Ex Christians And Social Conscience.

[DesertBob]

That is why I think that 95 % of so called believers, have no belief and are just in it for traditions sake.

You may well be correct about that. We tend to focus on fundamentalist / evangelical true-believerism here and forget that much of Christianity -- particularly the masses of asses in the pews -- is much more sanguine about dogma and is there for tradition, to get the wife or parents of their back, for the sake of the kids, for the sense of community, or any number of reasons that aren't very connected to Biblical teaching.

 

In addition, a fair number of people in effect say, just tell me what to think, because it's too much effort to work it out for myself. Some are just lazy, others just lack confidence in their own judgment (something the church tends to encourage).

 

In any local church there is usually a handful of people who are termed "pillars of the church". These are the ones who really are committed, really care that things get done and really drink the Kool-Aid. The rest are kind of surfing along for the ride.

 

Whether this means that 95% of church members are vulnerable to listen to reason may be debatable however. Just because they don't have a Rolodex of apologetics arguments in their heads doesn't mean they want their boat rocked.

[Spectrox]

Most of the time I'm more chilled than this. If I lived in certain parts of the US though I would probably be more outspoken than Richard Dawkins!

 

Spectrox (formerly Spectrox War)

 

Thanks for this.

 

I too was banned from there and cannot read you O P.

I have had the same basic type of discussion though and know the feeling.

 

One thing that I have noted in going about to different places, is how actually few apologists are out there.

Don't get me wrong, there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, but when you consider the population numbers of just the Abrahamic cults, 5 billion or so, hardly any of them are actually in the fray.

That is why I think that 95 % of so called believers, have no belief and are just in it for traditions sake.

Nothing better to do on Sunday I guess.

 

Regards

DL

 

Yeah. Lots of people just pay lip service to the whole thing - especially in the UK. Kind of like an afterlife insurance rather than any genuine calling. I don't see the point of liberal Christians. Liberal Christianity is like talking about a fried snowball! There's nothing liberal about the Bible.

 

A lot of genuine believers are skeptical of the internet, sometimes calling it the Church of Satan. Probably because they know that the internet is where religion goes to die.

[Guest end3]

Ummmm... look, I've just got to ask you out straight...

Do you believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins and that if you accept His free gift of salvation, you will be saved from eternal hellfire, dwelling with the triune God Yeshua in heaven, forever after? Y/N?

 

Yes I do BAA.

 

Sorry friend, but your profile says that you are an 'Authentic Christian Believer'.

Doesn't that title mean that you are saved by your belief in the sacrifice Jesus made for you upon the Cross, not by any efforts on your part?

 

I think that is take home message....by faith.

[midniterider]

Ah, this is good. We have a Xian in the conversation. Here is the scenario and questions: You tell me you are a Xian and suddenly I say to you, "Xianity is a myth." How would you react? Would you become defensive? Maybe you ask "Why do you say that?" If I start telling you that Xianity is sun worship and the crucifixion is just a metaphor for the sun etc etc and that it came from Egyptian mythology, as well as other myths, how do you think you would react as a Xian? Let's say you are a hard line Evangelical Fundamentalist Xian who is truly deluded into the myth, what sort of reaction do you suppose you would have, esp if you were not ready to hear such statements? What if you were the hard liner who did not ask for the info, how do you think you'd react?

 

 

Let me ask you this Mriana.....if you knew hell were real, would you risk being offensive in order to save another person?

 

 

If God had taken me on a tour of hell saying, "This, my child is where you will end up if you continue rejecting me..." then I might become concerned. Sort of a 'Scared Straight Into Christianity' program. But this tour of hell has not occurred therefore hell is just a vague notion concocted in the bible and passed along by gullible fear mongers. And if god's involvement in my life now is any indication of his involvment in my afterlife, well I assume I will have to torture myself in hell because certainly no other supernatural entity will be doing it.

