Deconversion: Letting go of one's religious belief and accepting reality on its own terms.

[Charity]

15 hours ago, Raf said:

Folks are certainly entitled to those beliefs, but as Christopher Hitchens once said, "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." The new heavens and new earth are an assertion. Accusing people of being blind to them is a convenient way of sidestepping the fact that there is no evidence in favor of the assertion. Perhaps we are blind to the new heavens and the new earth for the same reason we are blind to pixie dust and the Loch Ness Monster: They are figments of the imagination of human beings.

There is an end to our world here in the physical. But that doesn't make the spiritual more important unless the spiritual can be established to exist. 

I remember writing in another thread (and in a comPLETEly different context) that if you step back far enough in time, you can dismiss and minimize just about any atrocity, especially those committed in the name of a god. So God tells you to kill a baby, and you do it, figuring the baby gets eternal life in heaven/paradise, so from the eternal perspective, how much harm did you REALLY do?

Yeah, that's a problem there. And it's not academic. Don't make me look up the verses where God commands Israel to kill heathen babies, or the honest-to-evilness exposition by the contemptuous William Lane Craig who argued with a straight face that the real victims of that episode were the Hebrew soldiers who had to carry it out. [Yes, he really said that. No, it's not out of context. Yes, he was serious].

Anyway, it's a LITTLE unfair to cman to make this point in response to what he posted, as I am SURE his meaning was much more benign. Nonetheless, I am compelled to respond with my reasons for rejecting the words of that post.

[I re-read this post and I seem a little harder on cman than I intended. I hope I can convey that while I disagree with what was written, I do so respectfully, and my heart is to explain why. Things got a little hairy between us a couple of weeks ago and I am not intending to resume any hostility that I previously exhibited].

Your post speaks so well of what many Christians (no one specifically) find a need to minimize, rationalize or ignore.  Personally, I didn't spend much time in the OT so I didn't focus much at all on the sick and terrible things God did there.  It's like the "out of sight, out of mind" thing happening.  However, for those Christians who believe in the trinity, it must be said that Jesus was right there along with God agreeing with him since they are all of one mind. 

I also didn't spend much time in the gospels, so I can't name where Jesus may have been doing the "like father, like son" thing, but he did teach that like the tares are gathered and burned in the fire so will all things that offend and do iniquity be cast into a furnace of fire in the end times where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.  He was not talking only about spiritual beings for he was warning those present who had ears to hear, to do so. 

[Charity]

1 hour ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Here are two “records” of magic, sorcery, or, if preferred, miracles, performed by Jesus. Which one is fiction? By what standard?

 

 

When this boy, Jesus, was five years old, he was playing at the ford of a rushing stream.

He was collecting the flowing water into ponds and made the water instantly pure. He did this with a single command. He then made soft clay and shaped it into twelve sparrows. He did this on the sabbath day, and many other boys were playing with him.

But when a Jew saw what Jesus was doing while playing on the sabbath day, he immediately went off and told Joseph, Jesus' father: "See here, your boy is at the ford and has taken mud and fashioned twelve birds with it, and so has violated the sabbath."

So Joseph went there, and as soon as he spotted him he shouted, "Why are you doing what's not permitted on the sabbath?"

But Jesus simply clapped his hands and shouted to the sparrows: "Be off, fly away, and remembe' me, you who are now alive!" And the sparrows took off and flew away noisily.

The Jews watched with amazement, then left the scene to report to their leaders what they had seen Jesus doing.

…………….

 

Jesus asks the demon for his name and is told, “My name is Legion, for we are many.” The demons beg Jesus not to send them away, but instead to send them into the pigs on a nearby hillside, which he does. The herd, about two thousand in number, rush down the steep bank into the sea and are drowned.

 

Hi Nathan, I'm curious where you read the first "record?"

[Charity]

32 minutes ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Some consider the story of Jesus casting demons into pigs causing the death of 2000 valuable livestock near the Sea of Galilee, where people were likely living hand-to-mouth, a historical record. The same will not consider the story of Jesus animating clay sparrows to life part of the historical record.

Both are fantastically weird and awesome stories! But historical records?

By definition, if one believed the account was fictional, then they should not refer to it as a record.  The noun "account" by definition does not include the words "facts" or "proven to be true."  This could be an alternative to using the word "record."

 

[Charity]

3 hours ago, oldiesman said:

Respectfully, what is the standard that we may agree on in this thread: the bible is fiction?   or the bible happened but some refuse to believe it?   or something else?

Good question!

[Nathan_Jr]

2 hours ago, Charity said:

Hi Nathan, I'm curious where you read the first "record?"

https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/infancythomas-hock.html

With a wave of his hand Jesus strikes down that tattletale kid, everyone freaks, but he ultimately straightens that kid out and everything is cool in the end. I love this story!

