Why I’m no longer a Christian

“IMAGINE no religion!”

Since: Feb 09

usa

#421973 Nov 23, 2012
LIes Busters wrote:
<quoted text> HA, so what a loser, you are working on Thanksgiving. What a loser life,.......
lots of people work on holidays. like police, fire, EMTs, nurses, doctors, ambulance drivers, those who work in nursing homes, those who man suicide hotlines, the list goes on and on.

all those people working so others can be safe, while fundie christurds stuff their faces.

guess you think all those are losers too huh.

if this is what your religion teaches you, then keep the hate filled religion.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#421974 Nov 23, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text>When speaking of all gnostic gospels on Wednesday, you said you rejected them because they did not meet the criteria of the Laodicean Council.
The Laodicean Council approved:
III and IV Kings
I and II Esdras
It banned:
Romans
What Bible do you have that contains III and IV Kings and does NOT contain Romans?
According to the criteria you set for believing or not in the Gnostic Gospels, ie the Laodicean Council, you must have a Bible that goes by the same rules you set for the exclusion of all the Gnostic gospels.
You asked me to wait until today to remind you, and I did so. So now lets get down to business and you tell me which Bible you're using.
I saw where he said that.

And thought, "Poor lil' fella. He don't know her vewy well, do he?"

ROFL

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#421975 Nov 23, 2012
love_spell wrote:
<quoted text>
((((((hugs)))))
oops should i ask mac first **wink**
Nihil obstat.

“IMAGINE no religion!”

Since: Feb 09

usa

#421976 Nov 23, 2012
AnnieJ wrote:
<quoted text>
"Poor saps"??? Some of those "poor saps" need the extra pay...others volunteer to work so that others can be at home with family. Then there are those that have no choice to work for fear of losing their jobs. No matter what the reason I am always grateful to those that give up their holiday...just in case I need something from the store or if for some reason I decide to eat out on a holiday.
Most people do not have a choice as to when they work...you should be grateful that you are not one of those "poor saps" that has no choice. Our lives are better because of those in the service industry...yours included since you might stop and get one of those "poor saps" to serve you your dinner.
^5

i remember working many a holidays in the ER. back in the early 90s when my ex and i divorced, i found it alot easier for us to take the boys and go out to a resturant and eat thanksgiving meal. rather than trying to cook all that food and then clean up after. i usually worked the third shift the day before or the second shift that day.

now days we do the turkey, ham and non meat items and friends and family bring the side dishes and desserts. tho i do make my boys favorite desserts.

hope your turkey day was all you wanted it to be!

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#421977 Nov 23, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text>When speaking of all gnostic gospels on Wednesday, you said you rejected them because they did not meet the criteria of the Laodicean Council.
The Laodicean Council approved:
III and IV Kings
I and II Esdras
It banned:
Romans
What Bible do you have that contains III and IV Kings and does NOT contain Romans?
According to the criteria you set for believing or not in the Gnostic Gospels, ie the Laodicean Council, you must have a Bible that goes by the same rules you set for the exclusion of all the Gnostic gospels.
You asked me to wait until today to remind you, and I did so. So now lets get down to business and you tell me which Bible you're using.
1 & 2 Kings were renamed to 1 & 2 Samuel. 3 & 4 Kings were renamed to 1 & 2 Kings. So 3 & 4 Kings are still in the Bible. This is just a matter of name changes. 1 & 2 Esdra were changed to Ezra and Nehemiah. It doesn't change the content at all, and so it doesn't compromise the integrity of the Laodicean Canon. Neither the Catholic nor the Protestant Churches accept 3 & 4 Esdras which are also sometimes mistakenly referred to as 1 & 2 Esdras.

Now let's move on to the debate about Romans. This, I agree is a subject of intense debate in the early church. It is without a doubt the longest of Paul's epistles. I am not sure why the Synod of Laodicea rejected it. I have researched this subject for quite some time and still don't have an answer that is satisfactory. This doesn't mean that it doesn't belong there. It just means that I am undecided about how and why it was rejected at one time in church history, but added later. It is one of my favorite NT books. The same goes for the book of Revelations.