 

 

Regarding being offensive: Some people I'd love to see go to hell. But there isn't one. Besides you can't MAKE someone believe. They either will or they won't. And if they SAY they believe, they might just be lying to get you to shut up about it. Or if they accept Jesus, later on they may fall away and end up in hell. Just because you offend the crap out of someone today doesn't mean your work will GUARANTEE their entry into your heaven. So no, I don't want to be offensive to people by telling them that they may end up in a hell that does not exist.

 

Nor is it my duty to pluck people out of Christianity and convert them to atheism or whatever belief I feel is right. Everyone has the RIGHT here in the USA anyway to believe whatever way they want. Proselytizing for atheism can be as bad as proselytizing for Christianity. People get pissed when you do it and usually dont listen.

[midniterider]

Deconverting some quasi religious acquaintances will do little to change the hearts and minds of terrorists and crazies.

 

What if your quasi religious acquaintances is really a terrorist just on the brink of indecision as to what he is?

The life you save may be your own or that of your children or grand children.

Those fools have to have neighbors and acquaintances as well. In fact, I hear it is part of the way they infiltrate.

 

Regards

DL

 

What if? 'What if' is a great game to play but it is just your imagination working overtime. A religious freak could go apeshit and kill a bunch of people. An atheist could go apeshit and kill a bunch of people. Someone who watches Dancing with the Stars could go apeshit and kill a bunch of people. Anything could happen at anytime and nobody can predict WHAT it will be.

[bornagainathiest]

Ummmm... look, I've just got to ask you out straight...

Do you believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins and that if you accept His free gift of salvation, you will be saved from eternal hellfire, dwelling with the triune God Yeshua in heaven, forever after? Y/N?

 

Yes I do BAA.

 

Sorry friend, but your profile says that you are an 'Authentic Christian Believer'.

Doesn't that title mean that you are saved by your belief in the sacrifice Jesus made for you upon the Cross, not by any efforts on your part?

 

I think that is take home message....by faith.

 

Thank you for the succinct reply End.

 

Which amounts to all of thirteen words from you.

I count fifty eight keystrokes in all, including the punctuation and spacings.

 

(Sarcastically) Took you a l-o-n-g time to compose and then type out your response, did it?

No! Don't answer that. That question was rhetorical - I really don't want you to answer it, please.

 

However, there are quite a few other questions and points I've put to you recently (in this thread and in another) that are still outstanding.

 

I've already asked you this once, but I'll do it again...

If you don't want to answer me (even tho' you expressed an interest in my thoughts) then please just say so.

 

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that silence from your end, End, will just make me go away.

It won't.

I pursued Rayskidude for over a year, while he dodged, bluffed and blustered. He tried giving me the silent treatment for months on end, End, but I was still there when he de-lurked and resumed posting.

 

I am not going away. I don't do 'going away'.

 

You invited me to post, now it's time for you to reply.

Please reply to ALL of my questions in FULL, sparing no detail and taking as much time as you need to explain yourself.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[Greatest I am]

That is why I think that 95 % of so called believers, have no belief and are just in it for traditions sake.

You may well be correct about that. We tend to focus on fundamentalist / evangelical true-believerism here and forget that much of Christianity -- particularly the masses of asses in the pews -- is much more sanguine about dogma and is there for tradition, to get the wife or parents of their back, for the sake of the kids, for the sense of community, or any number of reasons that aren't very connected to Biblical teaching.

 

In addition, a fair number of people in effect say, just tell me what to think, because it's too much effort to work it out for myself. Some are just lazy, others just lack confidence in their own judgment (something the church tends to encourage).

 

In any local church there is usually a handful of people who are termed "pillars of the church". These are the ones who really are committed, really care that things get done and really drink the Kool-Aid. The rest are kind of surfing along for the ride.

 

Whether this means that 95% of church members are vulnerable to listen to reason may be debatable however. Just because they don't have a Rolodex of apologetics arguments in their heads doesn't mean they want their boat rocked.