[Nathan_Jr]

1 hour ago, Charity said:

By definition, if one believed the account was fictional, then they should not refer to it as a record.  The noun "account" by definition does not include the words "facts" or "proven to be true."  This could be an alternative to using the word "record."

 

Yep. I think that was the point Waysider was making earlier. A good point. 

[Rocky]

Only tangentially related to this thread, We are Made of Stories by Leslie Umberger

Recasting American art history to embrace artists who have been excluded for too long, We Are Made of Stories vividly captures the power of art to show us the world through the eyes of another.

 

 

[Charity]

I’m watching a video called “Seeing Through Christianity - A Critique of Beliefs and Evidence” by Bill Zuersher.  With the concept of God being human made, he’s covered so far the evolutionary stage of the OT from Canaanite polytheism to Jewish monotheism due to the history of the Babylonian conquest.  He’s about to get into the transition of Jewish monotheism to Apocalyptic Judaism due to the Persian Zoroastrian influence.

I’m beginning to better understand why some Christians who believe in God but agree with the fictional storytelling of the OT will balance or cancel out the negative character of the OT God leaving God with the more positive image shown in the NT. 

Is this why someone (like myself for instance) who refers to the scriptures in the OT that show God committing atrocities may be pointed out as having a fundamentalist point of view?  In this way, fundamentalism can be taken as being subjective at times in contrast to the objective definition which refers to it as taking the whole bible literally and as being inherently accurate.  Am I understanding this correctly? 

Edited May 7 by Charity
Changed the last paragraph

[Rocky]

4 hours ago, Charity said:

I’m beginning to better understand why some Christians who believe in God but agree with the fictional storytelling of the OT will balance or cancel out the negative character of the OT God leaving God with the more positive image shown in the NT. 

My admonition: stay curious.

I just ran across this reference to a new book dealing with an aspect of deconverting: (From the Amazon blurb)

A gripping memoir about coming of age in the stay-at-home daughter movement and the quest to piece together a future on your own terms.
 
Raised in the Christian patriarchy movement, Cait West was homeschooled and could only wear clothes her father deemed modest. She was five years old the first time she was told her swimsuit was too revealing, to go change. There would be no college in her future, no career. She was a stay-at-home daughter and would move out only when her father allowed her to become a wife. She was trained to serve men, and her life would never be her own.  
 
Until she escaped.  
 
In Rift, Cait West tells a harrowing story of chaos and control hidden beneath the facade of a happy family. Weaving together lyrical meditations on the geology of the places her family lived with her story of spiritual and emotional manipulation as a stay-at-home daughter, Cait creates a stirring portrait of one young woman’s growing awareness that she is experiencing abuse. With the ground shifting beneath her feet, Cait mustered the courage to break free from all she’d ever known and choose a future of her own making. 
 
Rift is a story of survival. It’s also a story about what happens after you survive. With compassion and clarity, Cait explores the complex legacy of patriarchal religious trauma in her life, including the ways she has also been complicit in systems of oppression. A remarkable literary debut, Rift offers an essential personal perspective on the fraught legacy of purity culture and recent reckonings with abuse in Christian communities.

[Charity]

Here’s what I know.  My life is healthier since walking away from Christianity.  It's healthier mentally and emotionally which is inspiring me to work on being healthier physically.  It has freed up my time since there is no longer a need/desire to work on a 24/7 relationship with a god that supposedly wanted one with me. 

I’m now going to let go of the need/desire to learn more about why the bible was not inspired by any kind of God.  Simply put, I want to be able to stop thinking about god to the extent that only the rare thought will pop into my head and then quickly dissipate.

Thanks everyone for your input – it was much appreciated! 

[Charity]

3 minutes ago, Rocky said:

My admonition: stay curious.

I just ran across this reference to a new book dealing with an aspect of deconverting: (From the Amazon blurb)

A gripping memoir about coming of age in the stay-at-home daughter movement and the quest to piece together a future on your own terms.
 
Raised in the Christian patriarchy movement, Cait West was homeschooled and could only wear clothes her father deemed modest. She was five years old the first time she was told her swimsuit was too revealing, to go change. There would be no college in her future, no career. She was a stay-at-home daughter and would move out only when her father allowed her to become a wife. She was trained to serve men, and her life would never be her own.  
 
Until she escaped.  
 
In Rift, Cait West tells a harrowing story of chaos and control hidden beneath the facade of a happy family. Weaving together lyrical meditations on the geology of the places her family lived with her story of spiritual and emotional manipulation as a stay-at-home daughter, Cait creates a stirring portrait of one young woman’s growing awareness that she is experiencing abuse. With the ground shifting beneath her feet, Cait mustered the courage to break free from all she’d ever known and choose a future of her own making. 
 
