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 
@Josh (in particular)
Such posts, irrespective of what they start out as have a habit of falling back on old stalwarts, good, evil, and god.
There is a sense of inevitability which I suspect is because these are the only core issues (along with life after death) that really interest Christians, hence their almost pathological need to
prove – at least to themselves- that their god is real.
But the bad news, for Christians at any rate , is if one takes a simple commonsense view it can all be dispensed with in a matter of moments – IF one is prepared to look at a few historical realities and not to cherry pick the Bible to find the best way to shoe-horn the text into your own little worldview.
1) It has been shown conclusively by archaeologists that Moses, The Exodus and the Conquest of Canaan is all FICTION. It did not happen. This has been known as FACT for over a quarter of a century and is accepted as fact by every leading archaeologist in the world.
Others that accept this are people such a Chief Rabbi Wolpe.
2) The New Testament character, Jesus, mentions Moses and the ‘Law’ on numerous occasions.
Ergo, he was under the misapprehension that Moses was real, he was insane, he lied, or he did not exist.
Considering all the other anomalies with the text, the commonsense option is the last. The Biblical character Jesus, did not exist.
This , of course, blows Islam out of the water as well.
You cannot out run the truth.The question is, what are you going to do when it catches up with you?
Thank you very much.
LikeLike
William G. Dever, author of the book, “What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It?” was raised a theist, and educated in religious schools. After nearly half-a-century of work as a biblical archaeologist, working in Israel, Dever concludes: “After a century of exhaustive investigation, all respectable archaeologists have given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob credible historical figures.” He writes of archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus as having been “discarded as a fruitless pursuit.”
Biblical scholar Robert M. Best wrote “Noah’s Ark and the Ziusudra Epic,” demonstrating that Noah’s “flood” was actually a Mesopotamian event that occurred when the Euphrates River flooded and overflowed it’s banks by 22.5 feet – devastating in an area we today would consider about three counties, but hardly global. It is described mythologically in the classic “The Epic of Gilgamesh,” and in fact, Genesis uses the same phrase, “god smelled the sweet savor” that is used in “Gilgamesh,” indicating a direct plagiarization.
Other biblical scholars and archaeologists have demonstrated that many of the cities allegedly destroyed by Joshua, including his famous conquest of Jericho, had walls that came a tumblin’ down long before Josh’s time, if in fact he ever existed.
The Israeli archeological team of Finklestein and Silberman have demonstrated that although Kings David and Solomon were actual, historical figures, their “kingdoms” were mere fractions of the size the Bible portrays them to have been.
Most of those who profess to believe in this book, know nothing about it’s actual history, ans prefer to leave it that way – they just need a fairy tale to believe in, to fill the gaps in their lives and reassure them about death.
LikeLike
@archaeopteryx1
It is disgusting that fraudulent people, the likes William Lane Craig and his ilk, are never pulled up for such flagrant obfuscation.
And it is because of such issues that atheists will continue to chip away at the stone of make believe until common sense prevails.
If the blokes like Josh and unklee, two regular visitors to this blog, were prepared to be brutally honest as Nate was with everything they claim is truth and recognise it is nothing but make believe such nonsense would disappear very quickly.
LikeLike
Josh, I wasnt saying that you were absurd. I was trying to say that if everything is possible for god, whether it be flying, knowledge of everything that has been and yet to come, bending physics or even suspending logic and reason (do absurd things), then ANYthing becomes a “possibility.”
I’m saying that isnt a good defense. I’m saying that sort of excuse only dismisses issues without actually having to address them.
This is one extreme example, but let’s just say a “holy” book said 2+2=9. I would say, that was an error. But a believer of that religion could say, “but for god, anything is possible…” or the, “maybe it does workout to 9 if there were other factors we’re just not aware of…” or “it’s too obvious a problem to be a real problem… (I’ve actually heard this from people. They’re trying to make the point that it would have been caught and edited if it were a human mistake in a human book. I would explain why this is silly, but i think it speaks for itself).
Anyhow, I hope this clarified. Wasnt calling you absurd this time.
LikeLike
Arkenaten,
Let me destroy your nonsense item my item.
1. Historians and archeologists only have a “consensus” that Moses, the Exodus, and the conquest of Canaan did not happen.
Because the events in question happened so long ago as to be virtually lost in the sands of time there is no way to say with certainty that the events in question did not happen.
For the intellectually stunted atheist, personal opinion becomes fact because only that which supports atheism is given any consideration.
So you are merely expressing a personal opinion about the veracity of a consensus whose only merit is that it supports your personal opinion.
Those who mindlessly swallow such consensus probably also mindlessly swallow the scientific consensus that supports the global warming hoax.
2. Jesus based his teachings on the teachings of Moses. Since the famous Greek philosopher Socrates never wrote a word or left any physical evidence of his existence are we also to assume that Plato and Aristotle were insane or lying?
Of course not. So your accusation against Jesus is the usual biased atheist crap that only fools the terminally ignorant.
Consequently, associating atheism with common sense is like drinking 3 day old urine thinking it is rare vintage wine.