 

+ 1

 

Regards

DL

[Greatest I am]

Most of the time I'm more chilled than this. If I lived in certain parts of the US though I would probably be more outspoken than Richard Dawkins!

 

Spectrox (formerly Spectrox War)

 

Thanks for this.

 

I too was banned from there and cannot read you O P.

I have had the same basic type of discussion though and know the feeling.

 

One thing that I have noted in going about to different places, is how actually few apologists are out there.

Don't get me wrong, there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, but when you consider the population numbers of just the Abrahamic cults, 5 billion or so, hardly any of them are actually in the fray.

That is why I think that 95 % of so called believers, have no belief and are just in it for traditions sake.

Nothing better to do on Sunday I guess.

 

Regards

DL

 

Yeah. Lots of people just pay lip service to the whole thing - especially in the UK. Kind of like an afterlife insurance rather than any genuine calling. I don't see the point of liberal Christians. Liberal Christianity is like talking about a fried snowball! There's nothing liberal about the Bible.

 

A lot of genuine believers are skeptical of the internet, sometimes calling it the Church of Satan. Probably because they know that the internet is where religion goes to die.

 

The net is a good teaching resource and religions are against their sheep learning. It has always been so.

 

Regards

DL

[Greatest I am]

Ummmm... look, I've just got to ask you out straight...

Do you believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins and that if you accept His free gift of salvation, you will be saved from eternal hellfire, dwelling with the triune God Yeshua in heaven, forever after? Y/N?

 

Yes I do BAA.

 

Sorry friend, but your profile says that you are an 'Authentic Christian Believer'.

Doesn't that title mean that you are saved by your belief in the sacrifice Jesus made for you upon the Cross, not by any efforts on your part?

 

I think that is take home message....by faith.

 

Care to comment on these two short clips?

 

You will need to try to forget your prejudices if you can to get the message.

 

You might remember that if Jesus died for you, then God would have had to set all the conditions to have his son murdered needlessly.

 

 

 

Regards

DL

[Mriana]

Zinnia is cool! How could anyone have a prejudice against her? Ok so she has a knot in her throat, among other things that we won't mention, but she's still cool. However, she needs to smile more.

[DesertBob]

Zinnia is cool! How could anyone have a prejudice against her? Ok so she has a knot in her throat, among other things that we won't mention, but she's still cool. However, she needs to smile more.

Yeah, she's a bit monotone and unanimated and seems to be reading from a teleprompter but the content is good.

[florduh]

Someone who watches Dancing with the Stars could go apeshit and kill a bunch of people.

The most likely scenario, in my opinion.

[Guest end3]

...is basically ignoring that unforeseen consequences exist...

Some consequences are indeed unforeseen. Since neither you nor I can know what they might be (after all, we admit they are unforeseen), why should I choose an imaginary outcome and claim it is the inevitable result?

 

What outcome do you choose that is NOT imaginary?

[florduh]

...is basically ignoring that unforeseen consequences exist...

Some consequences are indeed unforeseen. Since neither you nor I can know what they might be (after all, we admit they are unforeseen), why should I choose an imaginary outcome and claim it is the inevitable result?

 

What outcome do you choose that is NOT imaginary?

An outcome from what? If I know what you're hinting at, I might come up with a likely result.

 

I can choose a logical outcome from a given action; if I throw a rock at a window, the consequence is very likely a broken window. An unforeseen consequence might be that the rock didn't break the glass but bounced back and hit me in the head, but odds are that the window will shatter. I simply agreed that some consequences are unforeseen. That means you can't know or expect the outcome. It is impossible to choose what an unknown outcome might be. I venture to say that there are always some unpredictable consequences to every action or inaction. Do you understand what unknown means?

[Mriana]

Zinnia is cool! How could anyone have a prejudice against her? Ok so she has a knot in her throat, among other things that we won't mention, but she's still cool. However, she needs to smile more.

Yeah, she's a bit monotone and unanimated and seems to be reading from a teleprompter but the content is good.

