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 
Nate, great post, first time at your blog. I’ve just emerged from Christianity myself, and as you have said of yourself, by an honest acquisition of knowledge. I appreciate your candor, clarity, and patience in responding to comments that unfortunately lack those qualities. Look forward to reading more in the future. Cheers…
LikeLike
BTW, I particularly appreciated one of your illustrations: “If a father has two children, and one is beating the other with a stick, should he intervene, or allow it to happen?” Lucid, simple, effective. Can’t say that I’ve heard it before.
LikeLike
Thanks Brisancian! Glad to have you here — and I’m about to do a post to drive people to your site. I haven’t read much so far, but it looks very impressive!
LikeLike
“Historians and archeologists only have a ‘consensus’ that Moses, the Exodus, and the conquest of Canaan did not happen.”
— You’re saying that experienced archaeologists, degreed biblical scholars, carbon-dating experts, etc., have only a “consensus,” as opposed to Jewish priests, writing stories, hundreds of years after the alleged event allegedly happened, based on legends passed down by word of mouth is the more likely factual – is the one about Paul Bunyon and Babe, the big blue ox in there? —
“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.”
— So since the event in question, such as the parting of the Red Sea, or giant, traveling columns of dust by day and pillars of fire by night require suspension of the laws of physics, it is more logical to assume that they did not happen, until someone presents evidence that they did. —
“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.”
— how does that differ from what you’re doing? I’m sure he (and I) would gladly change his opinion if you were to provide him with evidence – have you any? —
“Those who mindlessly swallow such consensus probably also mindlessly swallow the scientific consensus that supports the global warming hoax.”
— Please don’t embarrass by demonstrating for all, your lack of knowledge. —
“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.’
— There is no evidence that Moses ever existed – like Noah’s flood is a plagiarized version of the actual Euphrates River flood near Shuruppak, in Mesopotamia, Moses is a composite of a possible tribal chieftain of a band of nomadic Israelites, who, for a time, merged his tribe with a tribe of Midianites and adopted their desert god, Yahweh, merging him with the Israelites original god, Amurru (“El Shaddai”), brought with them from Mesopotamia – the legend of this tribal chieftain was then given the attributes of the great historical figure, the Amurrite lawgiver, Hammurabi, by those Israelis in captivity in Babylon, where such information was readily available to them. The fact that Yeshua (Jesus real name) – if he ever existed – was said to refer to Moses as though he actually existed, implies that he believed that he did, which means that Yeshua could not be divine, as if he were, he would know that Moses never was. —
“Consequently, associating atheism with common sense is like drinking 3 day old urine thinking it is rare vintage wine.”
— Clearly you are not one who has ever savored the bouquet of vintage wine, so unless you have drunk 3-day old urine, I must assume you don’t speak from experience in either case. —
LikeLike
Archae,
It is you who are pitting inconclusive archeology against religious tradition that commemorates events from over 2000 years ago.
My claim is that there is not enough archeological evidence to state conclusively that Moses didn’t exist.
My claim is a fact and your claim is merely an opinion based on a consensus. And that is all the difference in the world.
Atheist don’t see any difference between their opinions and actual, objective facts. That is one reason why atheism is so intellectually debilitating.
Regarding man-made global warming… Again, you are expressing a personal opinion based on a “scientific” consensus.
If you understood science you would understand that there is no such thing as scientific consensus. Science is based on what is observable and provable.
Jewish tradition indicates that Moses existed. In the case of Jews and Catholics concerning Moses and Jesus, the traditions of those religions far outweigh the archeology.
That is because those traditions have traversed thousands of years almost completely unchanged.
By declaring that only physical evidence is valid, the atheist consigns himself to deeply ingrained ignorance.
That is because the scientific method is only one of various ways to gather knowledge and wisdom.
Additionally, what is important about Moses and Jesus is what they taught.
Making an issue about whether they existed or not isn’t relevant to those who seek wisdom. One need not believe that Moses and Jesus existed in order to benefit from their teachings.
