You know Kathy, we’ve been fairly blunt with you today. Flippant, too. And it’s tough when people talk to/about you that way. I’m sorry for that.
If we could cut through all the rhetoric for a second, I’d like to commiserate with you. A little over 4 years ago, I was a very dedicated Christian. I had some doubts, but they weren’t about the Christian faith, just my understanding of it.
I felt like there were problems in my beliefs about the gospel. I believed in a literal Hell, and I believed a lot of people would be going there. But I had a very hard time squaring that with a loving God. I had matured enough to realize that most people were pretty decent. Not perfect, certainly, but good people who cared about others and typically wanted to do the right thing. I didn’t think such people deserved Hell. In fact, like Paul, I often thought that if God would accept it, I’d gladly go to Hell myself, if it would save my friends and family. And if everyone else could be added into that deal too, even better.
So if I felt that way, could I be more compassionate than God? Of course not. But I had a very hard time finding anything in the Bible that backed up an idea that most people, regardless of creed or belief would be saved.
I didn’t give up though. I knew about Universalists, so I decided to read up on their reasons for thinking everyone went to Heaven. It sounded good, but I just wasn’t convinced by their arguments. I just didn’t see the Bible teaching such a doctrine, and I still believed the Bible was the inerrant word of God.
I was in a state of flux.
And that’s the position I was in when I first ran across articles that pointed out flaws in the Bible. I was shocked by what the articles said, but since I didn’t have any answers against them at the moment, I got busy with research. I didn’t even comment on the articles — I just went to work. It wasn’t about winning any arguments; it was simply a search for answers.
I think that frame of mind I was in made all the difference for me. Deep down, I was already struggling. The doctrines I had long believed in, and even taught to others, didn’t fit together in my mind as well as they once had.
That’s probably the difference between you and me. I get the feeling that you question nothing about your faith. Not trying to put you down about that; just making an observation.
For me, discovering that the Bible was not the perfect book I had always thought it to be, and finding out that some of these church leaders I had always admired knew of these problems but never spoke of them, helped me make sense of a lot of things. It took time, and it wasn’t easy to come to the realizations, but everything finally fell into place for me when I realized Christianity was just another religion. For the first time, I finally understood the sentiment of that line from “Amazing Grace,” I once was blind, but now I see…
I don’t know if that’s helpful to you at all. Maybe one day it will be. Maybe one day, something will make you ask a few questions, and you’ll think back to those non- believers who were so insistent that Christianity was certainly not the only way. If that day comes, I hope you’ll find this exchange helpful and realize you’re not alone.
Finding Truth 
“Yes, I’m definitely noticing this. Or, if not a flat out denial, then the point is just ignored.. obviously hoping that it won’t be brought up again. I don’t understand how searching for truth and these actions gel.. they don’t.” – kathy
i’m not sure how either of you honestly believe this…
LikeLike
William,
“do you realize that the evidences you gave are the same evidences claimed by most religions? How do you find them credible for the bible, but incredible for the other religions?”
Yes.. many of my comments reveal my understanding of this.. and many of my comments elaborate on why their credentials fail and Christianity’s doesn’t. It’s about quality of credentials.. it’s about WEIGHING the evidence/ credentials.
LikeLike
And their credentials are the word of a single person who, there is no disputing, was a pedophile and a murderer. No need to look further.
Kathy, why is Mo’s character any worse than the “righteous” pedophiles and murderers found in the Bible? Moses killed an Egyptian and commanded the men to “save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.” Lot banged his daughters in a cave. Abe pimped out his half-sister/wife—twice! He also impregnated her maid and then banished both her and their son Ishmael out into the desert. Jacob married two sisters and slept with their maids. David had multiple wives and concubines, and committed murder to cover up an affair. Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. Saul/Paul by his own admission hunted Christians prior to his “vision” on the road to Damascus.
LikeLike
Now wait, on a previous thread, you and Mike said the opposite. You said God was justified in slaughtering all the Canaanites (including the infants) because their culture was so horrible — for being infidels, in other words. Now you’re saying it’s because God wanted their land for the Israelites, and this is somehow less monstrous?