LikeLike
Well, this should get interesting. 🙂
LikeLike
COME AND SEE silenceofmind BATTLE Arkenaten LIVE! 2 shall enter. 1 Shall leave.
Silenceofmind, before your game of wits with Ark properly kicks off, do you care to answer any of the questions you ignored yesterday?
and I just have to briefly commend you on your calling out of the “global warming hoax.” bravo. I mean, the ice caps are melting and the US government has literally spent millions in relocating the Inuits due to rising waters from the melting ice. And the glaciers and icecaps are receding and melting at historic and measurable rates.
Was it that the abundance of ice and snow of the past was the hoax? Thankfully you’ve come in the nick of time to educate all these crazies who believe in silliness like “global warming” and who are too naive to fall for a magically conceived god-man who flew into heaven and made wine out of water. idiots.
LikeLike
@Silence of no mind.
Oh dear….
The only reason there is consensus is simply because there is no alternative evidence to support an alternative view.
William Allbright tried to prove the bible archaeologically and failed at EVERY attempt. His work in this particular field of archaeology is often considered the benchmark of what NOT to do.
”So you are merely expressing a personal opinion about the veracity of a consensus whose only merit is that it supports your personal opinion.”
If was merely expressing an opinion I would say “In my opinon…”
The archaeology speaks for itself, and certainly doesn’t need someone like me to wave a flag for it.
I couldn’t even dig a decent flower bed
”Jesus based his teachings on the teachings of Moses. Since the famous Greek philosopher Socrates never wrote a word or left any physical evidence of his existence are we also to assume that Plato and Aristotle were insane or lying?”
it is probably wise if you read what I write carefully, I don’t want to have to resort to using crayon and single syllable. So I shall make this as clear for you as possible…but only ones, so please pay attention.
1.Moses did not exist. This is considered fact an is NOT DISPUTED by ant recognized scholar.
This next bit is my own point of view….
2. Thus , if the biblical character, Jesus, referenced him (which he did) it means:.
a) Jesus was unaware of the history.
b) He knew the history was false but still referenced him and thus lied.
c) He like Moses was a narrative construct.
Personally, I prefer option c as it make the most sense and we can dismiss Islam in one fell swoop as well.
Thank you.
If you are able to supply any evidence to refute any of this please do.
But if you are going to try, then please begin with Moses and the Exodus.
I will not enter any further discussion with you until we can establish the veracity of this character, okay?
Good show….
Over to you.
LikeLike
AWWW SNAP!
LikeLike
I’m sorry. Sorry everyone. I hate “snap.” Just having fun here. When having heated debates over religion, one cant help but have a good time.
LikeLike
1. The point is that no one really knows. So your attack on Moses is baseless and fundamentally biased.
2. The archeology does indeed speak for itself, what little there is. There is so little that it is impossible to conclusively prove the issue one way or the other.
Again, your conclusion is the result of bias, not facts.
How do you know Moses did not exist? How do you know Socrates existed. Again you are merely projecting your bias.
Repeating your bias over and over again only makes it true in your own mind and the minds of those who believe like you do.
In the hood they call that an echo chamber.
The rest of your comments are based on your applying your postmodern worldview to the ancient Hebrew worldview.
Again, that is bias.
In ancient times knowledge was passed on by tradition. Tradition took the form of stories, ceremonies and behavioral practices.
The Jews and Catholics preserved incredible amounts of ancient knowledge through tradition (the passing down of knowledge from one generation to the next).
LikeLike
silenceofmind,
Contrary to the belief of Mormons, we’ve never found any evidence to indicate that North America was populated by a “lost tribe of the Jews.” Since we’ve never found any evidence, does that mean the possibility of the Mormons being right about this is 50/50? Or does the supreme lack of evidence make it more probable that the events they claim didn’t happen?
LikeLike
It’s called normal weather between ice ages.
Did you know that last year there were over 4 times as many low temperature records set as high temperature records?
The sun is what causes warming or cooling, not man-made atmospheric CO2. A volcano burping puts more CO2 into the atmosphere than all of mankind has during his existence on planet Earth.
There is no man-made global warming.
Atmospheric CO2 is minuscule.
And the hoax of man-made global warming depends on people believing the lie that atmospheric CO2 is massive and is caused by man.
It’s more trash for the ignorant.
LikeLike
”1. The point is that no one really knows. So your attack on Moses is baseless and fundamentally biased.”
The point is they DO know. Go and do a bit of research instead of arguing with me. It’s not my fault if Messrs Finkelstein et al widdled in your religious cornflakes.
.”2 The archaeology does indeed speak for itself, what little there is. There is so little that it is impossible to conclusively prove the issue one way or the other.”
The fact is there should be evidence. You remember all the places those naughty Israelite camped at for years, yes? Well, guess what, hotshot…not so much as damn pottery shard, fossilized goat dung or Quail bone in sight.
”’Again, your conclusion is the result of bias, not facts.
How do you know Moses did not exist? How do you know Socrates existed. Again you are merely projecting your bias.”
Not MY bias. I was as stunned as the next bloke when I read about it.
It is Archaeological evidence. Pretty much the whole archaeological world agrees.
