Dumbguy

Well this is a strange place for Christians. Paul said that when a people reject (paraphrase, and if anybody wants word for word, I'll quote, I'm lazy, sue me) the Gospel we are to move on and preach it somewhere else. We should listen more to our teachers I know. Although reading most of my fellow Christians getting smashed in an argument about Jesus, I feel compelled to join the fray.

No, I am not a liberal Christian. No I am not a conservative Christian. I am a fundamentalist Christian. Meaning, I believe that I am a walking contradiction. I believe that I should be like Jesus, but I am not. No one is.

In my own understanding,(and I know there are many regarding the Bible), the whole point is that no one ever or will get to know God because he or she "is" good. Many Christians seem like they believe that you all are complete ning com poops and if you don't believe you are evil. That is not what the Bible says. That is what today's religion says. The Bible says we are all missing the mark. That we need God to forgive us for the way we act. That we have to suffer the experience of death once as punishment for our sin. The forgiveness comes in, so that we don't have to die eternally. Death (the word for Hell really just means the grave Heb. "sheol") is just seperation from contact with God in any and all personal fashion. Now, fire and bad stuff like that may or may not also accompany the experience of eternal death but that is just from our point of view.

This all is presupposing that we take the Bible for one moment as telling the truth. Just saying what if. That is all this web site argues about is what ifs. I'm not speaking of Science discussions, of the way things work, or in what we can create, no, those things are pretty right on. To a certain level though. That is my next point.

I've only read your site for about four or five months now, and one thing I have noticed is that your arguments with Christians or theists mostly are schizophrenic in nature. So far when I have referred to "your arguments", I am referring to the forum as a debate. I am not at all referring to "your" as in athiests. Rather, I am referring to "your", as in the debate itself, atheists and Christians alike, have together with eachother. Does that make any sense?

For instance, if I, an athiest, were to say that "by Science we have invented many of the things that make our lives better. So we should be grateful." Then the Christian says back to me, "Science is full of lies, one day they say one thing is good for you, the next day they say it will kill you."

You guys aren't even debating the same thing. Now, this does not always occur. But enough to make these debates really useless. Yes, because of people studying nature, and learning how to manipulate it we do have a ton of cool stuff that we all know and love. Even the Amish (sp?) use technology presented in the wheel. The person that is writing the Christian point is using a computer, so they are being weird as it is. But (I know sentences aren't supposed to start with but, but) the Christian was on a completely different level of thought anyhow. (Not level as in higher or lower, I just mean in different places) The Christian is trying to show that Science "as some people think of it" is tainted. He is saying that because a Scientist creates a vaccine, and another scientist creates a drug like the cholesterol one that killed some people, that just because someone does some studies on something a bit and then tells you, "hey, this stuff was tested, and is backed by such and such scientific research" we should not be so trusting in what someone thinks they found through Science. They really didn't find anything.

The point being that no one is getting to the meat and the potatoes of it all. How we should live and why. If no one can agree on two truths about science such as the ones described above or any other truths, then nothing is ventured, and nothing is gained. Not many on either side want to give an inch. If you just open your eyes you'll see all the places you agree. We (believers and non) don't need to comprimise any belief in the first place. There is much to agree on. Granted there is much to work together on, and there are major differences on where our faith is kept, but why not debate how to have a better world. Debate what would be a better world. Have a little fun. Christians, are the Athiests dumb. Athiests, are the Christians dumb. Is this the "look at the infidels argue really stupid things website"

Finally, if any Christians want to rebutt to me about something Biblical that speaks against what I have said, I can already think of your verses you will use. For each one I have one that rebutts you. Athiests, if there is any scripture that you feel is hard to swallow or that just seems to rub you the wrong way, I have one that rubs you the right way. Call out something that contradicts, I will explain the way it makes perfect sense in my mind, and you can study the psychological make up of my personality and find out why I have a ludicrous (sp?) fanaticism fantasy about some pompous arrogant evil dimbwitted mute God. Right?

The word devil means accuser. It is written that John the Baptist was called demon possessed because he neither ate nor drank food like most normal humans in the area at that time, while at the same time Jesus was called a glutton and a drunkard because he did eat and drink.

Love in Jesus Christ,
Dumbguy

Jesus Is Bored

Hello again everyone, thanks for your thoughts. Ex-Preacher, I appreciate what you had to say, your post was an encouragement to me. Ron Garret I also appreciate your response though I believe that Ex-preacher better understood the point I was trying to make, and I did qualify my post as a rant after all.

