Why am I a Christian?

[rhuntermt]

Greetings from a newly registered member. The registration process included a prompt to identify the deity or deities to which I subscribe. I chose to defer my response to this, my first post here, in order to avoid as much stereotyping as possible (not to accuse any here unjustly).

 

This is a fascinating site, very well done, remarkably comprehensive. I greatly appreciate the candor and logic of those posting here. I particularly appreciated this expression in one member's post: "to many of us, losing faith was not a decision or conscious act, but a sudden experience and an undeliberate epiphany.'

 

I can relate, although in my case my faith/convictions were changed rather than entirely lost. My epiphany was like what so many of you have described: a sense of liberation, of discarding of incoherent, heavy baggage. Having had this experience, and having observed reactions here that parallel my own, I have no interest in persuading any of you who are satisfied with the conclusions you have reached to abandon those conclusions. It would be heinous of me to do so. I am however interested in dialoguing with members here about reasons against and for Christian faith, and if in the process of our dialogue some less satisfied lurkers find light either way, then good has come from it.

 

That said, after my epiphany I remained a Christian as defined by this statement of faith which admittedly may not meet the measure of Christianity generally: God in Christ saves people. This statement necessarily means that I believe that God exists, and that this God has done something important through an obscure Jewish rabbi from long ago whom I call Christ. All else in Christian creed involves speculation that I am pleased to engage in from time to time, but which is not essential to my faith.

 

Perhaps I should expand a bit for clarity, however. The "something important" I mention involves life. In particular, I am persuaded that God gave this rabbi God's power of life, to restore conscious life post-mortem, to everyone's actual (rather than mere potential) benefit. The how and why are again matters of speculation that I enjoy discussing, but that is getting beyond introductions here.

 

Texas Freethinker asked a very good question that I'm struggling to recall precisely - not sure I can back up to re-read it without losing this message. It was something along the lines of "Why do you think there is a God" or "Why do you believe in God". As best as I can articulate it at this moment, I have an overwhelming urge to life. I cannot fathom my consciousness or anyone else's simply expiring, and I long deeply for transformation so that your conscious existences and mine are perfected and united in such a way to no longer be subject to constraints of this time/space existence.

 

This may of course be a mere biochemical misfire prompted by environmental causes, but it neverthelss gives impulse to my belief. God, to my understanding, is this life urge and the life itself.

 

That is probably plenty for introductory purposes, but it may also help some here to better understand if like Chesterton I define my belef by some things I do not believe in. This may make our dialogue more productive. So, I do not believe in:

 

1. Hell, in the sense of a conscious place of torture, endless or otherwise

2. That God is wrathful toward life (including us)

3. That the obscure rabbi in question was God, rather than a particular manifestation of God

4. That the Bible is an inerrant/infallible source of truth

5. That other sources of other truth do not exist

6. That some end time, cataclysmic apocalypse is racing down upon us (unless we ourselves bring it about through WMDs, environmental destruction or other looney actions)

 

Hope to hear back.

 

RH

[Checkmate]

......................

That said, after my epiphany I remained a Christian as defined by this statement of faith which admittedly may not meet the measure of Christianity generally: God in Christ saves people.  This statement necessarily means that I believe that God exists, and that this God has done something important through an obscure Jewish rabbi from long ago whom I call Christ.  All else in Christian creed involves speculation that I am pleased to engage in from time to time, but which is not essential to my faith.

..........................

So, I do not believe in:

 

1.  Hell, in the sense of a conscious place of torture, endless or otherwise

2.  That God is wrathful toward life (including us)

3.  That the obscure rabbi in question was God, rather than a particular manifestation of God

4.  That the Bible is an inerrant/infallible source of truth

5.  That other sources of other truth do not exist

6.  That some end time, cataclysmic apocalypse is racing down upon us (unless we ourselves bring it about through WMDs, environmental destruction or other looney actions)

 

Hope to hear back.

 

RH

Greetings, RH. I quoted you here, JUST to make sure I've got it right.

 

You say you REMAINED a Christian after your epiphany, and yet you state that you don't believe what the bible teaches?

 

Doesn't sound like you're much of a Christian to me. No insult intended. Just stating a fact.