 

That too, but what she reads is well thought out and all. Clearly rational and not deluded.

 

 

 

[kazza]

In answer to the original question - i get really torn on this one - by personality i am not 'evangelical' at all, i'm kinda live and let live, dont interfere in others beliefs cos its none of my business type of person BUT i do so so wish that i had somehow managed to leave christianity at a much earlier age than i did - i wonder if i had been challenged or given more information from an atheist perspective - whether i could have seen the light earlier and saved myself years of shit.

 

Because i wasnt vocal about my christianity and quite a liberal christian i never really triggered anyones challenge i suppose. Maybe i was still so entrenched i wouldnt have 'heard' the rational view anyway but i often feel i should be shouting this 'good news' from the roof tops, just because i would love to go back in time and tell it to myself :0)

[Guest end3]

...is basically ignoring that unforeseen consequences exist...

Some consequences are indeed unforeseen. Since neither you nor I can know what they might be (after all, we admit they are unforeseen), why should I choose an imaginary outcome and claim it is the inevitable result?

 

What outcome do you choose that is NOT imaginary?

An outcome from what? If I know what you're hinting at, I might come up with a likely result.

 

I can choose a logical outcome from a given action; if I throw a rock at a window, the consequence is very likely a broken window. An unforeseen consequence might be that the rock didn't break the glass but bounced back and hit me in the head, but odds are that the window will shatter. I simply agreed that some consequences are unforeseen. That means you can't know or expect the outcome. It is impossible to choose what an unknown outcome might be. I venture to say that there are always some unpredictable consequences to every action or inaction. Do you understand what unknown means?

 

The point would be IMHO, that faith is required in both instances...unforseen/unknown outcomes whether it be relatively logical or not. The Bible describes the need for faith in the unforseen outcome. By default, if you choose to follow a "logical" pathway, faith is not far away from our ability to predict. So I am saying that it seems reasonable to me, that an age old book that speaks of this, points to some insight.....specifically more than I would expect.

[florduh]

The Bible describes the need for faith in the unforseen outcome.

Okay. I have "faith" that there will always be unforeseen outcomes. Of course, being unforeseen, I still have no idea what they might be. Again, what are you getting at, in plain English? Sorry if I'm being dense.

[Guest end3]

The Bible describes the need for faith in the unforseen outcome.

Okay. I have "faith" that there will always be unforeseen outcomes. Of course, being unforeseen, I still have no idea what they might be. Again, what are you getting at, in plain English? Sorry if I'm being dense.

 

You are not being dense....just my writing makes it difficult for consumption. There is nothing more....that faith is on the periffery(sp) of our decisions and that the Bible puts a specific emphasis on faith is interesting to me. What I perceive those that rely on logic as an end-all appears a bit short-sighted and a bit arrogant as well....not discounting my own ownership of both. If I am remembering right, isn't that the Tower of Babel lesson somewhat.....that these humans have great capability, but.....

[florduh]

...the Bible puts a specific emphasis on faith is interesting to me. What I perceive those that rely on logic as an end-all appears a bit short-sighted and a bit arrogant as well...

Religions ask that we have faith that an undetectable magic realm actually exists and operates in a certain way. It demands faith, because there is no real reason to believe such a fantastic claim. Various cultures have always had conflicting views of what they imagine that realm to consist of and how it behaves. The pictures people paint of the invisible realm differ because each makes up their own version and makes different guesses.

 

I have friends whose word I take on faith (that is, without specific evidence) because of past performance. I know I can trust them and don't have to make them prove what they tell me is true, or that they will do what they say they will do. That is a logical faith, as opposed to a religious faith, because it is based on prior actions. Should one of those friends ever tell me they were visited by the ghost of Abraham Lincoln, I would demand some additional evidence as that would be a rather extraordinary claim.

 

Religious faith (blind faith in the nature of the unknown) requires guessing at what the unknown is, and the decision to believe it in the absence of evidence. Evidence based logic is much more likely to lead to the truth than mere guesswork, isn't it?

