I value open-mindedness over most other things. When I was going through my deconversion and having frequent religious discussions with my family, I often felt that they weren’t being open-minded. I know that it’s hard (perhaps impossible) to judge how open-minded someone else is being, so I hesitate to even pass that kind of judgment. At the same time, it’s not like they were answering the problems I brought up with actual solutions — it mostly centered on how arrogant I was to question “God’s word.” On top of that, they never read any of the books or articles that I asked them to — I don’t think they even read all of the stuff I personally wrote to them.
It was the seeming lack of open-mindedness that shocked me most, in many ways. During my time as a Christian, I tried to be as open-minded as possible. I was part of a strict denomination that thought most other Christians were wrong, so I often had discussions with my Christian friends to try to help them see “the truth.” In those discussions, I often admitted that I could be wrong:
Either I’m wrong, or you’re wrong, or we’re both wrong. We can’t both be right…
I firmly believed (based on Matthew 7) that as long as I was searching for the truth, I would find it. Also, if what I believed about Christianity was true, then more study would only bear that out. In other words, I had nothing to fear by discussing and examining Christianity with those who disagreed with me. If they could show me where I was wrong, then that was good! It would mean that I had believed the wrong thing, but learning that would give me the opportunity to correct it and be more pleasing to God.
Now that I have come out of Christianity, I still feel just as strongly about the merits of open-mindedness. Recently, someone suggested that I read In His Image, by William Jennings Bryan (which I’m now doing), but when he gave me the suggestion, he then backpedaled and said I might not like the book because it supports Christianity. I was disappointed by that statement. I told him that I don’t read things based on whether or not I will agree with them — I take religion very seriously, because all religion is an effort to explain reality. If this book by WJB can provide some arguments I haven’t considered before, or answer some of my questions about Christianity, then I want to know that!
But now for the admission. Now for the part that I haven’t been able to say to my family yet: I don’t see any way that I’ll ever believe Christianity again. On the surface, that may seem like it runs counter toward my goal of being open-minded, but it really doesn’t. The fact is, I’ve just seen too much. “I once was blind, but now I see.” The fact is, the Bible can’t fix its problems because it’s a closed document. No more material is going in or out of it. Nor is God going to speak to me directly or perform some miracle to overcome my skepticism. We’re stuck with what we’ve got.
We’re left with a god that’s supposedly omnipotent, omniscient, and loves us all, yet we still have evil in the world. He remains hidden from us, but supposedly wants a relationship with us. He supposedly left us a message, but no one can agree on what it says, and its books look pretty much like all the other things that were being written at the time. As this post said:
Let’s face it – I may still be open to the idea of being convinced on the matter, but this is a genie that’s not going to go back into the bottle easily. I can’t unlearn what I’ve found; I can’t simply deny the truth that I’ve been able to discover without the fear of uprooting my faith. To ask me to believe again would be to take on the herculean task of not only providing sufficient evidence but also dealing with all of the logical and evidential problems or to ask me to knowingly deceive myself – and I’m not sure I’m willing to do that for anyone.
I am still an open-minded person. But I also know enough about Christianity now to know what it is and what it isn’t. I didn’t lose my faith by forgetting things, but by learning things. And if I had known years ago what I know now, I never would have been a Christian in the first place.
Finding Truth 
The Old Testament portion was written by Jews, for Jews. So to really understand the Torah, you would need to study it in Hebrew and learn the oral tradition that goes along with it from a Jewish rabbi.
LikeLike
As you’ve learned by now, whether you choose to admit it or not, I know far more about the Bible than you do. I am quite familiar with the Latin Vulgate, and already have a copy, but thanks for the link.
The Vulgate was composed, using both the Hebrew Tanakh and the Greek Septuagint, translated from the Tanakh in Alexandria by 72 Hebrew priests, interviewed and selected to have been the best of the best – it was reputedly finished in – wait for it – 72 days.
Any book with a flaw, cannot be completely believed to be inerrant. I have personally found an error in the very first chapter of the Vulgate. Yes, I do have a background in Latin.
The Latin Vulgate, the original source for the King James version, says: “dixit etiam Deus producant aquae reptile animae viventis et volatile super terram sub firmamento caeli.” Translated, it says: “over the earth under (not “in”) the firmament of heaven” – “super,” meaning “above,” “sub,” meaning, “below.” Where there’s one error, no book can be called inerrant.
In 325 CE, Emperor Constantine, fearing a civil war between Roman Christians and Roman citizens of other belief systems, ordered a conclave of Bishops to meet at what has become known as the Council of Nicea, and to come up with a definitive version of Christianity. After much debate, the Bishops culled through all of the various versions of Christianity that had arisen in a mere 300 years, discarded the Docetists, the Patripassianists, the Gnostics and many others, and defined exactly what THEY BELIEVED Christianity should be. They then set about deciding which books would be included in the New Testament, and some of those were forgeries, but they hadn’t the means at the time, to distinguish the difference. The main concept they devised was that of the Trinity, the idea that Yahweh, Yeshua and the Holy Spook were one single entity. This, of course leaves one wondering what Yeshua meant when he said that he had no power except that which was given to him by his father. To whom was he praying in the Garden of Gesthemene, who was he calling to when he said, on the cross, “My god, my god, why have you forsaken me?” Those questions were never answered
Further, his purpose on earth was reputedly as a sacrifice, but to whom? To god! To himself! How much sense does that make?