 

You can, of course, feel free to call yourself whatever you please. (I often refer to myself as the Queen of England!) But that doesn't make it so.

 

I just find it...puzzling? Confusing? Dishonest? To say you don't embrace what is considered nominal Christian beliefs, and yet you still call yourself "Christian"? I'm confused. Your UNBELIEF sounds precisely like ours.

[Totallyatpeace]

So, I do not believe in:

 

1.  Hell, in the sense of a conscious place of torture, endless or otherwise

2.  That God is wrathful toward life (including us)

3.  That the obscure rabbi in question was God, rather than a particular manifestation of God

4.  That the Bible is an inerrant/infallible source of truth

5.  That other sources of other truth do not exist

6.  That some end time, cataclysmic apocalypse is racing down upon us (unless we ourselves bring it about through WMDs, environmental destruction or other looney actions)

 

Hope to hear back.

 

RH

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

rhuntermt~

 

With you list of things you don't believe about Christianity, I'm just curious........

 

What reason do you have for still needing the Christian label?

 

Tap

[Kryten]

Welcome!

I think you're off to a pretty good start here since you've discarded the obvious errors. If I may repeat back what I heard, in different words, you say you believe because you cannot accept that there might be nothing more than this life. You feel there must be more than just "this life and then it's over". If you'll examine that thought a little closer, it is wishful thinking. I wish for eternal life also, but not with all the fundies. But wishing doesn't make it so.

I agree that people who become Christians can change for the better. I've seen it happen. Some people just need an authority to scare them into behaving. But I think joining the military would be just as good for them, plus they'd get paid and get benefits.

 

I would ask why Christianity? If you already know the bible is flawed and botched by men, then why try to find any deep spiritual meaning within its pages?? How can you determine which verses were included by men for selfish reasons-- to benefit themselves or the church? Why not just go all the way and admit that as a reference and life-guide, it is useless. If you want to believe in God, then why think He would use such a flawed and absurd book to sneak in His message? I would think He would go the opposite way and reveal His truth in a more nuetral and believable medium.

 

I may have more later. Glad to have you here. I hope you enjoy the show.

[Purple]

Greetings, RH. I quoted you here, JUST to make sure I've got it right.

 

You say you REMAINED a Christian after your epiphany, and yet you state that you don't believe what the bible teaches?

 

Doesn't sound like you're much of a Christian to me. No insult intended. Just stating a fact.

 

You can, of course, feel free to call yourself whatever you please. (I often refer to myself as the Queen of England!) But that doesn't make it so.

 

I just find it...puzzling? Confusing? Dishonest? To say you don't embrace what is considered nominal Christian beliefs, and yet you still call yourself "Christian"?  I'm confused. Your UNBELIEF sounds precisely like ours.

 

 

What does "Christian" mean, doesn't it mean christ like, or to follow christ? Seems to me all rhuntermt does differently then mainstream Christians is disagree with some of the bible. They stated they believe in a god, and that this god did something imporatant, including saving people, through a Rabbi we often refer to as Christ. That being the case I think they have as much right to the Christian lable as a Catholic considering that the vatican is now saying some of the bible ain't true.

[Skankboy]

Have to agree. Sounds more like a diest than anything.

 

Am I correct in understanding your only real underpinning for belief is the necessity that the ego survive death?

 

PS Welcome to the boards! Keep and open mind, don't be too much of a jerk (believe me we've got more than our share already!), you should do just fine here...

[mwc]

Are you sure you're not keeping the label just out of habit, or like I did, out of fear? All I knew was being a Christian. The thought of not being a Christian was unbearable and, near the end, I kept the label to prevent the final "crash." The thing is that crash never came. The crash turned out to be the pain of denial I was living in trying to remain a Christian when I couldn't justify it to myself any longer. I didn't feel alone and miserable like I thought an ex-Christian would but I felt truly relieved and happy for the first time in probably 30+ years. Christianity brought me a lot of "happiness" at my own expense. Giving up on that and becoming basically agnostic with deist leanings (it's to give up on the idea of a god) has been more satisfying in a way I can't describe.

 

If this isn't you I apologize but what you wrote seemed, in some ways, similar to what I went through on my way out. Either way, I like your version of xianity over the "real" version.