[Guest end3]

Religious faith (blind faith in the nature of the unknown) requires guessing at what the unknown is, and the decision to believe it in the absence of evidence. Evidence based logic is much more likely to lead to the truth than mere guesswork, isn't it?

 

I realize you probably think I am being stubboorn....but if we take the sum evidence of the Bible, then IMO it becomes more than making the unseen a "whatever fits for us" kind of scenario. Don't worry, I give some credit and can substantiate your view without much effort, but again, the sum of the evidence painting a picture or pointing to this particular unseen "imaginary" if you will, seems less likely to be imaginary or made to fit. The relationship thing is a big one for me....that things must constantanly be in a giving/sacrificing relationship.....but we have talked about that before.

 

I feel personally, and not slighting anyone, that choosing logic, is like giving in or conceding for some reason......death almost. My apologies, just my personal feeling.

[florduh]

...but if we take the sum evidence of the Bible...

I don't know what you mean by "evidence" in this case. You know what a mess the Bible is, with its murky history, conflicts with known reality and internal conflicts. Perhaps you mean some of the wise sayings ring true, as they do in other religious and philosophical writings.

 

...choosing logic, is like giving in or conceding...

Though there is certainly a place for emotionalism in human affairs, it is rational thought and logic that are most likely to lead to the correct conclusion.

[Guest end3]

Though there is certainly a place for emotionalism in human affairs, it is rational thought and logic that are most likely to lead to the correct conclusion.

 

Yes, isn't that the very point, that if we concluded, everyone is an asshole?

 

Lol.....go wick Betty a few times and go spy the young babes on the beach before winter makes it's way over there. I'll watch the fort for you until you get back.

[florduh]

Lol.....go wick Betty a few times and go spy the young babes on the beach before winter makes it's way over there. I'll watch the fort for you until you get back.

Betty has given way to Irene, and in winter even more babes come here for the beach.

 

If I may get back to topic somewhat, I'd like to address your argument or assertion regarding logic.

 

I see this argument from True Believers in all quarters, including various Christians and also generic "spiritual" types. When there is no evidence or logic to lead one to the position in question, they attack logic itself. True Believers assert that logic and reason blind us to whatever it is they imagine is "out there." I guess it's the only defense if you have no evidence. I frankly get tired of hearing that I am closing myself off to half of reality by not believing in the invisible, undetectable things that they happen to believe in. Like it or not, we are all products of the natural world, and to entertain anything SUPERnatural is of necessity pure speculation. Visions, profound feelings, and weird things do get experienced from time to time, but the only demonstrable conclusion is anomalous brain activity due to chemistry, disease or other abnormal stimulation. Without actually looking for the causes, the easy way out is claiming some sort of spiritual event. One might imagine they encountered a ghost, perhaps a visit from an angel, another swears they saw a demon, another alien abduction, yet another would call the experience "out of body." Sorry, I just can't make the leap and embrace someone's unfounded interpretation of their brain's process.

 

But of course, I'm an unregenerate pig.

[Guest end3]

But of course, I'm an unregenerate pig....

 

So proud of myself for saving bandwidth...

 

I don't have any good answers. I don't feel you are missing out on half of life. Hell, I make a living as an analyst.

 

What comes to mind off the cuff is I find it logical to assume a cause to the things I don't understand. My daughter and I have a running conversation about black holes. Does stuff get spit out on the "other side". At age 15, her theory is they are like the screw/thread part of an incandescent bulb. Anyway, by not having the answers to these questions, along with having a myth that describes what I see, and pretty well fits with my cognitive whackiness, I grow more confident in the myth. But, if you are correct, then I can see that view as being the most truthful for what conditions we are in.

 

Again, for me, I just feel deflated if I were to say this is all, a freak of happenstance. I think you make a lot of sense most of the time. I just don't see why you don't assume more cause and openness in your statements.....or maybe you do and I am just assuming to much.