If you want to be the lone apologetic voice pissing in the Sinai wind, so be it. I don’t care and don’t have to prove ANYTHING to you.
Archaeology has already done this job. All you are doing is making yourself look just a bit silly.
I have no idea what point you were trying to get across with the last bit or what relevance there is.
And so far you have not offered up a single shred of evidence to dispute the archaeological findings.
What’s the matter? Too difficult for you?
LikeLike
I can’t speak for the rest of the world, but here in the US, many churches have groups that split off every Sunday afternoon, meet in the home of one of the members, and do “Bible Study” – what a difference it would make, if instead of studying Paul (who actually hijacked the Christian religion from the original disciples), and cherry-picking the parts about how much their god loves them, they would actually STUDY the Bible, it’s origins, its authors, and the circumstances under which it was written.
LikeLike
If it’s only about the sun, why is the moon colder than the earth? Shouldn’t they be the same temperature? The gases in the atmosphere have a great deal to do with global temperature. Certainly the earth has gone through many temperature changes over its long life, but now it also has mankind contributing to the natural cycles. The level of CO2 in the atmosphere is directly related to global temperature. It’s not possible for us to contribute as much as we do without it making an effect.
But let’s not get into global warming. There are bigger fish to fry here. I’d like to hear what your answer is to my question about the archaeological evidence for Mormonism.
LikeLike
Silence,
I think Ark has some really good points here. I’m curious, do you believe that there is no consensus among the experts about Moses’ existence, or do you just believe the consensus is wrong?
I agree with your statement that because the events happened so long ago we cannot know with certainty what happened. This is an unfortunate thing for all of us, but I think Nate’s last response is a good example of why there are some cases where we can reasonably conclude that certain things didn’t occur based on evidence or lack of evidence.
We should try to be as unbiased as we can which is impossible for every human being, but if we try to rely on the evidence or lack thereof as well as the consensus of experts (and some of the experts are Christians and Jews who would like to prove that Moses existed) then this seems to me like a perfectly reasonable way to draw conclusions.
If there is a consensus and we choose to deny it then I think it may be fairly stated that this person may be falling prey to biases more than the one who goes along with consensus. Is this wrong thinking?
LikeLike
Big thumbs up to that, archaeopteryx!
LikeLike
Your argument now consists of the usual atheist tactic of hallucinating an infinite number of alternative realities and then demanding that each one be addressed.
Who gives a crap about the Mormons?
And let’s get reality settled before we venture off into the infinite alternative universes that inhabit atheist La-La Land.
At issue is the claim that archeologists have conclusively proven that Moses did no exist.
That claim is false.
For lack of evidence archeologists have formed a consensus that the physical evidence does not support Moses’ existence.
So any thinking person just leaves it at that.
And the thinking person also leaves the Christians and Jews to believe what they want to believe.
LikeLike
so you’re response is basically, “i cant answer the question so I’m gonna dodge it?”
LikeLike
“Your argument now consists of the usual atheist tactic of hallucinating an infinite number of alternative realities and then demanding that each one be addressed.”
maybe you’re hallucinating that. They asked a (not infinite) related question which some religious people believe, namely that the mormons make a stupid unsupported claim. Couldnt they make the same argument you are, that the lack of evidence means that it could go either way?
the question seems fair and it does relate. your thoughts?
LikeLike
”At issue is the claim that archeologists have conclusively proven that Moses did no exist.
That claim is false.
For lack of evidence archeologists have formed a consensus that the physical evidence does not support Moses’ existence.
So any thinking person just leaves it at that.
And the thinking person also leaves the Christians and Jews to believe what they want to believe.”
Nope. Not only the consensus, but also the majority, and this includes historians, a fair number of Rabbis, and Christian scholars as well. Not yu of course, but then you don’t count
And as I stated right at the beginning. No Moses….probably no Jesus – and certainly no Jesus of the bible and definitely no DIVINE Jesus.
Now pack it up because you are just being silly.
Offer up some evidence to refute the statement or shove off.
LikeLike
Silence,
You said this:
This is an interesting statement. I’m curious what you viewpoint is here. Do you believe that everyone should just choose on their own the metaphysical worldview that they believe (whether it be Jewish, Christian, Hindu, Naturalist, Non-believer, etc.) and that we should all just shut our mouths about it entirely and not discuss it with each other or help each other make an effort to arrive at what is true?
LikeLike
the statement almost implies that christians and jews arent thinking people… which I dont agree with. I mean, I dont agree with their religious thoughts, but many of those people are otherwise very sound in their thinking.
LikeLike
SOM, why are you so angry?
Obviously, you disagree with us, but I’d ask you to step back a minute and think about the fact that we’re still human beings. And hopefully, you can tell that we’re not morons — we’ve come to our positions through a lot of thought and study. Now maybe we’re wrong; that’s definitely a possibility. But all of us could be wrong, including you.
If you want to engage us in an actual discussion about what is true and how we can determine what is true, I think everyone here (at least most of us) would be willing to have a discussion like that. But so far, you seem more interested in sniping than anything else. Is that how Jesus would have interacted with sinners?
LikeLike