 

mwc

[Vixentrox]

Well, the Catholic Church just dumped a bunch of the bible....and still think themselves Xtians. I think even Amanda still thinks herself as one though her belives would be heresey in most mainstream sects.

[Ouroboros]

Welcome Rhuntermt,

 

Strange name you got there.

 

Anyway, it sounds like you're kind of going the Gnostic path, or maybe Universalist?

[rhuntermt]

Welcome Rhuntermt,

 

Strange name you got there.

 

Anyway, it sounds like you're kind of going the Gnostic path, or maybe Universalist?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Thank you for the welcome, HanSolo. I see this is an active forum (!) and since I'm time compressed I can only briefly reply to several/all messages First the moniker: I live in Montana (is that too specific for protocol here?), thus the mt, rest is, well, personal, going way back.

 

I don' know much about Gnostics, but do feel some kinship there based on what little I know - just nothing directed or intentional. Uism is the better guess - good radar, there.

 

Rob

[rhuntermt]

Well, the Catholic Church just dumped a bunch of the bible....and still think themselves Xtians.  I think even Amanda still thinks herself as one though her belives would be heresey in most mainstream sects.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Is it Vixentrox (I'm still learning to navigate here, but assume that is your ID above). Since Christ is central to my theology, I assume it is fairest to idenify myself as Christian. If anyone - Christian, ex-C or otherwise - wishes to identify me otherwise, I do not begrudge either their preference or practice.

 

RH

[rhuntermt]

Are you sure you're not keeping the label just out of habit, or like I did, out of fear?  All I knew was being a Christian.  The thought of not being a Christian was unbearable and, near the end, I kept the label to prevent the final "crash."  The thing is that crash never came.  The crash turned out to be the pain of denial I was living in trying to remain a Christian when I couldn't justify it to myself any longer.  I didn't feel alone and miserable like I thought an ex-Christian would but I felt truly relieved and happy for the first time in probably 30+ years.  Christianity brought me a lot of "happiness" at my own expense.  Giving up on that and becoming basically agnostic with deist leanings (it's to give up on the idea of a god) has been more satisfying in a way I can't describe.

 

    If this isn't you I apologize but what you wrote seemed, in some ways, similar to what I went through on my way out.  Either way, I like your version of xianity over the "real" version.

 

      mwc

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

MWC:

 

No need to apologize for anything - we probably share some experience in common, and may learn more about that as we go.

 

You ask whether I'm sure about keeping the C label out of habit or fear. My reply to Vixentrox suggests yet another motive, but either or both fear and habit could be involved. I am not a skilled self-diagnostician in the mater of motives, and about the only thing I'm sure of is that I'm not sure of anything - most (all?) of my life involves some element of uncertainty and faith in one thing or another.

 

I'm smiling and nodding my head in affirmation of the testimony you share here about the relief and happiness you've found from being truthful with yourself. Way to go!

 

Rob

[Asimov]

I don't like Christians who don't come here to debate.....they're no fun....

[rhuntermt]

Have to agree.  Sounds more like a diest than anything. 

 

Am I correct in understanding your only real underpinning for belief is the necessity that the ego survive death?

 

PS Welcome to the boards!  Keep and open mind, don't be too much of a jerk (believe me we've got more than our share already!), you should do just fine here...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Skankboy:

 

Thanks for the welcome and advice. And HanSolo thought my moniker was interesting? If by "real underpinning" you mean something aking to "primary impulse", and if in the context of "belief" you refer to deity, then we're on roughly the same page. "Ego" is a little Freudian for my taste, as it tends to imiss or at least underappreciate the desire for the union of all consciousness to which I referred (as an exC you may recall the Biblical teaching that "God will be all in all").

 

RH

[dario]

So, I do not believe in:

 

1. Hell, in the sense of a conscious place of torture, endless or otherwise

2. That God is wrathful toward life (including us)

3. That the obscure rabbi in question was God, rather than a particular manifestation of God

4. That the Bible is an inerrant/infallible source of truth

5. That other sources of other truth do not exist

6. That some end time, cataclysmic apocalypse is racing down upon us (unless we ourselves bring it about through WMDs, environmental destruction or other looney actions)

 

Hope to hear back.

