Hey

[Clizby_Wampuscat]

Just wanted to say Hi.  I was a Christian for about 18 years and have been an atheist for about 2 years now.  Most of my family and friends are Christians so I don't have much discussion with non believers.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Welcome.  There are plenty of non-believers here, so discuss til yer heart's content.

[Clizby_Wampuscat]

1 hour ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Welcome.  There are plenty of non-believers here, so discuss til yer heart's content.

Thanks!

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

3 hours ago, Clizby_Wampuscat said:

Just wanted to say Hi.  I was a Christian for about 18 years and have been an atheist for about 2 years now.  Most of my family and friends are Christians so I don't have much discussion with non believers.

Welcome to ExC wampus!!

[Myrkhoos]

Hello. 

 

18 years since birth, or did you convert later on?

 

Myrrkhoos.

 

[Clizby_Wampuscat]

3 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

Hello. 

 

18 years since birth, or did you convert later on?

 

Myrrkhoos.

 

I became a believer as an adult.  The problem was that I thought I was being skeptical.  My girlfriend at the time (now my wife) was a believer and I thought I better check into Christianity.  My mistake was to go to Christian sources for the answers because I thought at the time that they were the experts.  I never looked at any opposing views or arguments against what Christians say is good evidence.  So it all made sense to me and I was convinced.  Later on when I was trying to find better reasons for what I believed I started to study epistemology and skepticism etc.  Through that process I became unconvinced.

[Myrkhoos]

20 hours ago, Clizby_Wampuscat said:

I became a believer as an adult.  The problem was that I thought I was being skeptical.  My girlfriend at the time (now my wife) was a believer and I thought I better check into Christianity.  My mistake was to go to Christian sources for the answers because I thought at the time that they were the experts.  I never looked at any opposing views or arguments against what Christians say is good evidence.  So it all made sense to me and I was convinced.  Later on when I was trying to find better reasons for what I believed I started to study epistemology and skepticism etc.  Through that process I became unconvinced.

I am curious. Did the intellectual reasons convince you to convert or did you have some spiritual exp? Or both? 

    Yeah, some of what you said rings a bell. Checking sources only from Christianity. My point of questioning came with the problem of suffering, temporal and eternal, which seemed contradictory.

  I have recently started reading religious books from other religions. By the practitioners. I can say it has been very enlightening.

[Clizby_Wampuscat]

3 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

I am curious. Did the intellectual reasons convince you to convert or did you have some spiritual exp? Or both? 

    Yeah, some of what you said rings a bell. Checking sources only from Christianity. My point of questioning came with the problem of suffering, temporal and eternal, which seemed contradictory.

  I have recently started reading religious books from other religions. By the practitioners. I can say it has been very enlightening.

I never really had too many of what I would call spiritual experiences.  It was the arguments from Christians that convinced me mostly and I did not have the tools to properly think about why they may be false.  Over time I thought I was hearing from god or that things in my life were orchestrated by god.  But all of that was reinforced by everyone I knew and it just became common to believe these things in my family and friend groups.  

 

The problem of suffering and other issues I think are pretty easy for Christians to dismiss as "god is doing everything for our good, we may just not understand how". This is how I dismissed it as a Christian.  What I think is the best argument to take to Christians is divine hiddenness.  Why would god, who wants to save us, not respond to sincere seekers? Of course he Calvinists have a response to this but Christians that believe in free will etc. have a hard time explaining this.  It usually goes that the seeker is doing something wrong or is not really sincere etc.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

27 minutes ago, Clizby_Wampuscat said:

It usually goes that the seeker is doing something wrong or is not really sincere etc.

This argument also comes up short in the face of a supposedly loving god.  If said seeker was doing something wrong, why would god not do everything within his omnipotent power to correct said seeker, given the horrific intensity of the eternal conscious torment that awaited as the result?  Moreover, if faith need only be the size of a mustard seed, then having enough faith to simply pray about it shows plenty enough sincerity.  Simply put, there is no getting god off the hook by blaming the believer.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

1 hour ago, Clizby_Wampuscat said:

Why would god, who wants to save us, not respond to sincere seekers? Of course he Calvinists have a response to this

Scripture says that god is not willing that anyone should perish but that all should come to repentance.  Whatever calvinists might say about predestination, there's no getting around this verse.

[Clizby_Wampuscat]

2 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

This argument also comes up short in the face of a supposedly loving god.  If said seeker was doing something wrong, why would god not do everything within his omnipotent power to correct said seeker, given the horrific intensity of the eternal conscious torment that awaited as the result?  Moreover, if faith need only be the size of a mustard seed, then having enough faith to simply pray about it shows plenty enough sincerity.  Simply put, there is no getting god off the hook by blaming the believer.