LikeLike
Howie,
I am saying that consensus is what it is. And what it isn’t is conclusive.
The social impact of Moses and Jesus would indicate that they actually lived. Judeo-Christianity powered the rise of Western Civilization, greatest civilization in human history.
Clearly, restricting one’s knowledge and thinking to only one form of information is debilitating not liberating.
You folks have crippled yourselves intellectually and you’re demanding that the rest of humanity mutilate their minds just like you have.
LikeLike
The Ancient Near East believed that Gilgamesh was real for thousands of years. Does that mean he was real? People once believed that King Arthur was real. Does that mean he was?
Actually, Arthur is a good example, because it’s possible that he was a real individual. But it’s considered fact that he is not the same individual represented in Arthurian legend. The same is true of Moses, David, and Solomon. There may have been someone named Moses deep in Canaan’s past. But archaeology has shown that the Moses of the Old Testament was almost certainly not real.
Now, like the Mormons, you can continue to believe all the fantastical stories about Moses, but there’s no historical or archaeological reason to do so. So don’t expect to gain traction with people who aren’t believers. We have no more reason to believe Moses of the OT was real than we do to believe the legendary Arthur character was real.
But here’s the thing, if the findings of archaeology and history are not enough for you, that’s fine. They wouldn’t have been enough for me either when I was a believer. So while I can’t speak for everyone else here, I’d personally be okay with moving to a different issue — one that might be more meaningful for you. Contradictions in scripture, perhaps?
LikeLike
Hey Ark,
I think it’s very interesting you brought up the “real name of Jesus”.
I have tried to start conversations about this, countless times with Christians.
They always deflect and say that the name doesn’t really matter.
My question is, if the Angels themselves came down and comanded Mary and Joseph to call his name “yeshua”, and the bible states in Acts 4:12 “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” None other name means just that. None. Not even the name Jesus. Why is it impossible for Christians to see that and simply play it safe as they like to do, and start using the name yeshua?
It boggles my inadequate mind.
LikeLike
Silence,
You are saying anyone who says Moses didn’t exist is a fool, because there is no evidence that he didn’t exist.
But you are saying he DID exist, also with no evidence.
Both are opinion, but no one is calling you a fool.
Foolish?
LikeLike
RE: “The Jews and Catholics preserved incredible amounts of ancient knowledge through tradition (the passing down of knowledge from one generation to the next).”
Ever play a game called, “Telephone” or “Chinese Whispers”? What happened to the original information?
LikeLike
I did not say that there was no evidence that Moses never existed.
I said that Jewish tradition provides evidence that he existed and that Jewish tradition is actually much more informative than archeology in this particular case.
Moses was the leader of a nomadic tribe. So the chances of him leaving any physical, long lasting evidence is slim to none.
I am also saying that regimes like Pharaoh routinely wipe out all evidence of people whom they deemed unacceptable.
LikeLike
Nate,
How is it even possible for someone like Moses to leave archeological evidence?
Also, the Pharaohs of Egypt, like all authoritarian regimes, were notorious for wiping out any physical trace of those they held in contempt.
The Bible even tells of the Jews and their intention of wiping out any trace of Jesus.
So it seems only natural that there would be a dirth of
LikeLike
I see where you’re coming from Nate. After making the difficult decision to examine Christianity from an agnostic position – I have learned things that make it almost impossible to go back. I told myself that I should not become a Christian again just because it would make things easier on a social (and family) level. It would have to be based on evidence and the evidence would have to be compelling enough to not only convince myself of Christianity’s truth, but also allow me to convince others of it’s truth as well. So far I have not found that evidence.
I’m glad you said this. I like to stay as open-minded as possible too.
LikeLike
Thanks Dave! 🙂
LikeLike
RE: “And the thinking person also leaves the Christians and Jews to believe what they want to believe.” – so why are you on this site, if not to deny atheists the same rights you would ascribe to Christians and Jews? (Why would you omit Muslims?)
