Recurring fears

[Kat34]

2 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

Genesis starts off contradicting itself. It reflects a time before they realized that day light is caused by the sun. They thought that days took place independent of the sun. So you find in Genesis 3 days taking place before the sun, moon and stars were made on the 4th day. I once argued an apologist for 40 pages about this on another forum. The more he tried to remove the contradiction, the deeper the hole he dug for himself. Green grass growing on dry land on the 3rd day before the existence of the sun. It's a mythological creation story, borrowed behind other similar near eastern creation myths which are much older. 

 

 

I hadn’t thought of this before. Wow, 40 pages debating that...! It’s been pointed out to me in the past that the genesis story has sin and death entering the world after Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit but dinosaurs suffered and died way before humans were on the scene. 

[Kat34]

So in those examples I see the contradictions, fine. Then there are things outside of the bible that I don’t know how to interpret. For example, not long after my dad died, my mum had a conversation with someone in the church who had been praying for her. This woman told my mum that she didn’t know what it meant but she kept getting this particular image in her head. My mum was bowled over by this because it turned out that the image corresponded exactly with a pet name that my dad had had for her that nobody else could know about. So both she and the other woman felt this was a message from god/ from my dad through god. 

This kind of thing I find it very hard to explain through logic and reason as it’s so personal and so specific?

[◊ Weezer ◊]

Kat34, it took me 30 years to finally walk out the door.  I was also born with a logical and curious mind and kicked around the doctrinal arguments off and on for years.  Some things in Christianity just didn't add up.  It wasn't until I began to look outside the "box" of Christianity that things fell into place.   Now it is so clear, and gets more clear with time, that man created God.  That's why he seemed to change through the ages.  From the vengeful message of the old testament,  to the loving, forgiving message of Jesus.  He also changed down through the ages in other religions.  But he didn't actually change.  Man's  concept of him changed as man's morality evolved.  It just seemed logical.  To me that was validated by reading some books on the history of God and religion. 

 

I no longer believe the bible is the inerrant word of God, or that Jesus was divine, but believe Jesus summed up the basic truth of major word religions.  And provides us direction in life.  That is to, "......love your neighbor as yourself".  My faith is now in GOOD.  Not in God.  I am now an Agnostic humanist.  I believe there is some energy, force, "creator", what ever you want to call it out there, but what it is, I don't know.  But what ever it is, I am not afraid it will send me to hell, and it is no longer all that important for me to understand it.  I hope this helps.

[◊ Weezer ◊]

2 hours ago, Kat34 said:

So in those examples I see the contradictions, fine. Then there are things outside of the bible that I don’t know how to interpret.

 

This kind of thing I find it very hard to explain through logic and reason as it’s so personal and so specific?

 

These things also happen outside christianity.  Even outside religion.

[Joshpantera]

2 hours ago, Kat34 said:

I hadn’t thought of this before. Wow, 40 pages debating that..

 

I hung in there because I wanted to see how many ways an apologist could possibly come up with to try and get out of the contradiction. It's one of those learn from experience things I'm suggesting. I've learned so much over the years from arguing with apologists about various issues. 

[Kat34]

1 hour ago, Weezer said:

 

I no longer believe the bible is the inerrant word of God, or that Jesus was divine, but believe Jesus summed up the basic truth of major word religions.  And provides us direction in life.  That is to, "......love your neighbor as yourself".  My faith is now in GOOD.  Not in God.  I am now an Agnostic humanist.  I believe there is some energy, force, "creator", what ever you want to call it out there, but what it is, I don't know.  But what ever it is, I am not afraid it will send me to hell, and it is no longer all that important for me to understand it.  I hope this helps.

Thanks Weezer - it’s tricky for me as what you described here is exactly what I was warned was so dangerous about unbelief - seeing Jesus as just a moral teacher, thinking that people are basically good, believing in some kind of god or life force that we are not accountable to, not believing in ultimate judgement/ justice/ hell. So reading this kind of stuff rings warning bells, ridiculous as that sounds. Oh to be able to approach this question neutrally and without any prior conditioning!!

[Joshpantera]

3 hours ago, Kat34 said:

So both she and the other woman felt this was a message from god/ from my dad through god. 

This kind of thing I find it very hard to explain through logic and reason as it’s so personal and so specific?

 

This is a psychic claim interpreted through the lens of two women trying to tie it to the idea of an outside god concept. If the psychic claim is true, that doesn't automatically mean the theistic attachment is true as well. It could be that the woman read your mothers mind if psychic powers turn out to be real. Or, more simply, two theistic women from the same church were playing off of one another's emotions until an exaggerated story of what happened was told to you. 

 

 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

18 minutes ago, Kat34 said:

So reading this kind of stuff rings warning bells, ridiculous as that sounds. Oh to be able to approach this question neutrally and without any prior conditioning!!