I'm not going to sit here and just spout apologetic rhetoric just for the sake of having an answer. If I don't know something, or furthermore, if I am not convinced of it's truth, I'm not going to sit here and say any differently.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#421978 Nov 23, 2012
Resurrectionologist wrote:
<quoted text>
It could be hyperbole. But remember, hyperbole is only a communication tool meant to emphasize a particular point. It was a very common method of teaching in antiquity. If Jesus was employing hyperbole in regard to the destruction of the 2nd temple, it was to describe ruthlessness on the part of the Romans.
However, regarding this specific passage, it appears that the prophecy wasn't hyperbolic because the platform on which the temple sat was not considered part of the temple. It was an extension of the hill that was called the Temple Mount. Everything sitting on that platform was demolished. This is consistent with what is known about Roman vengeance on rebellious territories.
I trust that your question regarding literalism and hyperbole is a serious question and not a satirical swipe for your own amusement. If you're sincere, then here is my own personal answer. Attempts to discern the difference between Biblical hyperbole and literalism are severely hampered by our own Western ethnocentrism. To make a fair determination, we must first stop assuming that our own way of thinking and reasoning is superior to those of an ancient culture. This doesn't mean we have to stop thinking altogether as that would just be absurd. Knowing history, knowing languages, knowing cultural differences, and willingness to shed our own "here-and-now" presuppositions are all important if we wish to make a fair and accurate determination. In short, be open-minded without being gullible. Be willing to follow the evidence wherever it takes you even if it brings about emotional or intellectual discomfort. We need not think like the ancient cultures thought, but we must be aware of how they thought, and not get locked into the battle of comparing our culture with theirs. This is how I was able to escape the trap of my agnosticism.
Treating that as a serious answer: it still seems to boil down to "where it's inaccurate, it's symbolism".
You can't honestly point to an obvious false statement and declare "Well, since it's false, it's obviously symbolic" - that's cheating. Truth of the matter is, if it's false it's false.
And I'm quite certain that the ancients knew the difference between "true" and "false" - I've spent enough time reading classical literature.

And I will follow an evidence trail doggedly, wherever it leads, and form my opinions accordingly. It's just that, to put it mildly, said evidence does not support your position.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#421979 Nov 23, 2012
love_spell wrote:
<quoted text>
i mostly ignore your posts. you are a childish idiot and argueing with a childish idiot is like talking to a brick wall. only the brick wall has more intelligent things to say, than you.....
my vision of you is a child who stomps their foot and gives raspberries when an adult won't give into their demands.......
however to compare your delusional rantings to those of a NYC firefighter has got to be the biggest delusion of yours yet!!!!!!!
mainly because the fires these brave heros fight..........ARE REAL!!!!!!!!!!
I know all about fires. Until I was injured as a young man, I was a professional firefighter in a much smaller city than NYC. But that's not the point. The point of that post was to say that I am constantly correcting mistakes that the skeptical raise as objections. My knowledge of world history, church history, languages, and trips to foreign lands and historical sites have provided me with a vast amount of knowledge that trumps what most laypeople know. It does not make me superior to them, but my experiences and my education do provide me with formidable skills with which to defend my own personal faith. It is not my goal to silence you or any other critic. It is my goal to cause you to ask more questions. Not so I can prove what I know, because there is certainly much more to be learned, but so that those who truly seek correct answers may find them. To that end, I am succeeding. If I come across as a "know-it-all," it's only because I have provided you with knowledge that disarms your presuppositions.

“IMAGINE no religion!”

Since: Feb 09

usa

#421981 Nov 23, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text>How many have come here saying they just want to learn what we think and then never ask? How many have come here to be our 'teachers' and prove they know less by far about their Bible than do those who left Christianity? How many come here just to be nasty and stay on as dozens of socks?
I have not seen but one person come here and leave when she was told 'no thank you'. Kudos to her.
exactly!!!!!!!!!

fort wayne, in history center has a gingerbread fest every year. we make it an event and take past and present clients and children to this event.

one local christian school entered 12 scenes from the bible [crafted in gingerbread].

of course our group wasn't the only group there as it was senior day, so alot of nursing home groups were there.

our group came to the bible scenes. the first was the creation and some of our group were puzzled, until i started pointing out the symbols.

the second was the garden of eden [which i got because of the animal crackers used].