None of this is opinion, it is history.
Interesting side-note about Constantine, he knew he had a lot of murdering to do in order to maintain his position as Emperor, so he waited until the end of his life to be baptized, believing that baptism washed away all of his sins – had he become baptized earlier, he felt he would still be held accountable if he had occasion to murder again. Talk about covering his…bases!
LikeLike
With all due respect, Ron, I hope I can make a slight correction without offending – the Torah consists of the first five books of the Bible, falsely attributed to Moses, the Tanakh is the full, Old Testament Bible.
LikeLike
Archaeo,
You know a bunch of factoid gibberish. That is all.
Your nothing but a parrot who has memorized how to be stupid.
LikeLike
Ron,
The Bible, Old and New Testament was written for all mankind.
It is the Revelation of God about Himself that he has given to mankind.
Jesus was a Jew without whom the Old Testament would have no meaning to anyone outside the tribes of Israel.
The utter gibberish vomited out on this blog about the Bible is proof of that.
LikeLike
Earth to Mark! Earth to Mark!
Since the Catholic Church produced the Bible for itself and the spread of Christianity, YES! they get to decide what goes into their own scripture.
Maybe the atheist pink pie monster should get to tell the Catholics what their scripture should be and the meaning it should have.
The fits well with Archaeo telling JK Rolling what her Harry Potter books really mean. I mean, JK is such a screw up she needs an atheist to set her straight on her own work.
LikeLike
Mark,
No, it isn’t reason. It’s you creating God in your own image and setting arbitrary standards for him that make sure he fails.
That way you can tell yourself there is no God.
That is delusion, not reason. And that is the precise problem with atheism.
LikeLike
Good grief, more PeeWee Herman, and still no answers to my questions —
LikeLike
Archaeo,
Saying you have no belief in God, is the same as saying you have to faith in God.
Faith and belief are the exact same thing and you are playing the usual knit witted word games that characterize atheist bilge.
LikeLike
Archeao,
You go ahead and accept whatever you want. You have my permission.
LikeLike
So according to you, if I don’t have one, I don’t have the other, and since “a-theist” means “no belief” in a theology, you agree that I don’t have either – it really took you all afternoon and evening to finally agree with me? Whew —
LikeLike
You have no idea how grateful I am. No, you REALLY don’t —
LikeLike
archaeopteryx1,
Understood. I merely focused in on the first five books because the bulk of the comments seem to be centered around Moses and the Exodus.
LikeLike
Archaeo,
You can accuse all you want. It just matches the low level of all the other nonsense you have tried to peddle here as truth.
LikeLike
I know Ron, and I understand completely, I just didn’t want Si to jump on it, and he’s just the type – what I neglected to realize was that he wouldn’t even know the difference. Sorry.
LikeLike
silenceofmind,
There originally was no “Bible” per se — just an assortment of scrolls which were later combined into one book. And the Jews certainly don’t agree with Christianity’s appropriation and interpretation of their sacred texts.
LikeLike
Make sense, debate in earnest, answer questions, provide evidence, or retire from the field, I’m tired of playing with someone who is obviously an idiot.
LikeLike
@Ron, that’s the real reason that Yeshua, if he ever existed, was killed. He wasn’t arrested by the Romans, he was arrested by the Jews.
LikeLike
Ron,
That’s exactly right.
And it was the Church who examined all those scrolls and letters that had accumulated throughout the ages and chose from among them those that were divinely inspired.
The Jewish disagreement with Christianity is seen in the way they had Jesus murdered.
LikeLike
Archeao,
If you didn’t have a belief about God not existing and Moses and Jesus not existing, you wouldn’t be such a windbag.
Your fervor is proof positive that you do have a belief, and a very strong one at that.
LikeLike
SOM,
What right did the Catholic Church have to pick and choose which writings were the “right” ones? Why should we recognize their authority?
LikeLike
Make sense, debate in earnest, answer questions, provide evidence, or retire from the field and stop making a fool of yourself.
LikeLike
Has anyone but me noticed this “debate” with SOM is going nowhere? It’s so plainly obvious that he is not going to give factual evidence of his beliefs, nor is he going to change his thinking, so why continue? I love Nate’s blog and look forward to reading his posts and the comments that follow, but this discussion is getting rather boring and is certainly not going anywhere.
I do appreciate one thing, however. Ron and Arch have contributed some great information (FACTS!) that I probably would not have found on my own. Thanks guys.
LikeLike