 

Just one more comment before I go to bed.  Something to give you some perspective.  Keep in mind that if you had been born to another set of parents, in another country, in another religion, the conditioning would just as strong, or perhaps more so, than what you got.  And you would have believed it was the truth, from the true God.  In a sense you were lucky.  You might have been conditioned to be an agent for ISUS.  people's religion is mostly determined by chance of birth.  Be glad you are looking at the "big picture" to determine "truth".

BEST WISHES!

[Joshpantera]

7 hours ago, Kat34 said:

Thanks Weezer - it’s tricky for me as what you described here is exactly what I was warned was so dangerous about unbelief - seeing Jesus as just a moral teacher, thinking that people are basically good, believing in some kind of god or life force that we are not accountable to, not believing in ultimate judgement/ justice/ hell. So reading this kind of stuff rings warning bells, ridiculous as that sounds. Oh to be able to approach this question neutrally and without any prior conditioning!!

 

Keep referencing these thoughts back to our conversation. The bible written not by divine inspiration but by errant bronze age men with their own mentalities projected as coming from a god. Churches formed behind these writers. The writings, contradictory from the outset. Internally inconsistent. The churches power and existence depending, absolutely depending on keeping believing this evident nonsense.

 

What to do in a world where people are ceasing to believe it anymore? What to do where people began to interpret it liberally and stop taking the threats serious? They have to have some ultimate threat of hell if you stray away from the denominational world view, and add in things like no salvation outside of their respective church. In fact, just this last week, a big stir up in SDA's took place based on some people rallying to have everyone get back to the old ways. Everything's been increasingly liberal and relaxed and the old guard are trying to make a stand, but the results seen on social media go in the opposite direction. The harder they fight to force people to go backwards the more inclined people are to say screw off and leave the church. Regardless of whether or not they believe in god. They start seeing the churches as irrelevant. 

 

And this is why the churches can not deal with an all encompassing god concept, either. 

 

It means that you already have it all in you now, there's no role for them to play between the individual and the god. And that spells the potential to loose their followers. So they will fight against it, they will try and apologize away logical conclusion making, and look for ways to back peddle the implications of omnipresence and other issues we've discussed here.

 

Try reading through this thread in the spirituality section of our forums where I lay out several posts about how the all encompassing god concept applies to the Jesus myth, especially concerning the gospel of John. Early christianity may have been completely different than what people think of it now. And the contradictions between priestly factions may have to do with some writing mystical works based on the all encompassing ideas, while others were focused on the tribal god concept and two tend to conflict and contradict one another. But as to the mystical and all encompassing ideas, below illustrates how they seem to play out: 

 

 

Take your time, watch the videos I posted there. Try and digest our member responses to the video and content. I want to discuss with you what happens to the Jesus myth when you include the all encompassing god concept. 

[Kat34]

Thanks Josh, I’ll have a look at those videos when I can. I’ve read the thread and watched the short Heroes clip but do much of my reading and messaging on here through the night when the baby wakes to feed so the long ones I will have to put on hold for now! I did re read a long but I thought very well explained and reasoned extimony from a different site, which left me with a few questions/ reservations but also made a lot of sense in many respects.

 

I’ve been thinking about forgiveness. I wonder why so many people (myself included at times) feel they need absolution for their negative traits - I mean can we attribute it all to bible generated guilt? When you reconverted did you find it a huge paradigm shift to start thinking that your every move wasn’t being watched and noted by a judging god? 

[Joshpantera]

7 hours ago, Kat34 said:

Thanks Josh, I’ll have a look at those videos when I can. I’ve read the thread and watched the short Heroes clip but do much of my reading and messaging on here through the night when the baby wakes to feed so the long ones I will have to put on hold for now! I did re read a long but I thought very well explained and reasoned extimony from a different site, which left me with a few questions/ reservations but also made a lot of sense in many respects.

 

I’ve been thinking about forgiveness. I wonder why so many people (myself included at times) feel they need absolution for their negative traits - I mean can we attribute it all to bible generated guilt? When you reconverted did you find it a huge paradigm shift to start thinking that your every move wasn’t being watched and noted by a judging god? 

 

You mean deconverted? 

 

When people pray to a god perceived as out there somewhere for forgiveness, they are in effect speaking to themselves in their own minds (in internal dialogue) which amount to asking themselves for forgiveness. But they project it outwards. This is the ego mind at work again. But it's all in the mind. If any one feels forgiven, what else could it be aside from them forgiving themselves internally for something they regret doing? And feeling watched all the time because there is more than one type of consciousness taking place within our minds. Something, in effect, is always watching internally like a witness or bystander. But it's clearly the different types of consciousness taking place within our own minds. 

 

This explanation should make more sense if you take in and comprehend the Alan Watts videos about god, jesus and the rest of humanity. It gives another dimension to pose these questions against. 