Ron:
I guess it comes down to how comfortable you are living a lie, knowing that no one in your life actually knows you or has a relationship with you that is not mediated by your facade of continued belief.

I personally find the effort of maintaining two faces to be more than I can carry and have the energy left over to accomplish or enjoy anything. Is it fair to your significant others that what they know of you is a shallow deceit? Are you doing this to protect them out of nobility, or are you doing this because you so doubt your own worth as a person that you think revealing your true beliefs would cause them to reject you? I'm not in a position to know which is which.

Do we really do anyone a favor by telling them comforting lies? I suppose there may be occasions where one would think so. You certainly do yourself no favor by creating an avatar for yourself, a make-believe person that your loved ones relate to, insuring that you never have real intimacy with anyone. That seems a very sad and unhappy situation to me.

What you are doing is intellectual cowardice, as you clearly know, or you would not have anticipated the charge. I am more concerned for the effect it will have on your life to live from a position of fear that your genuine self is unacceptable to the people you love, and for them, that the person they think they love does not exist. If they truly define you and value you only because you agree with their happy delusions that's really unfortunate. I doubt their feelings for you are that one-dimensional, but at this rate you will never know, will you?

Me:

Well I believe that I understand the points that you are making. But I think that I must clarify a few things because it seems to me that you are making some assumptions here, though I acknowledge that my post was vague. Though virtually all of the people important to me are Christians, there are a few that I have spoken to concerning my walk away from fundamentalist Christianity and my uncertainty about where I end up on the Religious spectrum from Fundamentalist Christian to Atheist. They have been understanding for the most part but what you have to understand is that these are people that I know are more open-minded, even though they are also professing Christians.

I once attempted to share my thoughts with a friend who then grew concerned and told me that I needed some prayer because I was obviously being demonically influenced. So I dropped the issue, we have other things to talk about. I have been prodding and probing people to see if they are willing to discuss these issues. You talk about a “shallow deceit”, well if me having not written a letter to everyone I ever knew declaring my new beliefs, or something to that effect, a shallow deceit than I guess I am guilty. Most people have no reason to think that I have changed and I haven’t told them.

Didn’t you say you are an ex-pastor? Perhaps maybe once a preacher always one? I’m not a confrontational person by nature. My father is a pastor and a confrontational character. He will view my decision to alter my belief system (assuming I come out as an agnostic or an atheist) as a confrontational act. It will also break my mom’s heart. I don’t view it as nobility or fear, just the right thing to do for right now.

Regarding your statement that I am “living a lie” well I really don’t know how to respond to that. I am still calling myself a Christian because I share many values with modern day evangelical Christians, I am doing graduate work at a Christian Liberal Arts college, and virtually all my friends and family are Christians. What should I call myself? I rarely attend church, I never go to Church prayer meetings or worship “jams” or Bible studies any more. I have nothing to gain from them. I challenge the stories I hear of Ouija boards flying around rooms and miraculous Benny Hinn-style healings. I am my own man with my own beliefs, some in a state of flux, and I am trying to reason out the best course of action for my future.

Some fundamentalist beliefs I was glad to discard because they seemed immoral. Some beliefs I’ve had to slowly let go of and it makes aspects of life harder for me now without these comforting psychological crutches. I am being honest about it though. This is intellectual cowardice?

Regarding my sarcasm towards atheists and the agendas that some of them posses: I just don’t want to be told what to think anymore. How is it any different when some loudmouth Secularist tells me what to do and think than some tract spewing Bible whore? In some ways it’s even more dishonest for an atheist to give some dogmatic statement than a theist because the Atheist has no law-giving deity that he/she can paraphrase their supposed statements as absolute truth. Somebody like Koy who states that the altruistic acts committed by modern-day Christians, with their religious convictions as the prime motivation for the act, are morally negated as a “good” thing by the violent persecutions that the historical church has imposed on non-believers! Why did I ever go on those mission trips when any house that I repaired, orphan that I comforted, friend that I made (to toot my own horn) was negated from being a good deed by the Spanish Inquisition! I wish I could find his post to quote him.

I assume that some will speak up and say that he doesn’t speak for you but hey, nobody of any intelligence spoke up in response to that statement anyway. It seems to me that the fervor that the infidels have to “gallop”(In honor of the Gish gallop debating technique) around these boards shooting holes through the arguments of silly theists with their six-shooters of critical thinking and skepticism often fail to notice that one or more of your members have put their guns away and are giving their horse a hand job! I hope I am getting my point across on why atheism doesn’t appeal to me. And I wish to offend nobody, except Koy.