LikeLike
“Yes.. many of my comments reveal my understanding of this.. and many of my comments elaborate on why their credentials fail and Christianity’s doesn’t. It’s about quality of credentials.. it’s about WEIGHING the evidence/ credentials.” – kathy
but how can you accurately weigh them if you havent fairly measured? you’re literally just declaring it.
and you havent shown how christianity’s credentials are better than the others…
and if you allow that all the other religions have the same claims, why do you go around saying that everyone who doesnt believe in the god you believe in, the way you believe in him is dishonest or liberal?
LikeLike
Oh wow … it’s been so peaceful the last few posts! The positive vibes are coming right off my monitor. 😉 Hoping it continues …
LikeLike
Kathy, just a point worth noting since you seem to keep falsely repeating it:
Religions don’t have credentials. People have credentials. Religions have followers.
LikeLike
I was referring to the posts by Portal and Carmen in case anyone wonders.
LikeLike
“William,
me: “A contradiction is much different than a fundamental teaching of evil. It depends on the specifics.. and the best place to start is with the theology.. and then the basic evidence/ credentials. The theology of Islam of exactly what the word means.. “submission” .. by force, according to the teachings.”
you: “okay, then say the looked at the OT and saw where the israelites killed women and children, or where god killed all the first borns, etc… or where jesus condemned a fig tree to wither and die because it didnt bear fruit…?”
This is not the theology of Christianity.. it’s a story of the events of how God revealed Himself to humanity. It’s part of His overall PLAN in doing this. His chosen people had to be established. They had to OBEY God, which was essential for God’s plan.. their land had to be established. Those people who were not following God, who were in the WAY of God’s plan, occupiers of the land God gave to the Jews.. and also people who would lead the Jews AWAY from God to follow their false gods.. they had to be dealt with in order to fulfill God’s overall plan.. that started with God and His chosen people, who would bring God to the rest of the world.
This could all be explained a lot better, I’m sure, which it IS explained IN THE BIBLE.. but all of this is very very different than what Muhammad commanded which was simple to kill those who didn’t “submit”.
“and “islam” does mean to submit, to the one true god… Most muslims are very peaceful and very hospitable. If you know islam, you’ll know the koran respects people of the “book” the bible, jew and christian.”
Oh William.. you are pushing liberal propaganda.. this just isn’t true. If you knew ALL of the Koran, the Jews are “pigs”, “dogs” etc and need to be killed. There is zero “respect” for Jews and Christians. You might find a few passages that claim “acceptance” or respect.. but there are many many MORE passages that state the very OPPOSITE! Muhammad was a false prophet who used the Bible as a template for his “sacred” scripture.. he didn’t understand the core teachings of the Bible, erroneously thinking that those passages of God commanding the killings of others made it “ok” for him to duplicate those same “commands” of God.. he never recognized the difference.. and his teachings are fundamentally based on HATE, intolerance and violence.
‘”Those murderous self proclaimed muslims arent true muslims. ”
Those murderous Muslims ARE following Muhammad’s teachings! Any Muslims
who are peaceful are REJECTING some of Muhammad’s teachings. Something Christians do not have to do.. ALL of His teachings are of peace and love.
LikeLike
Kathy, do you think Muslims don’t have answers for everything you’re bringing up?
You claimed that all of Jesus’ teachings are about peace and love, but they aren’t. We didn’t get any teachings about Hell until Jesus. He said he came to bring a sword, not peace. He told his disciples to buy a sword, even if they had to sell their cloak to get one. He said he came to turn father against brother, etc.
Now as a Christian, I know you have answers for all of those passages. Do you think Muslims can’t do the same thing?
This is where you seem to keep missing William’s point. It would be very easy for a Muslim to look at the problems in Christianity and say that they don’t match up to how God would do things, but you believe that looking through Christianity more deeply answers those problems. So why shouldn’t you put forth the same effort in understanding Islam?
LikeLike
Points I will address later today/ tonight..
Nate said:
“Kathy, science is a problem for god-of-the-gaps theology. In other words, when people point to something (even the beginning of the universe) and say “since we don’t understand how that happened, God did it,” they’re using god-of-the-gaps reasoning, and that has always failed in the past.
There are other arguments for god that science doesn’t really deal with. But the reason I just laid out above is why people like Tyson say science causes problems for the notion of God. And they’re right, when it comes to explaining the natural world.