the third one was the parting of the red sea and they used taffy to make the red sea.

at this point i somehow became the tour guide for these scenes. and not only our group was clustered around. the fourth one really had alot of them puzzled. it was the ten commandments. one student had used rice krispie treats to craft the "golden calf" and it did look alot like a reindeer. until i pointed out the tablets and moses.

then there was jonah in the belly of the whale. i had to point out that the gummy bear in the middle was jonah.

then they had a manager scene which most got! then there was one that i got almost right away but most were clueless until i explained in detail....... mark 4:35-41 so many confused it with jesus walking on water.

as all these people are standing around listening to me explain these scenes, i am thinking........and i am the atheist, and know right off what all these scenes are!

btw a kindergratener had an entry no one got either, so i had to explain it was SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS who lives in pineapple under the sea..........he used gingerbread to make the pineapple!

personally it was one of my favorites. along with the RV made out of gingerbread! and NOTRE DAME!

“BE BRAVE ENOUGH ”

Since: Oct 09

TO STEP IN MUD PUDDLES

#421982 Nov 23, 2012
Resurrectionologist wrote:
<quoted text>
*
to defend my own personal faith
*
Why do you feel a need to defend your personal faith? If it is personal then it is unique to you and no matter what someone else believes or doubts it can not or should not affect your personal faith.

IMO If one feels the need to defend then you must feel at least a small amount of doubt yourself. When you are secure in your personal faith then the doubts of others are just that...their doubts. Do their doubts in anyway threaten you. Usually one only defends when they feel threatened or they want to convince someone else to do it their way.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#421983 Nov 23, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Treating that as a serious answer: it still seems to boil down to "where it's inaccurate, it's symbolism".
You can't honestly point to an obvious false statement and declare "Well, since it's false, it's obviously symbolic" - that's cheating. Truth of the matter is, if it's false it's false.
And I'm quite certain that the ancients knew the difference between "true" and "false" - I've spent enough time reading classical literature.
And I will follow an evidence trail doggedly, wherever it leads, and form my opinions accordingly. It's just that, to put it mildly, said evidence does not support your position.
Yes the ancients did know the difference between true and false, but there are many ways in which something can be true. In reference to the destruction of the temple, it was both symbolically true because the the period of sacrificial atonement ended (which was a symbolic ritual) with the destruction of the temple, and literally true because every building above the platform (of which the Wailing Wall is a portion- I've seen it) was completely destroyed.

Hyperbole is only a communicative tool. It's not intended to serve as a ruse or deception; so to interpret the linguistic use of hyperbole as "true or false" is misguided.

“IMAGINE no religion!”

Since: Feb 09

usa

#421984 Nov 23, 2012
Resurrectionologist wrote:
<quoted text>
I know all about fires. Until I was injured as a young man, I was a professional firefighter in a much smaller city than NYC. But that's not the point. The point of that post was to say that I am constantly correcting mistakes that the skeptical raise as objections. My knowledge of world history, church history, languages, and trips to foreign lands and historical sites have provided me with a vast amount of knowledge that trumps what most laypeople know. It does not make me superior to them, but my experiences and my education do provide me with formidable skills with which to defend my own personal faith. It is not my goal to silence you or any other critic. It is my goal to cause you to ask more questions. Not so I can prove what I know, because there is certainly much more to be learned, but so that those who truly seek correct answers may find them. To that end, I am succeeding. If I come across as a "know-it-all," it's only because I have provided you with knowledge that disarms your presuppositions.
no, the point of your post was you compared your pissing matches on an internet forum to those heros who put their lives in danger putting out actual fires and saving lives!

you provide nothing but crap.

but you will believe your delusions. as always.