 

RH

 

 

 

I was wondering, RH, why you don't believe in these things you listed above, when they are clearly represented in the bible, or at least some of them. If you call yourself a Christian, because you follow Christ, then why don't you believe in these things?

 

Dario

[rhuntermt]

Welcome! 

I think you're off to a pretty good start here since you've discarded the obvious errors.  If I may repeat back what I heard, in different words, you say you believe because you cannot accept that there might be nothing more than this life.  You feel there must be more than just "this life and then it's over".  If you'll examine that thought a little closer, it is wishful thinking.  I wish for eternal life also, but not with all the fundies.  But wishing doesn't make it so.

I agree that people who become Christians can change for the better.  I've seen it happen.  Some people just need an authority to scare them into behaving.  But I think joining the military would be just as good for them, plus they'd get paid and get benefits.

 

I would ask why Christianity?  If you already know the bible is flawed and botched by men, then why try to find any deep spiritual meaning within its pages??  How can you determine which verses were included by men for selfish reasons-- to benefit themselves or the church?  Why not just go all the way and admit that as a reference and life-guide, it is useless.  If you want to believe in God, then why think He would use such a flawed and absurd book to sneak in His message?  I would think He would go the opposite way and reveal His truth in a more nuetral and believable medium.

 

I may have more later.  Glad to have you here.  I hope you enjoy the show.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Kryten:

 

First your questions:

 

1. Why Christianity? The honest answer is heritage. Had I been born into an Islamic environment, I would likely be Muslim. And so on. I've been shaped to see the world, to approach information, through a number of lenses, of which Christianity is inevitably a prominent one.

 

2. Why bother with the Bible given its imperfections? How can I determine what is slefishly motivated therein? There are a myriad of ways to answer here, but I'll attempt just one. I'm imperfect, yet my wife bothers with me. She does not understand me completely, and probably has some misconceptions as well, but overall what we have works for both of us. My perspective on these not infallible "writings" is no more or less than what Paul said, whatever he actually meant: they are inspired and useful for learning - overall, they work. Including observing myself in the mirror of others' selfish writing, which brings me round to your question about parsing truth therein: I try to obseve and interact with it as we all do with any information, by applying reason. I'm not aware of a way to perfectly comprehend the world, so I do the best I can with what I've been given.

 

Second your conclusions about wishful thinking: I agree - my wishing for post-mortem life for you and me does no make it so. I haven't the power to deliver it, so I do not allocate any human capital to the attempt. Likewise, I'm not going to the batting cage today in the hope that each time I connect well it will translate into the Red Sox getting a hit tomorrow night in their playoff game. I wish for them to get hits, and I'll enjoy it if they do. But if they don't, well, not my problem.

I'm not surprised to hear that you wish for eternal life as well, btw. If my Uist belief about it proves correct, there won't be any fundies there, though all who are now fundies will be. :-)

 

RH

[rhuntermt]

rhuntermt~

 

With you list of things you don't believe about Christianity, I'm just curious........ 

 

What reason do you have for still needing the Christian label?

 

Tap

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Totallyatpeace:

 

Needing? That's a bit presumptive, isn't it? ;-) In any case, whether motivated by need, want or deference to others' preferences, I'm amenable to the Christian label and suspect the shoe fits because of the centrality of Christ in my belief.

 

RH

[BeccasStillSeeking]

So, I do not believe in:

 

1.  Hell, in the sense of a conscious place of torture, endless or otherwise

2.  That God is wrathful toward life (including us)

3.  That the obscure rabbi in question was God, rather than a particular manifestation of God

4.  That the Bible is an inerrant/infallible source of truth

5.  That other sources of other truth do not exist

6.  That some end time, cataclysmic apocalypse is racing down upon us (unless we ourselves bring it about through WMDs, environmental destruction or other looney actions)

 

Hope to hear back.

 

RH

I was wondering, RH, why you don't believe in these things you listed above, when they are clearly represented in the bible, or at least some of them. If you call yourself a Christian, because you follow Christ, then why don't you believe in these things?

 

Dario

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Perhaps he believes, like many do, that the bible isn't at all an accurate representation of Jesus's teachings, and is instead a self-contradictory mishmash of folk legends, people's inserted cultural mores, and Dark Ages-era propaganda?