LikeLike
Silence, perhaps the egyptians did wipe out any reference to moses out of embarrassment or disdain, but they seemed to have kept detailed records of the Nile (height and such). Despite those detailed records, there isnt any mention of the nile turning to blood. Out of everything that supposedly happened, nothing was recorded outside the bible?
And much of the moses story is filled with huge claims of miraculous events, and you’re saying that the best evidence that they happened are the old stories passed down through tradition? Is there no limit to your gullibility or do you have a method for what size fish tales you accept?
I dont really care if moses was real or not. I dont care if he led a slave revolt out of egypt. Any and all of that is quite possible. But the far fetched miraculous events would be more readily accepted if accompanied with sound evidence – there deosnt seem to be any.
move on to internal consistency?
LikeLike
Silence,
As Nate has countlessly stated, the Mormon religion is based off the same “evidence”.
As far as Pharoahs having an agenda, the bible clearly states that after each plague, pharoah desired to let the Israelites go.
It states, “And the LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh, and he hearkened not unto them” Exo 9:12
But Moses probably was just having a hard time with words and stuff when he wrote that.
LikeLike
For the record, it is NOT just atheists who are stating that the Moses story is pure fiction, Christian scholars say it as well.
Okay…I am not going to play here with Silence of no mind. I fear he is winding everyone up.
If not then he is, quite simply , a Dickhead.
LikeLike
“It is you who are pitting inconclusive archeology against religious tradition that commemorates events from over 2000 years ago.”
— I am pitting the findings of educated experts who find no evidence of Moses, against the hearsay evidence, passed through hundreds of generations before it was ever written down, by men with less than 1% of the knowledge of how the world works, than the experts searching for evidence of Moses. —
“Atheist don’t see any difference between their opinions and actual, objective facts. That is one reason why atheism is so intellectually debilitating.”
— We’re still waiting for your facts —
“If you understood science you would understand that there is no such thing as scientific consensus. Science is based on what is observable and provable.”
— Possibly you should listen to your own statements from time to time – show me your scientific proof, obtained through observation, that Moses existed. —
“Jewish tradition indicates – yada, yada, yada –” – each time you use that phrase, be sure and translate it correctly, so that everyone will be able to accurately gauge the validity of whatever follows: “Millennia-old Jewish hearsay evidence indicates….”
LikeLike
@Silence – RE: “Judeo-Christianity powered the rise of Western Civilization, greatest civilization in human history.”
Western civilization was firmly empowered by the might and drive of the Greeks, followed by the Romans, full a thousand years before Christianity was even recognized as a belief system by the majority of the world. Judeo-Christianity was responsible for the Dark Ages, and I wouldn’t call that empowerment.
LikeLike
Actually, Mark, I believe you mean “Arch,” rather than “Ark,” unless I missed a post – not that I’m keeping score, I just want to be sure I’m responding to the appropriate comment.
I prefer the use of the name, “Yeshua” because, a) I can prove that’s what he would have been called, had he ever existed, and b) because it throws off-balance those Christians who all of their lives have heard their ministers speak of, “Jeee-sus!”
LikeLike
Silence, RE: “Moses was the leader of a nomadic tribe. So the chances of him leaving any physical, long lasting evidence is slim to none.” – according to your book of fairy tales, he and a million and a half Jews wandered around in the Arabian desert for 40 years, are you telling me that out of a million and a half people, no one tossed aside a Spam can or something?
LikeLike
Nate – “Contradictions in scripture, perhaps?”
since you brought it up, and since I have been thinking about rereading what you’ve already written on the subject, perhaps now would be a good time to repost, or offer a post that contains links back to your writings on this topic.
If you had new material in mind, maybe you you could do as suggested above and add the new stuff to it…
Just a suggestion.
LikeLike
So if I may summarize what you’re saying, Silence, two religious figures, whose evidence for existence has been erased (by Men in Black?), are evidence that there’s an invisible god —
“Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn’t there. Theologians can persuade themselves of anything.”
— Robert A. Heinlein —
LikeLike