“Live Love Laugh”

Since: Aug 07

Rings of Saturn Emporium

#421985 Nov 23, 2012
Resurrectionologist wrote:
<quoted text>
It could be hyperbole. But remember, hyperbole is only a communication tool meant to emphasize a particular point. It was a very common method of teaching in antiquity. If Jesus was employing hyperbole in regard to the destruction of the 2nd temple, it was to describe ruthlessness on the part of the Romans.
However, regarding this specific passage, it appears that the prophecy wasn't hyperbolic because the platform on which the temple sat was not considered part of the temple. It was an extension of the hill that was called the Temple Mount. Everything sitting on that platform was demolished. This is consistent with what is known about Roman vengeance on rebellious territories.
I trust that your question regarding literalism and hyperbole is a serious question and not a satirical swipe for your own amusement. If you're sincere, then here is my own personal answer. Attempts to discern the difference between Biblical hyperbole and literalism are severely hampered by our own Western ethnocentrism. To make a fair determination, we must first stop assuming that our own way of thinking and reasoning is superior to those of an ancient culture. This doesn't mean we have to stop thinking altogether as that would just be absurd. Knowing history, knowing languages, knowing cultural differences, and willingness to shed our own "here-and-now" presuppositions are all important if we wish to make a fair and accurate determination. In short, be open-minded without being gullible. Be willing to follow the evidence wherever it takes you even if it brings about emotional or intellectual discomfort. We need not think like the ancient cultures thought, but we must be aware of how they thought, and not get locked into the battle of comparing our culture with theirs. This is how I was able to escape the trap of my agnosticism.
You tell us to follow the evidence wherever it takes you, and then disagree with where our evidence has taken us.

Could any one sentence be more hypocritical?

“BE BRAVE ENOUGH ”

Since: Oct 09

TO STEP IN MUD PUDDLES

#421986 Nov 23, 2012
love_spell wrote:
<quoted text>
^5
i remember working many a holidays in the ER. back in the early 90s when my ex and i divorced, i found it alot easier for us to take the boys and go out to a resturant and eat thanksgiving meal. rather than trying to cook all that food and then clean up after. i usually worked the third shift the day before or the second shift that day.
now days we do the turkey, ham and non meat items and friends and family bring the side dishes and desserts. tho i do make my boys favorite desserts.
hope your turkey day was all you wanted it to be!
There are times that I think it would have been more enjoyable to eat out and less expensive! Three days of cooking and the hours of cleaning up.

I did eat out one Thanksgiving...then a few hours later I gave birth to my son. I haven't eaten out since on Thanksgiving...LOL

That whole conversation concerning those that had to work yesterday was disturbing to me...as if those people were less than others. I didn't find "poor saps" as a term of endearment nor as something to judge them by because for whatever reason they were working.

I don't know...maybe I over reacted but I have always been grateful to those that are there to make my life a little better...especially on a holiday.

“Live Love Laugh”

Since: Aug 07

Rings of Saturn Emporium

#421987 Nov 23, 2012
love_spell wrote:
<quoted text>
hope you had a wonderful turkey day!
It was great. Family and friends. Love and laughter. Ever so thankful that I had both my son and his wife with me as there was a time this year when doctors said neither of them would make it.

It was truly a wonderful and special day.

“Live Love Laugh”

Since: Aug 07

Rings of Saturn Emporium

#421988 Nov 23, 2012
love_spell wrote:
<quoted text>
i mostly ignore your posts. you are a childish idiot and argueing with a childish idiot is like talking to a brick wall. only the brick wall has more intelligent things to say, than you.....
my vision of you is a child who stomps their foot and gives raspberries when an adult won't give into their demands.......
however to compare your delusional rantings to those of a NYC firefighter has got to be the biggest delusion of yours yet!!!!!!!
mainly because the fires these brave heros fight..........ARE REAL!!!!!!!!!!
I figured he wouldn't hang around to answer the questions he asked me to remind him of today.

That's because he knows he set the standard for the Gnostic gospels by saying that they didn't agree with the criteria set out by the Laodicean Council. Then I ask him which Bible he uses that has all the books approved by the Laodicean Council and is minus the books (like Romans) that they banned.

Of course, he's going to chicken out and go somewhere else. I didn't expect anything else.