Rift is a story of survival. It’s also a story about what happens after you survive. With compassion and clarity, Cait explores the complex legacy of patriarchal religious trauma in her life, including the ways she has also been complicit in systems of oppression. A remarkable literary debut, Rift offers an essential personal perspective on the fraught legacy of purity culture and recent reckonings with abuse in Christian communities.

Thanks Rocky.  I'm giving it all a rest.  I'll check in for topics of interest though and perhaps post about those. 

[oldiesman]

5 hours ago, Charity said:

Here’s what I know.  My life is healthier since walking away from Christianity.  It's healthier mentally and emotionally which is inspiring me to work on being healthier physically.  It has freed up my time since there is no longer a need/desire to work on a 24/7 relationship with a god that supposedly wanted one with me. 

I’m now going to let go of the need/desire to learn more about why the bible was not inspired by any kind of God.  Simply put, I want to be able to stop thinking about god to the extent that only the rare thought will pop into my head and then quickly dissipate.

Thanks everyone for your input – it was much appreciated! 

Charity, if you decide to try any other religion(s) please post about it; would be interested in hearing about your experience. 

[Charity]

16 hours ago, oldiesman said:

Charity, if you decide to try any other religion(s) please post about it; would be interested in hearing about your experience. 

I'm reading about humanism for now. 

[oldiesman]

45 minutes ago, Charity said:

I'm reading about humanism for now. 

Got it, thx.

[Rocky]

22 hours ago, Charity said:

Thanks Rocky.  I'm giving it all a rest.  I'll check in for topics of interest though and perhaps post about those. 

Rest is a very good thing for a person and her (or his) mind to do. Best wishes. 

[Charity]

1 hour ago, oldiesman said:

Got it, thx.

You're welcome oldiesman.

[Raf]

I consider myself humanist as well. 

Since there is no hierarchy in humanism, no one really gets to define it. This website gathers various definitions that permit us to ascertain some kind of consensus.

For me, it boils down to the following:

* No gods (or devils) or spirits, etc. 

* Morality is derived from human experience and based on both empathy and the greater good.

* Humankind is responsible for its future and well-being.

There's much more to it, of course. 

 

[Raf]

What I like about the Humanist label is that it places the emphasis on what we believe while merely implying what we don't. That someone is an atheist only tells you what he doesn't believe. A humanist is to be distinguished from a nihilist, who believes life is ultimately meaningless.

I personally believe nihilism = humanism + time. I'll agree with nihilists a billion years from now, but not today.

[oldiesman]

3 hours ago, Raf said:

What I like about the Humanist label is that it places the emphasis on what we believe while merely implying what we don't. That someone is an atheist only tells you what he doesn't believe. A humanist is to be distinguished from a nihilist, who believes life is ultimately meaningless.

I personally believe nihilism = humanism + time. I'll agree with nihilists a billion years from now, but not today.

That explains more, thx Raf.

[chockfull]

18 hours ago, Raf said:

I consider myself humanist as well. 

Since there is no hierarchy in humanism, no one really gets to define it. This website gathers various definitions that permit us to ascertain some kind of consensus.

For me, it boils down to the following:

* No gods (or devils) or spirits, etc. 

* Morality is derived from human experience and based on both empathy and the greater good.

* Humankind is responsible for its future and well-being.

There's much more to it, of course. 

 

Is a humanist one that removes all controversial posts from a thread yet leaves the ones up that present the same point they embrace?

I notice about 4 of my posts were removed one of which noting the illogical nature of an atheist doing detailed word studies on scripture and lecturing others on “going deeper” into those same scriptures.

Believe what you want.

Do not censor logic.

Censorship is not “accepting reality on its own terms” but re defining your own reality by restricting what is presented.

These tactics are identical to TWI.  The viewpoint is opposite.

Why is a “deconversion “ necessary?

It seems like those are folks that still need to break the bonds of the fundamentalist cult before building their lives in a constructive fashion.

I certainly don’t need that.  The Christianity I accepted in my youth is still sound and solid and nothing like the bondage of TWI.  I can and do point out their doctrinal and practical errors.

What I dislike is the ego shown in viewpoints.  It seems like a “dog in the manger” approach.  We can’t eat any of the hay but we are going to bark at all the cows to keep them away from the hay.

I am growing to understand OldSkools perspective on sharing from a perspective that will not be respected.

And one more note.

Raf if this post is censored it will be my last on this site.  Not trying to be mean or controversial but if conversation is going to happen there need to be fair boundaries. 
 

Peace outta this thread for the fifth time.

[cman]

How do humanist account for creation? Certainly there is some explaining about how earth came to be.

