Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Did Your View And Treatment Of Other People Change After Leaving Christianity?


OrdinaryClay

Recommended Posts

I thought the question was pretty clear. Sure I tried to word it so the information of interest was obtained, but this is no different then a teacher wording an exam question so you can find out of the student understands what you think they understand. There is nothing nefarious with doing so.

The word is "than"...sorry that has been bugging the hell out of me.

 

Anyway, we are not your students so when you phrase things in a way for us to answer that reflects your biased understanding, you are simply being deceitful. Don't come here thinking you are teaching us something. If you want to discuss your understanding, fine, but do it as an equal, not a superior.

 

God, you rub me the wrong way...

I wonder where one draws the line between pedantic (annoying) and deceitful.

 

His style, however, is very Socratic. However, instead of gently coaching his "pupils" through complicated issues with small steps, he is making generalizations and biased assumptions that are disputed. That kind of throws a wrench into the works when the premises are refuted and/or unacceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people who are genuine and honest ask questions to gain understanding, out of interest, genuine interest, not as a setup. 'teacher' - as if we have no fucking clue about anything. just blow me. also this swipe at ourboros about 'did you leave for rational reasons' is pretty godfucking arrogant too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the question was pretty clear. Sure I tried to word it so the information of interest was obtained, but this is no different then a teacher wording an exam question so you can find out of the student understands what you think they understand. There is nothing nefarious with doing so.

The word is "than"...sorry that has been bugging the hell out of me.

Thanks.

 

Anyway, we are not your students ... Don't come here thinking you are teaching us something. If you want to discuss your understanding, fine, but do it as an equal, not a superior.

I'm definitely not superior to anyone here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm definitely not superior to anyone here.

Then where are those to whom you are superior?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the question was pretty clear. Sure I tried to word it so the information of interest was obtained, but this is no different then a teacher wording an exam question so you can find out of the student understands what you think they understand. There is nothing nefarious with doing so.

The word is "than"...sorry that has been bugging the hell out of me.

Thanks.

 

Anyway, we are not your students ... Don't come here thinking you are teaching us something. If you want to discuss your understanding, fine, but do it as an equal, not a superior.

I'm definitely not superior to anyone here.

 

Obviously. Clearly. Unquestionably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For goodness sakes. The point of interest is the change or lack of change. I'm well aware of the hackneyed attacks against Christianity. Whether someone genuinely changes tells you something about their professed experience.

 

Do you think this can be isolated in us? People are influenced by MANY things. Biochemical changes, secular influences, traumatic experiences, etc. Unless someone is in total "Christian" (hard to define, another problem) isolation, you can't reasonable make sweeping conclusions from this question.

 

My Christian experience was poor, confusing and stressful. I grew into a much better person when I grew up, after forsaking all Christian groups and most Christian company. I matured! Due to a variety of influences.

 

Please consider that you are making gross oversimplifications about human growth. People with no Christianity (my best friend) mature into better people as they age.

Phanta

Aren't you making a gross over simplification in your last statement about your friend?

 

Yes. "Some people with no..." etc.

 

You avoided an opportunity to examine the strengths and weaknesses in your thought process on this subject by pointing at mine. Why?

 

Phanta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why?

Because people tend to be more expressive (and stupid) online than in real life.

 

 

Is so what does that say about their Christian experience.

Nothing but an experience. Just like other experiences. Some experiences can be good, some bad. I had good and bad experiences with Christianity, and with atheism, and with Jews, and with ...

 

I didn't leave because of bad experience with other Christians.

 

If you don't mind me asking, did you leave for rational reasons (studied your way out) or did you leave because of the way other Christians treated you? You said before you were a Christian for 30 yrs, no? That is a long time. Why 30yrs? Why not 10 or something.

I left out of emotional reasons. Yes. I can admit that. But part was also rational. No Christian treated me bad.

 

For some years I thought it was rational to believe, but the arguments failed, so I trusted my gut, my feelings. I felt it was right. I felt "faith." I believed because I believed.

 

But after 30 years of Christian belief, my family was in a very difficult situation, and I needed the "footsteps in the sand" experience. But Jesus never picked me up. Emotionally I was breaking down. But nothing could soothe me. And I realized one day that God never answered in any shape or form, not even in my soul, not even emotionally. So when my faith was crumbling, I prayed for more faith, but my faith kept on crumbling, and I prayed for more, but one day I just realized it all was just self-delusion and imaginary things. It's a form of self-hypnotism. I wanted it to be true, therefore I made myself belief it was true.