 

 

[Kat34]

Josh - oops, yes, I meant deconverted.

 

Today I’m feeling like I can’t trust my own thoughts, which is a scary place to be. I felt like I could have had a “sign” from God during the night last night - now knowing my audience, I know people here will think that’s not what happened. But what I’m struggling with is whether I’m interpreting things neutrally or whether I’m doing so through the lens of ingrained beliefs. This is what I mean by not being able to trust my own thoughts. I mean I guess just because we were told something as children by trusted adults when we were very impressionable, and we didn’t arrive at the conclusion for ourselves, doesn’t automatically mean that thing isn’t true, but it just makes it harder to be sure. I just feel like I have no way of knowing whether this experience I had meant anything significant or not. I’m sure Christians would say it was significant and atheists would explain it another way (a bit like how Josh explained what happened with my mum and the lady at church... it bothers me that I can’t find a rational explanation for that). 

 

The ironic thing is I’d been feeling more at peace than I had all week last night and that I was starting to think more clearly and now I feel completely thrown off kilter again

[Joshpantera]

What threw you off?

[Kat34]

14 minutes ago, Joshpantera said:

What threw you off?

I’m actually embarrassed to give the specifics but here goes in short, I asked god before I went to sleep to let me know if he was there (as I have many times before) and then the church bells in our village rang at random times throughout the night (I was up feeding the baby). I have no idea why this would have happened as obviously they wouldn’t have people ringing bells in the middle of the night but it definitely did and so I thought is this finally a sign or am I just being ridiculous because of my current state of mind etc. I do sometimes think all this is making me a bit crazy

[TABA]

40 minutes ago, Kat34 said:

I’m actually embarrassed to give the specifics but here goes in short, I asked god before I went to sleep to let me know if he was there (as I have many times before) and then the church bells in our village rang at random times throughout the night (I was up feeding the baby). I have no idea why this would have happened as obviously they wouldn’t have people ringing bells in the middle of the night but it definitely did and so I thought is this finally a sign or am I just being ridiculous because of my current state of mind etc. I do sometimes think all this is making me a bit crazy

 

Don’t you think that if the creator of the universe wanted you to know that he exists, he could give you a less ambiguous message than ringing some church bells?  Who knows what was going on with the bells, but after saying that prayer you were on the alert for anything unusual and on any given day, SOMETHING unusual is liable to happen, especially when you’re looking out for it. 

[Joshpantera]

39 minutes ago, Kat34 said:

I’m actually embarrassed to give the specifics but here goes in short, I asked god before I went to sleep to let me know if he was there (as I have many times before) and then the church bells in our village rang at random times throughout the night (I was up feeding the baby). I have no idea why this would have happened as obviously they wouldn’t have people ringing bells in the middle of the night but it definitely did and so I thought is this finally a sign or am I just being ridiculous because of my current state of mind etc. I do sometimes think all this is making me a bit crazy

 

Maybe try asking god again, "are you there as in everyone and everything, within me and all things. Ring once for yes, twice for no." 

[Kat34]

5 minutes ago, Joshpantera said:

 

Maybe try asking god again, "are you there as in everyone and everything, within me and all things. Ring once for yes, twice for no." 

even though you’re making fun of me a little, that did really make me chuckle

[Kat34]

7 minutes ago, ThereAndBackAgain said:

 

Don’t you think that if the creator of the universe wanted you to know that he exists, he could give you a less ambiguous message than ringing some church bells?  Who knows what was going on with the bells, but after saying that prayer you were on the alert for anything unusual and on any given day, SOMETHING unusual is liable to happen, especially when you’re looking out for it. 

The funny thing is I actually wasn’t on the alert, or at least not consciously, as god is usually silent!! But yes I had the same thought as you about ambiguity... so then I started thinking, oh well god knows I’m easily freaked out so he just started with something subtle. I do know how this sounds by the way I think you’re probably right that my subconscious was on the alert. It just seemed strange timing. 

[Stargazer95]

29 minutes ago, Kat34 said:

god knows I’m easily freaked out so he just started with something subtle

 

If he ever gets beyond the subtle, let us know. And if you see him, send him my way. I'd kinda like to have a chat with him also hahaha

[Joshpantera]

17 hours ago, Kat34 said:

even though you’re making fun of me a little, that did really make me chuckle

 

Kat, I'm joking but what you're doing is not left field at all. Seeing patterns and signs all around us goes into the territory of human nature. 

 

It's not easy shifting away from this game of make believe and being done with it forever. Especially if it's deep rooted. We've had members here knee jerk back and forth between belief and non-belief pretty hard, and in real time posting about it as it was happening. It's make believe though, I bet my life on it. I'm 100% all in. Making the percentage of wondering if maybe there is a hell and that I may find myself there, a flat 0%

 

I know too much about it to believe in it.....