 

Besides, why are you getting on him? He's still hanging on to Christianity, whereas we chucked it.

 

Oh yes, I forgot--a lot of Christians like to play "my Christianity's better than yours".

[rhuntermt]

Greetings, RH.  I quoted you here, JUST to make sure I've got it right.

 

You say you REMAINED a Christian after your epiphany, and yet you state that you don't believe what the bible teaches?

 

Doesn't sound like you're much of a Christian to me.  No insult intended.  Just stating a fact.

 

You can, of course, feel free to call yourself whatever you please.  (I often refer to myself as the Queen of England!)  But that doesn't make it so.

 

I just find it...puzzling?  Confusing?  Dishonest?  To say you don't embrace what is considered nominal Christian beliefs, and yet you still call yourself "Christian"?    I'm confused.  Your UNBELIEF sounds precisely like ours.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Mr. Grinch:

 

Greetings back at'cha. You state this in question form: "yet you state that you don't believe what the bible teaches?" You attribute a statement to me that I didn't make, but I understand your meaning. To answer, based on my reading of the Hebrew and Christian texts, the doctrinal perspectives I reject - what you call nominal Christian beliefs - are contradicted rather than supported by Biblical testimony given more than the most cursory reading. They may well be generally held Christian beliefs, so as you say my rejection may disqualify me as being Christian by that measure. I've heard there are something like 27,000 Christian denominations based on variations of belief, so rather than attempting to determine which if any I do fit, I'll leave the defining to others. In any case, everyone here should by now appreciate that I am not bringing a Muslim or Ba'hai or any other religious perspective other than a Christian or pseudoChristian view to the dialogue.

 

And with that I believe I've responded to the initial round of member greetings and questions. If I overlooked any, my apologies - chalk it up to still learning how to navigate here. Now I've got to finish a work project or my client will be sharing a whole new epiphany with me tomorrow! I'll attempt to check back later, however - tomorrow or this weekend if not today. I've only browsed through a bit of this site, and from what little I've tasted and found good I am confident that there is a smorgasbord of clear thinking and goodwill to be experienced here. I know, I know, every forum has its jackasses, which each of us is from time to time, so I will welcome your tolerance as well.

 

RH

[Ouroboros]

I've heard there are something like 27,000 Christian denominations based on variations of belief

Interesting number, I always wanted to know that one.

 

There's about 2.2 Bill. Christians.

 

That makes about 81-82,000 average number of members in each denomination.

 

Say that only one denomination is the True Christian™ one.

 

Where, oh, where will the other 2,199,918,000 Christians go when they die???

[Mythra]

rhuntermt: Lemme guess. Montana rabbit hunter? Rock hunter? hmm.

 

Welcome to the forums. I'll let you get a little more cozy before I start attempting to dismantle your faith. You sound like you are ok so far. You should talk to Amanda. You sound like you've both reached similar conclusions about things.

 

Nice to have you here.

[Skankboy]

If by "real underpinning" you mean something aking to "primary impulse", and if in the context of "belief" you refer to deity, then we're on roughly the same page. "Ego" is a little Freudian for my taste, as it tends to imiss or at least underappreciate the desire for the union of all consciousness to which I referred (as an exC you may recall the Biblical teaching that "God will be all in all").

 

Ok, now I'm more confused than I was. What I mean is, you mentioned the seeming impossibility of the conciousness not surviving death. I use "ego" and "conciousness" interchangably. But basically, it's the idea of "me" as an individual surviving death. Does that sound right?

 

So am I right in assuming the afterlife is the main reason for your continued belief in a supernatural element in the universe?

 

(Is that any better? )

[chohan]

A hearty welcome rhuntermt,

 

That said, after my epiphany I remained a Christian as defined by this statement of faith which admittedly may not meet the measure of Christianity generally: God in Christ saves people.

 

Saves people from what? You ruled out a wrathful god so no need to be saved from my 'sins'.

 

You ruled out hell, in the sense of a conscious place of torture, endless or otherwise.

 

Saves people from what?

 

In particular, I am persuaded that God gave this rabbi God's power of life, to restore conscious life post-mortem, to everyone's actual (rather than mere potential) benefit.