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#421989 Nov 23, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text> That still does not allow the fact that some of the stones are still standing to be overlooked.
A person writing a "prophecy" in 90 AD Rome or Greece may not have known that the Temple foundatio still stood. Another indication that it is an inserted "prophecy". Also the "three days" would have been a later clue. Any Jew knows that unless the exact year is know, any calculation from Seder to Sabbath varries. Passover doesn't begin on the same day of the week every year.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#421991 Nov 23, 2012
Resurrectionologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes the ancients did know the difference between true and false, but there are many ways in which something can be true. In reference to the destruction of the temple, it was both symbolically true because the the period of sacrificial atonement ended (which was a symbolic ritual) with the destruction of the temple, and literally true because every building above the platform (of which the Wailing Wall is a portion- I've seen it) was completely destroyed.
Hyperbole is only a communicative tool. It's not intended to serve as a ruse or deception; so to interpret the linguistic use of hyperbole as "true or false" is misguided.
Bah.

Either "all these buildings" were destroyed, or they were not.
At no point is Jesus claimed to have said "These here symbolic sacrifices of atonement will stop".

What's next? You're going to claim that since there might be stones, still one upon another, that they're just part of the basement, not the building?

Foundations, maybe, but not "building"?

And while hyperbole is not of itself deceptive, the deliberate assertion that a precise statement is nothing else IS.

Oh, and wasn't Jesus' name supposed to be Manny, accorda te?

Sheesh.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#421992 Nov 23, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text>You tell us to follow the evidence wherever it takes you, and then disagree with where our evidence has taken us.
Could any one sentence be more hypocritical?
It's not hypocritical. If you truly believe that your answers are correct, then stay where you are. It is okay for us to disagree. You say I have taken the wrong direction, and I say you have. What's the problem? Neither of us can force each other to be correct. I'm not trying to force you to adopt my views. I am pointing out the details that I believe you are incorrect about. I sincerely believe that when somebody stops and is satisfied with agnosticism, or atheism, or gnosticism, they are not getting the whole story. You feel the same about those who are theists. Is this not a public forum for discussion? Aren't we allowed to disagree?

You may think that I am attempting to coerce or force you to think the way I do. How absurd is that? The truth (as I see it) is that I have more answers than you have questions, and the fact that I am confident in the soundness of those answers is bothersome to those who aren't as confident in their own answers. As I told another person here,, it's not that I'm always correct, but that my answers to your questions challenge your own presuppositions in such a way that is sends you all scrambling for more objections, while we stick to the core truths of our faith.

When I say "core truths" I am speaking of the very basic concepts that all Christians believe:

Jesus was born of a virgin (How doesn't matter)
Jesus was baptized by His cousin
Jesus had a 3 year ministry
Jesus was killed by Roman crucifixion
Jesus was resurrected from the dead (again, how doesn't matter)
Jesus ascended into Heaven (once again, how doesn't matter)
Jesus will return (go ahead, guess what my preemptive comment is)

These are the core truths we believe based upon the evidence that is available and recognizable if we set aside our own modern ethnocentric presuppositions. However, doing so requires that we admit to being flawed and needing help to be better than we currently are, which some people just cannot bear to bring upon their own intellect and conscience. It's not academic. It's emotion that drives the need to reject God.

But if you choose to be satisfied with the answers that make you more comfortable, go for it. As for myself, I want to keep searching for new questions and new answers that are grounded in truth, and not my own emotional and egotistical comfort.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#421993 Nov 23, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Bah.
Either "all these buildings" were destroyed, or they were not.
At no point is Jesus claimed to have said "These here symbolic sacrifices of atonement will stop".
What's next? You're going to claim that since there might be stones, still one upon another, that they're just part of the basement, not the building?
Foundations, maybe, but not "building"?
And while hyperbole is not of itself deceptive, the deliberate assertion that a precise statement is nothing else IS.
Oh, and wasn't Jesus' name supposed to be Manny, accorda te?
Sheesh.
See, they call it "interpretation" and "discernment," we call it, more accurately, "making it up as you go." They do this to suit their own agendas, it's not uncommon.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#421994 Nov 23, 2012
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
See, they call it "interpretation" and "discernment," we call it, more accurately, "making it up as you go." They do this to suit their own agendas, it's not uncommon.
One has noticed.

There's a degree of hilarity involved.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 2 min crucifiedguy 281,831
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 min Hangman 973,644
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 8 min mpetershat 653,671
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 14 min River Tam 63,353
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 44 min Peace_Warrior 618,748
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 1 hr andet1987 2,565
girls, when is the first time u saw a penis (Feb '14) 1 hr Katie_Anderson14 14
More from around the web