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

[Charity]

On 7/14/2024 at 2:23 PM, Nathan_Jr said:

Yeah, well, see? Here’s a condition: beleeve like me, think like me, get indoctrinated like me, or I’ll shun you.

Just pick up a newspaper or open Twitter or watch your favorite talking heads on TV, you’ll see BELEEEF-based division everywhere. The guy who shot the former President yesterday in a display of sad wickedness was motivated in part by BELEEF, just as both his target and his target’s political opponent foment division and destruction by BELEEF.

I maintain the source of all division is indoctrinated beleef. I don’t see division as a state of nature, rather, it is the fruit of conditioning.

Pay attention to the little children. Do they criticize? Now, who is the more “spiritually mature”?

Those who criticize my lack of belief in BELEEF are not my friends. And I lose no sleep. I have lifelong friends who are Protestant, Catholic, Jew, Buddhist, pagan, atheist… None of them try to proselytize me. Though we occasionally discuss esoteric cosmic mysteries, we never debate or argue or criticize. Ever. We find common ground. They love me, and I them, unconditionally. 

 

I'm getting a better understanding from the above of what you mean by BELEEF, something you have mentioned before in your posts.  Please correct me if I am misunderstanding anything.   

BELEEFS = beleeve like me, think like me, get indoctrinated like me, or I’ll shun you.  They cause division which can result in harming others who disagree with you. 

Beliefs = what everyone has on a multitude of topics but do not need to be pushed upon people.  They can be discussed civilly with people who think differently; therefore, arguing with and/or criticizing others are both unnecessary and unappealing.   

I'm thinking back to what you shared about your mother on page 2 of this thread.

 

 

[Charity]

9 hours ago, Rocky said:

Even IF it's "belief that since God can do no wrong, it is always wrong of the person if they leave the faith..." that's just how a person's very human rationalization for their criticism is simply a manifestation of the human tendency to criticize something they disagree with.

I guess I was coming from the perspective that as far as Christians are concerned, their beliefs are rooted in the supernatural or spiritual realm and therefore have top authority over all human thoughts, desires, etc.  Non-believers are not just disagreeing with them but with their God.  So when they criticize those who leave the faith for whatever reasons, they see their criticism as speaking on God's behalf. 

But I see your point - the reality is that they are humans defending what they as humans have chosen to believe.    I hope this makes sense.

[Rocky]

1 hour ago, Charity said:

But I see your point - the reality is that they are humans defending what they as humans have chosen to believe.    I hope this makes sense.

Of course it makes sense.

EVERY human is highly qualified to rationalize and therefore justify what they believe about anything, including what they consider God. Same goes for EVERY religion. There is no religion that can rightly claim their God (or god or gods) is/are the only true God and that they can prove it.

It's all about taking it on faith. IOW, every religion has an origin story and a narrative about what they believe is THE truth.

[Charity]

12 hours ago, Rocky said:

Of course it makes sense.

EVERY human is highly qualified to rationalize and therefore justify what they believe about anything, including what they consider God. Same goes for EVERY religion. There is no religion that can rightly claim their God (or god or gods) is/are the only true God and that they can prove it.

It's all about taking it on faith. IOW, every religion has an origin story and a narrative about what they believe is THE truth.

The sentence "I hope this makes sense." was referring to my first paragraph.  I was in a hurry to finish the post and stuck it at the end.  It was a "haste makes waste" sort of thing.

"Taking it on faith" is considered a strong virtue for those who believe in a religion.  Even when their god(s) fail them, most will hold on to it still.

[modcat5]

Got a complaint that one of these posts crossed into politics. It didn't. But it came very close.

Please continue to exercise proper judgment on this. Well done all around (including the "better safe than sorry" report).

[Raf]

To be a little more clear, I had a friend once who talked about how she survived a car accident in which two other people died (people she did not know) and she capped the story by saying, "God is good."

God is good. 

Unless you're the other family. F'em.

Now, that's not to say ANYTHING about my (now former) friend. Our reasons for no longer being friends have nothing to do with that incident. My criticism of "God is good" in that context is completely independent of my friend's character, just as criticism of "God spared candidate X and said f'em to the family of the fallen firefighter" has nothing to do with candidate X. Candidate X could have been comedian X or movie star X or pop singer X and the criticism of "God is good" in that context is the same.

The fact is, praising God for sparing one person when other people in the same incident were not spared strikes me as insensitive at best, horrifyingly arrogant at worst. And if we're really talking about the goodness of God, then that's something that needs to be answered. I mean, if you're trying to convince me there is a God and he's really good.

If you're not trying to convince me, that's another story.

[Claimer/disclaimer for anyone reading along who doesn't already know: modcat5 and Raf are the same person].

[oldiesman]

6 hours ago, Raf said:

To be a little more clear, I had a friend once who talked about how she survived a car accident in which two other people died (people she did not know) and she capped the story by saying, "God is good."

God is good. 

Unless you're the other family. F'em.

Now, that's not to say ANYTHING about my (now former) friend. Our reasons for no longer being friends have nothing to do with that incident. My criticism of "God is good" in that context is completely independent of my friend's character, just as criticism of "God spared candidate X and said f'em to the family of the fallen firefighter" has nothing to do with candidate X. Candidate X could have been comedian X or movie star X or pop singer X and the criticism of "God is good" in that context is the same.

The fact is, praising God for sparing one person when other people in the same incident were not spared strikes me as insensitive at best, horrifyingly arrogant at worst. And if we're really talking about the goodness of God, then that's something that needs to be answered. I mean, if you're trying to convince me there is a God and he's really good.

If you're not trying to convince me, that's another story.

[Claimer/disclaimer for anyone reading along who doesn't already know: modcat5 and Raf are the same person].

I get what you're saying.   What can I say but "we'll understand it all by and by".... we certainly don't now right?    I look at the horrible torture and painful death of Jesus in the same light how can we possibly understand it all. 

[Charity]

15 hours ago, oldiesman said:

I get what you're saying.   What can I say but "we'll understand it all by and by".... we certainly don't now right?    I look at the horrible torture and painful death of Jesus in the same light how can we possibly understand it all. 

I wrote something similar to the following on the "God's accountants, revolving doors, and Occam's razor on the scarcity of miracles" thread in this subforum.  When taking God out of the equation, one no longer has to try to justify the unjustifiable things God does.

~~~~~

I reactivated this thread because of a recent event that took place in Butler, Pennsylvania.  Almost Immediately after the shooting there, it was being declared as a miracle of God that "you know who" was only slightly injured instead of being killed. 

The obvious question then is where was the miracle of God for the man who was killed and the two others who were shot and were in critical condition?  The logical conclusion to this would be that God clearly picked and chose who to save and who not to save - who to protect from being shot and who not to protect. 

Different Christians will have different reasons for why God is justified in doing this.  One belief might be that God had/has a purpose for the lives of each shooting victim and that His plans will continue to ripple out to include their loved ones and maybe even further.

If you take God out of the picture, what is left are just the sad but real facts. 

~~~~~

The above is what the name of this thread is about.

Edited July 20 by Charity