 

I cannot fathom my consciousness or anyone else's simply expiring...

 

If you cannot fathom your consciousness simply expiring then why would you believe some obscure non-gentile rebbe needs to restore it?

 

and I long deeply for transformation so that your conscious existences and mine are perfected and united in such a way to no longer be subject to constraints of this time/space existence.

 

Escape velocity requires lightening the load; dropping the baggage so to speak. From what I've read so far I'd say you're doing fine other than the 'Christ Diver's Belt' wrapped around your consciousness. After all this progress I'd hate to see you wind up stuck in the belief system territories (postmortem) while the rest of us curls(consciousness, usually intelligent) continue to be perfected and united with the Whole.

 

I wouldn't fret the 'God in Christ saves people' thingee... Amanda says we've already been 'saved' (cosmic force feeding?) so maybe it'll all pan out.

 

My best to you and enjoy your stay.

 

cheers,

cho

[All Gods Fail]

Ok, I'll bite: why are you a christian?

 

Ha ha! Just teasing - welcome, rhuntermt!

[rhuntermt]

 

Ok, now I'm more confused than I was.  What I mean is, you mentioned the seeming impossibility of the conciousness not surviving death.  I use "ego" and "conciousness" interchangably.  But basically, it's the idea of "me" as an individual surviving death.  Does that sound right?

 

So am I right in assuming the afterlife is the main reason for your continued belief in a supernatural element in the universe?

 

(Is that any better?  )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Skankboy:

 

Your post is too irresistable - I really shouldn't be here again, it's going to be a very late night if I stay, but still here we are [now sounding like Bob Seeger - I wish!]

 

You do no appear as confused as you claim, but perhaps a few nuances will help.

 

The impulse to life, not afterlife, is the primary reason I submitted for belief in God, or a supernatural element. Afterlife logically follows from the impulse, not the other way around. Whether or not afterlife, if real, is individual in any sense, I don't know. The view I gather from Biblical content is of one-ness or unity of all, so "individual me-ness" is not a expression I would choose. Additionally, the life we each have - and I have a pretty confortable one compared to most - is incomplete, and not altogether satisfactory. So part of what I mean is not merely the impulse to my life, it's the impulse to be joined to all life. To be joined to your consciousness (no, I'm not trying to pick you up), to the consciousness all others who have ever existed, and even to creatures such as they may have (why did that guy go live with the grizzlies all those summers? more than unfortunate that he was finally eaten by one): that's LIFE, that's a deep, deep desire, that's a whole that is at least the sum of its parts if not greater, yet we can't sum it up - we haven't the power.

 

Closely related - maybe ultimately the same, maybe two different things - is the impulse to truth. We want to know all and to be known. We would like to eliminate all the deception that distorts relationships and community, including our own. We want the quantum details of subatomic particle speed and position, and details of whatever lies behind/within the cosmos. Like Life, Truth partly involves a why question - why should we have such an impulse - but it also involves a what and a how - what is it, exactly, and how do we get it? Like Life, the impulse is not satisfied by death. My mind (spirit? will?) won't accept that result - I have a confidence that goes above and beyond the best gut instincts I've had on other paths, a confidence that death is not the end, but it is still only a hope. As an Ex-C you may recall that Paul described resurrection as a hope, and admitted that absent that hope the faith of those in The Way was useless, and in that case they should be pitied. I've thrown in with that lot.

 

There is one truth of which I am certain, however: I'm too damned long winded. But thanks for asking for clarification, and feel free to do so again.

 

I'm sure you share these impulses, so how do you understand them - how have your views on them changed as you've walked away from mystery or hocus pocus and into, well, into what? How would you describe your position? Naturalist? Agnostic? A-theistic? Hope that inquiry sounds as straight up as I intend it. I described myself to someone else here as a universalist, so if you know what that's about you'll know that I feel no compulsion to convert you to my view on this. Like anyone I can be argumentive, but that's not the tone I intend here. Rather, I have another confidence, a confidence that real dialogue, shared pursuit of truth, reveals truth. Someone here welcomed me with the encouragement to be open minded. Sound advice - good advice - for anyone, Ex-C or otherwise, who believes we gain freedom from truth.

 

RH