 

When the reasons are gone, and the feelings are gone, and the faith is dissipating, only God's miracle to restore a person exists... but when God doesn't do anything? It only means three things: God doesn't want to, God can't, or God doesn't exist. The two first options didn't match the teaching from the Bible I've heard over the years, so I could only conclude that all the teaching I've heard must be wrong, and that kind of God I've learned about did not exist.

 

And why 30? Why not 40? Or 500 years? Why give up at 30, or perhaps it was 31, or 33 1/2, I can't remember exactly. Did I write down the date? Nope. Did I write down the date when I became a Christian at 7? Not really, but I remember it was spring time, and fall when I lost my faith.

 

 

I thought the question was pretty clear. Sure I tried to word it so the information of interest was obtained, but this is no different then a teacher wording an exam question so you can find out of the student understands what you think they understand. There is nothing nefarious with doing so.

If a person was an atheist and then turned Christian, and he was still a good person or a better person, it must mean that atheism made such a good impression on him to make him a good person.

 

But if a person was an atheist and then turned Christian, but now he's a worse person, it must mean that he didn't understand atheism.

 

(That's your argument, but Christian/atheist switched places.)

 

 

Clearly, change involves a before and after in both cases. I don't understand your point.

That's the problem. You have a hard time stepping out of your religious shoes.

 

You have a category mismatch there. Your first possibility involves the person, and the second a general organization. I would suggest that to make a proper point you should stick with a category through your point - organization or individual.

I made the same argument that you made, but I switched atheism and Christianity. So if my argument was wrong, then your argument was wrong.

 

For you to make a proper point. Analyze your own arguments first instead of criticizing others of using the exact same fallacy.

 

You remove your fallacy first. Then I'll remove mine.

 

 

Yes, exactly, you can flip it around, and as I said it says something about the persons experience prior to the change.

Meaning that atheists who became Christians did so only because they really didn't understand atheism, in other words, they were never true atheists.

 

The fallacy was yours. I'm just building on it.

 

Let me summarize your argument:

 

A person X was first Christian, then he became an atheist.

 

1) If person X was happy (or good person) as Christian, and now he is not, that means Christianity was a good experience (he was a true Christian, but he wants to live in sin and reject God even though he knows better).

 

2) If person X was happy then, and he still is, that means that the goodness of Christianity carried over to his atheism (he was a true Christian and now he's just deceived by the devil, and Jesus can bring him back).

 

3) If person X was sad (or bad) as a Christian, and now he is happy, that means that his experience with Christianity was flawed (i.e. he never was a true Christian).

 

Does that match your argument?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For goodness sakes. The point of interest is the change or lack of change. I'm well aware of the hackneyed attacks against Christianity. Whether someone genuinely changes tells you something about their professed experience.

 

I already answered you. I did not change. What answer are you wanting? Obviously you have not read what you wanted to read or you would not be pressing for answers that don't exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the question was pretty clear. Sure I tried to word it so the information of interest was obtained, but this is no different then a teacher wording an exam question so you can find out of the student understands what you think they understand. There is nothing nefarious with doing so.

The word is "than"...sorry that has been bugging the hell out of me.

 

Anyway, we are not your students so when you phrase things in a way for us to answer that reflects your biased understanding, you are simply being deceitful. Don't come here thinking you are teaching us something. If you want to discuss your understanding, fine, but do it as an equal, not a superior.

 

God, you rub me the wrong way...

I wonder where one draws the line between pedantic (annoying) and deceitful.

 

His style, however, is very Socratic. However, instead of gently coaching his "pupils" through complicated issues with small steps, he is making generalizations and biased assumptions that are disputed. That kind of throws a wrench into the works when the premises are refuted and/or unacceptable.

 

It's also the difference between understanding us as we understand ourselves, and considering that view vs. taking our testimony and warping it to fit his preconceived view.

 

This, people, is why I left. What use is this communication? Does it not rip you to pieces with pain of invalidation, with anger at being used, or with frustration born of the futility of reconciliation? What good can possibly come of this exchange? No one learns anything about anyone else, just get harder and harder to the Other. There is a chasm between us.

 

*sad*

 

Phanta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people who are genuine and honest ask questions to gain understanding, out of interest, genuine interest, not as a setup.

 

After reading the thread, I decided against answering the question. There are many valid responses and explanations. I couldn't add much of anything to them. But what you say here is what really stopped me from responding. If FeetOfClay asked out of interest and with a desire to understand, I would reciprocate that interest and desire to step into his shoes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't mind me asking, did you leave for rational reasons (studied your way out) or did you leave because of the way other Christians treated you? You said before you were a Christian for 30 yrs, no? That is a long time. Why 30yrs? Why not 10 or something.

I left out of emotional reasons. Yes. I can admit that. But part was also rational. No Christian treated me bad.