[Kat34]

4 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

It's not easy shifting away from this game of make believe and being done with it forever. Especially if it's deep rooted. We've had members here knee jerk back and forth between belief and non-belief pretty hard

It really isn’t easy... and I feel like it’s one step forward, three steps back. Then I’ll start briefly thinking, what if it’s Allah or some other god that’s real? (I know there isn’t evidence for this, it’s just how my mind is currently operating). Or what if it’s some other, less than benevolent, being and we are puppets in their game? Who knows what they might do to us after death? Honestly I’ve never really thought like THAT before in my life! I think all this thinking is driving me a little crazy

[Kat34]

Any thoughts on this?

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/jamesbishopblog.com/2016/09/22/responding-to-matt-dillahunty-on-jesus-resurrection/amp/

 

I didn’t think it was particularly strong... talks about testing books of the bible against other books of the bible and doesn’t cross reference with any other external material. Seems quite dependent on William Lane Craig. States that there are 4 minimal facts that most historians accept... I’m not convinced that’s the case? I don’t know enough yet though to be able to evaluate whether this is a decent rebuttal.

 

I’ve watched quite a few of the atheist experience clips now and enjoyed listening to the arguments but Matt especially can come across as quite dismissive and arrogant at times (as well as clearly very knowledgeable and intelligent) and I wonder if there’s something in what Bishop says about whether he raises the bar of evidence so high that no evidence would ever actually be sufficient. 

[Joshpantera]

54 minutes ago, Kat34 said:

I’ve watched quite a few of the atheist experience clips now and enjoyed listening to the arguments but Matt especially can come across as quite dismissive and arrogant at times (as well as clearly very knowledgeable and intelligent) and I wonder if there’s something in what Bishop says about whether he raises the bar of evidence so high that no evidence would ever actually be sufficient. 

 

He is arrogant and dismissive and I see how off putting that can be for some people. But I've seldom found him to be wrong. Whether he's raised the bar too high is a fair question, though. 

 

Quote

However, because “the Bible” is a substantial library of historical documents and claims it can be matched and corroborated against other biblical texts. The historian, for example, can put the Gospel of Mark against the Gospel of John, or Paul against Acts, or 1 Peter against 1 Timothy etc., in order to review the history behind them, and whether that history is corroborated and so on. What do these texts have to say about early Christian belief in Jesus? What do they say about the societies in which they were penned? In this way it’s matching history against history, and thus I believe Dillahunty’s claim of “the Bible” as a singular entity is unwarranted.

 

This can be more simply put. The bible is a collection of religious writings which are biased towards their own religious claim making. Something like the resurrection, is an evolving story that evolved over time, along with all of the miracles in these stories. 

 

 

Matt's position here is that the bible (a collection of biased religious writings) do not prove the claims found only within the bible. These claims are not attested by contemporary historians of the time and place. History is silent, aside from these religious writings that popped up and began to evolve long after the contemporary time period of the claimed events. Starting with Paul's writings which have been argued to be about a celestial drama of gnostic orientation. But we don't have to go into that at the moment. What we have here is a simple look at how myths evolve through time. And how many different writings take place within the group context of myth making and can be rolled together (no matter how contradicting) into a single collection of myths. And the above chart is generous, there's later dating theories on the table that go further into the 2nd century. 

 

 

54 minutes ago, Kat34 said:

I didn’t think it was particularly strong... talks about testing books of the bible against other books of the bible and doesn’t cross reference with any other external material. Seems quite dependent on William Lane Craig. States that there are 4 minimal facts that most historians accept... I’m not convinced that’s the case? I don’t know enough yet though to be able to evaluate whether this is a decent rebuttal.

 

You're on solid grounds with the opinion above. Anything dependent on WLC is a huge red flag. These are some of WLC's arguments rebutted by Richard Carrier: 

 

 

[midniterider]

On 10/9/2018 at 1:45 AM, Kat34 said:

I’ve read through the other threads on fear of hell and I empathise with a comment someone made about it almost being hardwired into our brains in childhood. I just don’t know how to find peace because ultimately, however unjust and awful we think hell sounds, we cannot know for certain what the truth is about what happens when we die. I just want to be free of this fear.

 

Jesus doesn't seem to do much while we're alive. Then when we die he supposedly gets active and sends us to hell. hmmm. Maybe he should give us more reason while we are alive to have a relationship with him then hell stress would be eliminated. His current plan of silence is ludicrous to me, a simple human. How much more ludicrous would it be for a supreme being?

[florduh]

Unlike God, brainwashing is real. Sometimes we need professional help to deprogram. For now I would recommend not attempting to disprove every assertion made by Christians, apologists and their Bible. It is their burden to provide evidence, not yours. And stop looking for signs and wonders in everyday coincidence. It ain't healthy.