Well, I agree t hat what is suggests is that if god exists it is not the god as described in the bible.  God could be a jerk and like people being frustrated by non contact.  But I agree it does dispel the notion that god wants relationship and is good.

[Clizby_Wampuscat]

1 hour ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Scripture says that god is not willing that anyone should perish but that all should come to repentance.  Whatever calvinists might say about predestination, there's no getting around this verse.

Calvinists have their answers to this objection and other Christians will disagree and round and round they go all the while both sides telling non believers that we can understand the bible correctly.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

5 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

This argument also comes up short in the face of a supposedly loving god.  If said seeker was doing something wrong, why would god not do everything within his omnipotent power to correct said seeker, given the horrific intensity of the eternal conscious torment that awaited as the result?  Moreover, if faith need only be the size of a mustard seed, then having enough faith to simply pray about it shows plenty enough sincerity.  Simply put, there is no getting god off the hook by blaming the believer.

 

I think the biblical "promises" of God are all epic fails. Like you said. With the faith of a mustard seed mountains are supposed to be moved. Whether literal or figurative it doesn't matter, time after time when the believer prays, the mountain is not moved. Jesus said he would return before his generation tasted of death, that didn't happen. The Bible convinced select idiots that they would be protected even if they picked up venomous snakes, yet snake handlers die all the time from their faithful stupidity. It says that he would lay no greater burden upon someone than they could bear. Yet the church is not immune to suicide. People would be healed by faith, yet God let's his faithful children suffer excruciating deaths from cancer and other terminal illnesses. 

 

The Bible speaks of the works that would be evident in a faithful believer. The fruits of the spirit. Yet for the God that those faithful people worship there is no proof of their God, other than the occasional coincidence that is interpreted in their Gods favor.

 

More and more the passages describing the impotency of the pagan gods can easily be applied to the biblical God. Obviously he either (can't hear, see, or touch), (has very selective hearing with obvious favoritism) 

, or (The biblical God does not exist) the most probable of course being the latter.  

 

It baffles my mind how I believed in that rubbish as long as I did. I really thought I was smarter than that. 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

3 hours ago, Clizby_Wampuscat said:

Calvinists have their answers to this objection and other Christians will disagree and round and round they go all the while both sides telling non believers that we can understand the bible correctly.

 

Every denomination does this. And they all have their select scriptures they use to prove their points. And they are all right and wrong at the same time. Ya really can't blame them. They are reading an archaic mythology that was changed, twisted, evolved, manipulated, forged, and fabricated through the millenia. It is a cluster fuck soup of thousands of years of Religious and political propaganda. I guess there really is something for everyone in that leather bond turd we call the Bible

[Clizby_Wampuscat]

13 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

It baffles my mind how I believed in that rubbish as long as I did. I really thought I was smarter than that. 

I have thought the same thing.  It has nothing to do with smarts but indoctrination and reinforcement and a lack of real skeptical thinking in my opinion.

[Clizby_Wampuscat]

12 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

 

Every denomination does this. And they all have their select scriptures they use to prove their points. And they are all right and wrong at the same time. Ya really can't blame them. They are reading an archaic mythology that was changed, twisted, evolved, manipulated, forged, and fabricated through the millenia. It is a cluster fuck soup of thousands of years of Religious and political propaganda. I guess there really is something for everyone in that leather bond turd we call the Bible

Yeah, but when I was a Christian I thought  I understood what it said and others were obviously wrong.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

1 hour ago, Clizby_Wampuscat said:

Yeah, but when I was a Christian I thought  I understood what it said and others were obviously wrong.

Yep I was the same way. I imagine most of us were. Probably not much different than the quacks that have visited our humble community lately....... eh ok. Maybe not so humble lmao. 

[pantheory]

On 7/15/2021 at 12:42 PM, Clizby_Wampuscat said:

Yeah, but when I was a Christian I thought  I understood what it said and others were obviously wrong.

 

I expect my opinion is a little different from most atheists. I think the most important thing in life is that you are happy and that you function well your entire life.  Of course if you can do so as an atheist or non-believer. I expect that most would agree that it's better to know the truth than to believe a fairy tail like those taught by all religions.

[Myrkhoos]

2 hours ago, pantheory said:

 

I expect my opinion is a little different from most atheists. I think the most important thing in life is that you are happy and that you function well your entire life.  

That depends. Maybe you are happy and function well as a slave master. Or a pedophile So as long as your happiness does not rest on exploitation, I might want to add, just to get started :).

[pantheory]

1 minute ago, Myrkhoos said:

That depends. Maybe you are happy and function well as a slave master. Or a pedophile So as long as your happiness does not rest on exploitation, I might want to add, just to get started :).

 

I forgot to say when in Rome do as the Romans, the meaning is that you must follow the laws of the land -- and for me this also means not to trespass on others happiness, as you added.