 

No Christian treated me bad, either, in any normal way. But they did offer insufficient copes and answers as I struggled to survive a difficult childhood, and invalidated with scripture what did work for me. Christianity did not work for my pain. The concepts exacerbated my suffering. It does not make sense to persist in that which does not work.

 

This is all very upsetting. Why are people like this?

 

Phanta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Christian treated me bad, either, in any normal way. But they did offer insufficient copes and answers as I struggled to survive a difficult childhood, and invalidated with scripture what did work for me. Christianity did not work for my pain. The concepts exacerbated my suffering. It does not make sense to persist in that which does not work.

Correct.

 

I did meet some bad Christians, but not until I joined this website did I really encounter asshole Christians. Of some reason, the most rotten fruits of Jesus are online. I wonder if they're such jerks in real life?

 

Unfortunately, my experience with the online Christians discourage me greatly from ever even consider that religion again. They've done a huge disservice to their own faith. So if it's all true, and God one day put me in his court, who will get the worst punishment? Those who deceived the children or the children who didn't know better and got scared by the incessant idiocy and empathetical display?

 

This is all very upsetting. Why are people like this?

Do you mean me, or him? :)

 

(Good to see you again Phanta. :wave:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is all very upsetting. Why are people like this?

 

Phanta

 

Some people feel the desire to prove their reasoning is correct and that they possess the Truth. They are the type that would send you to the gallows without flinching. Empathy takes a back seat to correct beliefs. That's why there is hell. One stern "I told you so".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is all very upsetting. Why are people like this?

 

Phanta

 

Some people feel the desire to prove their reasoning is correct and that they possess the Truth. They are the type that would send you to the gallows without flinching. Empathy takes a back seat to correct beliefs. That's why there is hell. One stern "I told you so".

For me, empathy was the death of Christianity. I could see that there were sincere people of other religions, and I could no longer simply write them off as "misguided." I saw good people who didn't believe, and I knew they didn't deserve anything eternal in the way of punishment.

 

When I finally gained empathy for all of the civilizatins crushed by the biblical invasion of Canaan, I saw the genocide and slaughter for what it was, and I could never again believe that there was anything of God that wasn't made by man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Empathy takes a back seat to correct beliefs. That's why there is hell. One stern "I told you so".

 

Empathy takes courage, because in a true attitude of empathy, we risk being changed.

 

Nevertheless, I feel dirty and used now. A good reminder that when someone asks for personal testimony, it's best to ask, "What for?", and weigh the answer carefully before deciding whether or not to answer and be associated with their goal. I regret that I contributed to this exercise.

 

Phanta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you mean me, or him? :)

 

(Good to see you again Phanta. :wave:)

 

You don't invalidate me, ever. It's good to see you too. :)

 

Phanta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Empathy takes a back seat to correct beliefs. That's why there is hell. One stern "I told you so".

 

Empathy takes courage, because in a true attitude of empathy, we risk being changed.

 

Nevertheless, I feel dirty and used now. A good reminder that when someone asks for personal testimony, it's best to ask, "What for?", and weigh the answer carefully before deciding whether or not to answer and be associated with their goal. I regret that I contributed to this exercise.

 

Phanta

 

I like your comment on empathy!

I was lucky to read to thread late. All the comments revealed the intent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, empathy was the death of Christianity. I could see that there were sincere people of other religions, and I could no longer simply write them off as "misguided." I saw good people who didn't believe, and I knew they didn't deserve anything eternal in the way of punishment.

 

When I finally gained empathy for all of the civilizatins crushed by the biblical invasion of Canaan, I saw the genocide and slaughter for what it was, and I could never again believe that there was anything of God that wasn't made by man.

 

Yes, ditto. If Christians were told to walk in the nonbeliever's sandals rather than shaking the dust off of their own, I would have had a better chance of remaining Christian. Well, that and a few other things... :HaHa:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suppose, a person answered "no", does this mean their current treatment of people was reflective of when they were a Christian. Is so what does that say about their Christian experience. Now suppose a person answered "yes", then we have two possibilities. Their current treatment of people is worse then before or their current treatment of people is better then before. Let's suppose it is the former. Then this implies a goodness stemming from Christianity. Now let's suppose it is the latter. Then this says something about their Christian experience.

 

If someone's behavior remains more or less the same whether they are xian or not, that would indicate to me that xianity has no bearing on the moral goodness of a given individual.

 

If someone's behavior got worse when they dropped xianity, it could mean that xianity was helping them be a better person. If someone's behavior got better when they dropped xianity, it could mean that xianity actually made them a worse person. Or, in both cases, it could be that xianity had nothing to do with their behavior, and it changed for some other reason.

