness.

 

Yes, what you will see a lot of the times when the standard-fair rote responses your typical greenhorn-apologist has memorized from the handbook of quasi-intellectuals from the Evangelical 'think-tanks' is met with well rounded responses, is either more desperate attempts of logic-leaps to make things fit for them, or emotional appeals, or "washing their hands of us", shaking the dust of their sandals, thus satisfying their emotional drive for vindication. I've been around here for awhile.

 

Every now and then, good discussion can occur. I've experienced a few. And in the end, there's mutual respect. The best that can be hoped for. Not "I beat them".