Finally regarding Don Morgan’s point about the breakup of Dan Barker’s marriage:

“You probably have no idea, really, if Dan Barker was more responsible than was his wife was for breaking up their marriage--or whether it would have survived had he not "come out," or even if it would have survived had he not deconverted. In any case, she could have "seen the light," so to speak, and deconverted”

He is right of course and it was incorrect for me to jump to the judgmental conclusion that I did. It was an irresponsible judgment on my part. I’m done.

[ August 20, 2001: Message edited by: Jesus is Bored ]

Rich

Ron...if this is what you want to reduce discussion down to then I am done with you. I don't discredit what the Bible has to say...I discredit the tactic you used to present it (once a fundy always a fundy).

Rich

Please clarify what you mean by believe here...

ex-preacher

Jesus Is Bored,

I think you're on the right track. Each person's situation is different; it's a careful balance of the benefits and costs of what to share, when to share it and who to share it with. I wish you the best. Again, I recommend the Secular Lifestyle & Support forum, especially the recent Atheist's Testimony thread. You'll find many people who are struggling with similar situations. Hang in there!

ex-preacher

Actually, that was Jesus, but the point remains. So are you saying that you are violating that teaching by hanging around here?

<STRONG> That's okay, we're all walking contradictions to some extent - even Jesus. Jesus said that anyone who calls his brother "fool" is in danger of the fires of hell. Yet he himself went around calling people fools, later Paul did the same. I'm glad you don't try to follow Jesus in everything he taught, much of it was absurd:
-cut off your hand & poke out your eye
-be an absolute pacifist
-give money to anyone who asks
-hate your family
-don't save money
-don't worry about the future
-stay married, even if you're being abused
-follow the law
-don't follow the law
-lust=adultery
-perfume for his body is more important than food for the poor
-non-Jews are dogs
-anyone who rejects his teaching will go to hell
-for healing (or anything you want), just pray and you're guaranteed to get it
-plus he apparently had no use for democracy, free enterprise, science, medicine, education of any sort, art, entertainment, humor, sex, music, family life - all the things we most appreciate in life.

<STRONG> That's one of the biggest problems with Christianity: the most intelligent and committed followers of Jesus can't seem to agree on what the Bible really means. It makes you wonder if God is confused or if he's really tricky or the whole deal is man-made. Jesus prayed for the unity of the believers (John 17) yet today there are 34,900 denominations. Why did Jesus' prayer fail? If it is the fault of believers, why did he pray it in the first place? Did he not realize that it was up to people, rather than God?

<STRONG> It's spelled atheist. Are you saying science is to atheists what the Bible is to Christians? Big problem with your analogy, atheists do not claim that science is inspired or that science is holy and unchanging. The scientific method is designed to generate hypotheses and test them to get at reality. It is to be expected that new theories will arise that conflict with old ones. It's like working out a huge jigsaw puzzle when we only have a few pieces. In contrast, Christians (depending on the flavor) believe that the Bible reveals a once-for-all Truth. The problem is they can't agree among themsleves on what exactly it means. Look at the various positions on who Jesus was, what it takes to be saved, what hell is, or what the Bible teaches on divorce, capital punishment, homosexuality, abortion, end times, church government, the Holy Spirit, free will, baptism, you name it.

<STRONG> Exactly, the beauty and limits of science. Are you saying that Christians are against science?

<STRONG> Exactly. The beauty and limits of the Bible. It can be interpreted to suit each individual. You can find biblical support for and against any thing you want: slavery, polygamy, murder, lying, drinking, you name it.

<STRONG> Are you saying that Jesus drank wine? You heretic you. Don't you know that it was really Welch's grape juice?!

-DM-

The Bible makes Jesus out to be a Hypocrite

--Don--

-DM-

Excuse me?

If you wish to clarify what YOU meant, be my guest, but please answer the question.

--Don--

Rich

I asked Don because I wasn't sure whether to take your question at face value

if I do then:

1) 100%
2) none- although I do view some with various non-literal interpretations.

Maybe if you have some specific examples, I could address how I approach those passages.

-DM-

1) In my opinion, anyone who says that s/he believes 100% of what is in the Bible cannot be very discriminating in what s/he is willing to believe.
2) I'm sure you do have some interesting, nonliteral interpretations of otherwise troublesome passages, but I'm not really interested in seeing your interpretations. (Nothing personal. I would be interested had I not seen this sort of thing umpteen times before.)

--Don--