 

If you're going to say that better behavior comes from the goodness of xianity, you cannot turn around and say that worse behavior comes from a person's "Christian experience" instead of a badness stemming from xianity. To do so is inconsistent and stacks the deck in favor of your belief system where no favor is warranted.

 

Mat 7:20

(20) Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

 

Indeed. So are you dishonest and manipulative because you are a xian, or were you always this way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did your view and treatment of other people change after leaving Christianity? Do you notice any material change in how you acted toward or treated them after leaving?

 

Yes, I have evolved into a better person, and treat others better. I am far more tolerant than I ever have been. I give exponentially more to charity efforts I feel are valid and effective. I offer more of my time and expertise to those who need it.

 

All of that change in me, has happened since I decided there was no god, and christianity is a farce.

 

I grew up in a missionary family and believed for 32 years. I can honestly say that I am a better person after leaving faith.

 

I realize now that it is me and how I relate to others, what I do is my decision and has an impact. I can no longer say a prayer and somehow fell that is sufficient. I must now act on my own.

 

<rant>

I saw somewhere in this thread (I think it was Shyone talking about empathy) talk about how seeing empathy in others from other religions is part of what led to their de-conversion. The same is true for me. The two best people that I know (morally, ethically, etc...) are not christians. One is a wayward Hindu, and the other an atheist. So out of all the people I have known for 32 years deep in the faith, surrounded my missionaries and the like, and the two best people I know don't have anything to do with christianity.

 

I honestly feel that christianity is an excuse to be a lazy ass sub-standard human.

</rant>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. I was more free to make higher quality relationships, because I know longer look at strangers and think of ways to proselytize to them, and I no longer try to turn conversations into witnessing attempts. I'm a better friend now, because I can be trusted to listen to your problems without trying to fix them with my religious beliefs. I am now able to just listen. This is great on both ends. They don't have to deal with me being a douche, and I don't have to focus on changing them, leaving me more energy to devote to loving them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can put it another way, Clay, besides in terms of my abhorrence for the Crucifixion, but it says a LOT of about Xianity, as well as the person. Many Xians have no concern for the earth or other animals. They don't even believe they are animals. From an early age, I had this thing about harming others, so much so that my mother, when I was a preschooler, could not read Bambi to me, because I would scream and cry, "It was the humans who did it." When she was born again for the first time in my life, she had little tolerance after that for my compassion for life, much less other lifeforms, saying it was not Xian, we aren't animals, and animals were put on this earth for us to use and consume. There is a problem though, Xian treatment of others, including other animals, is not much different than the barbarism of the Crucifixion. It is cruel, inhumane, and many other things. Life on this planet is meaningless to most Xians, which I find to be horrible. I always have and I refused to change my views and feelings about other animals, much less the violence at the very heart of Xianity. I am just sorry Xians can't see what I see in their very basic and common doctrine, much less in how some Xians treat others when they impose their views. Life is more important then killing some human (or other animal) as a sacrifice to the god(s) and should be treated with respect, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I have become much more kind and compassionate after leaving. Before when I was a fundamentalist, people just needed to measure up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suppose, a person answered "no", does this mean their current treatment of people was reflective of when they were a Christian. Is so what does that say about their Christian experience. Now suppose a person answered "yes", then we have two possibilities. Their current treatment of people is worse then before or their current treatment of people is better then before. Let's suppose it is the former. Then this implies a goodness stemming from Christianity. Now let's suppose it is the latter. Then this says something about their Christian experience.

Mat 7:20

(20) Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

No it does not. Morals are a reflection of character, not religion. Anyone can be a moral person without ever experiencing Christianity or believing in a god. Morality is what you make of it. Culture and personal experience determines one's morality, not religion, certainly not Christianity. If a belief in god or the religion made one a moral person then where are all the pedophiles coming from within the church? Adultery is rampant. All the sins you guys preach against, you also do to each other. What is the moral benefit of the religion? None.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Moderator

I am going to jump in here and hope I'm with the main question. I find my tolerance level for people has gone down. When I was a christian, I did everything in my power to treat the obnoxious, bullies, intimidators, abusers, etc.... with as much love as I could muster in my heart.. We were told to pray for these people and to forgive... blah, blah, blah.

 

I find now that I still treat everyone with as much love and smiles as I can, but the minute you try to intimidate, bully, or not have respect for me......you will be out of my life very quickly. I can walk away now, where before, I would continue to pretend to like the person.

 

In the last 6 months, I got rid of all the bitches in my clientèle and my job is sooo much more enjoyable! Oh dear - I've become a bitch myself! :twitch:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.