 

[oldiesman]

2 hours ago, chockfull said:

Is a humanist one that removes all controversial posts from a thread yet leaves the ones up that present the same point they embrace?

I notice about 4 of my posts were removed one of which noting the illogical nature of an atheist doing detailed word studies on scripture and lecturing others on “going deeper” into those same scriptures.

Believe what you want.

Do not censor logic.

Censorship is not “accepting reality on its own terms” but re defining your own reality by restricting what is presented.

These tactics are identical to TWI.  The viewpoint is opposite.

Why is a “deconversion “ necessary?

It seems like those are folks that still need to break the bonds of the fundamentalist cult before building their lives in a constructive fashion.

I certainly don’t need that.  The Christianity I accepted in my youth is still sound and solid and nothing like the bondage of TWI.  I can and do point out their doctrinal and practical errors.

What I dislike is the ego shown in viewpoints.  It seems like a “dog in the manger” approach.  We can’t eat any of the hay but we are going to bark at all the cows to keep them away from the hay.

I am growing to understand OldSkools perspective on sharing from a perspective that will not be respected.

And one more note.

Raf if this post is censored it will be my last on this site.  Not trying to be mean or controversial but if conversation is going to happen there need to be fair boundaries. 
 

Peace outta this thread for the fifth time.

I hope posts aren't being censored here.. all comments welcome far as I am concerned.  Thx.

[waysider]

28 minutes ago, cman said:

How do humanist account for creation? Certainly there is some explaining about how earth came to be.

 

I can't explain how electrons move from the light switch to the bulb. What should I surmise?

[modcat5]

5 hours ago, chockfull said:

Is a humanist one that removes all controversial posts from a thread yet leaves the ones up that present the same point they embrace?

I notice about 4 of my posts were removed one of which noting the illogical nature of an atheist doing detailed word studies on scripture and lecturing others on “going deeper” into those same scriptures.

Believe what you want.

Do not censor logic.

Censorship is not “accepting reality on its own terms” but re defining your own reality by restricting what is presented.

These tactics are identical to TWI.  The viewpoint is opposite.

Why is a “deconversion “ necessary?

It seems like those are folks that still need to break the bonds of the fundamentalist cult before building their lives in a constructive fashion.

I certainly don’t need that.  The Christianity I accepted in my youth is still sound and solid and nothing like the bondage of TWI.  I can and do point out their doctrinal and practical errors.

What I dislike is the ego shown in viewpoints.  It seems like a “dog in the manger” approach.  We can’t eat any of the hay but we are going to bark at all the cows to keep them away from the hay.

I am growing to understand OldSkools perspective on sharing from a perspective that will not be respected.

And one more note.

Raf if this post is censored it will be my last on this site.  Not trying to be mean or controversial but if conversation is going to happen there need to be fair boundaries. 
 

Peace outta this thread for the fifth time.

A few years back I learned not to moderate threads when I'm posting on them. You of all people should remember why. That rule has been modified slightly because there are just two active moderators left, not counting Paw (so three, but he's been pretty hands off). So now I will moderate a thread I'm on, but only under very specific circumstances. One non-negotiable circumstance is I WILL ANNOUNCE LOUDLY AND CLEARLY WHENEVER I MODERATE A THREAD IN WHICH I AM A PARTICIPANT. This has NOT happened on this thread. I am unaware of any moderation action on this thread at all. There were no reported posts and no removed posts.

Please let me know if I can help identify and locate any missing posts. There has to be some explanation. Censorship is not one.

[modcat5]

On 5/4/2024 at 12:57 PM, chockfull said:

Trying to respond to this I think a previous response somehow showed up missing.

What I find ironic is someone with no belief in any inspiration in scripture telling me to “look deeper” into scripture.

 

 No my remark is not snarky it is in the practical realm.

What is pleasing God?  It varies per individual but to me it involves seeking out a virtuous life.  I like my life better seeking out virtue than I do trying to parse over some VPW regurgitation of manifestations in a book he stole or “the law of believing” which actually I think we’ve shown to have spiritualist origins here on GSC.

Does God “always” provide wisdom when I ask?  I think so, whether it is in the form of the word of a friend, a sunrise, an idea, an observation about nature, a secular writing striking me in a way, or about a hundred other practical ways I could mention.

But to you He is “an unloving Father” because of how you interpret Gen 2 & 3 and are stuck on VPW believing fantasy and some idiot who is blabbing about devil spirits in a medical situation.

Yeah I get it.  It’s always the hypocrites that drive people away from churches and they are everywhere.

But what do you want to build in your life?  Tearing down idols is only half of a renovation project.

This appears to be the post you are saying is gone. It is not. You mentioned others. I see no evidence of missing posts (the only evidence I would be able to detect are quotes that don't link back to posts).