That may not be a position you agree with, but it’s what they mean when they use it. Does that answer your question?”
and..
”
me: They occupied the land that God had given to the Jews. This was all part of God’s
larger plan. They were not attacked for being infidels.
Now wait, on a previous thread, you and Mike said the opposite. You said God was justified in slaughtering all the Canaanites (including the infants) because their culture was so horrible — for being infidels, in other words. Now you’re saying it’s because God wanted their land for the Israelites, and this is somehow less monstrous?”
Ron said:
“me: And their credentials are the word of a single person who, there is no disputing, was a pedophile and a murderer. No need to look further.”
Kathy, why is Mo’s character any worse than the “righteous” pedophiles and murderers found in the Bible? Moses killed an Egyptian and commanded the men to “save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.” Lot banged his daughters in a cave. Abe pimped out his half-sister/wife—twice! He also impregnated her maid and then banished both her and their son Ishmael out into the desert. Jacob married two sisters and slept with their maids. David had multiple wives and concubines, and committed murder to cover up an affair. Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. Saul/Paul by his own admission hunted Christians prior to his “vision” on the road to Damascus.
William said:
““me: Yes.. many of my comments reveal my understanding of this.. and many of my comments elaborate on why their credentials fail and Christianity’s doesn’t. It’s about quality of credentials.. it’s about WEIGHING the evidence/ credentials.” – kathy
but how can you accurately weigh them if you havent fairly measured? you’re literally just declaring it.
and you havent shown how christianity’s credentials are better than the others…
and if you allow that all the other religions have the same claims, why do you go around saying that everyone who doesnt believe in the god you believe in, the way you believe in him is dishonest or liberal?”
Ron said:
”
Kathy, just a point worth noting since you seem to keep falsely repeating it:
Religions don’t have credentials. People have credentials. Religions have followers.”
I can answer that right now.. says WHO Ron?
LikeLike
says WHO Ron?
Says the dictionary and centuries of common usage….that’s WHO!
LikeLike
Hayden said:
” @Kathy “…The fictitious god of Islam is a god of violence and hate based on the lies of Muhammad.”
Now normally I would be calm and rational with you on this topic. Unfortunately I have Muslim friends so that is not an option as you just slandered them, being your brothers and sisters, and our God. ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR DAMN MIND?!
The terrorist hate mongers you equate to the teachings of Allah are no more following the Muslim teachings than the Ku Klux Klan are Christian!”
Hayden, no, I’m fully in my mind.. it’s you and all liberals who get really really confused here..
due to your liberal brainwashing desire to be “politically correct”..
I said NOTHING about Muslims.. if you read my comment again, it specifically addresses the Muslim god and Muhammad. No liberal is going to successfully silence people’s right to criticize and question ANY religion’s theology. Just as liberals so FREELY criticize Christianity!
And you are 100% wrong.. the terrorists ARE following the teachings of Islam! The KKK are NOT following the teachings of Christianity.. there’s a FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE.
LikeLike
“Portal, you said:
“Kathy,
1. are all the evils and destruction of the world caused by liberals?
2. Who exactly are you referring to when you write liberals?
3. who was tearing America apart before the liberals came?”
1) Liberals are a MAJOR influence in world destruction.
2) I’m referring to anyone who goes against the moral teachings of the Bible.
3) Liberal minded people.. who, again went against the teachings of the Bible, were
always around.. liberal ideology is the “evil” that balances out the “good”.. in this
fallen world, there must be balance.. not sure why, but this is obvious. Liberals are fulfilling
this requirement. If the delusional didn’t exist, our world would be very close to perfect.. and that would be like Heaven.. which it is not the time for Heaven yet.
and just to note,
those who flew two planes full of people into the Twin Towers were definitely not liberals.
So perhaps liberals aren’t the cause of all evils”
The terrorists have the same liberal mindset.. they aren’t motivated by love and peace but forcing their beliefs onto the world. They don’t respect the rights of others.. just like liberals.
LikeLike
There’s really not a difference. The KKK and terrorists both believe they’re following their respective religions. Maybe they’re following correctly, maybe they aren’t. But the point remains that just as it would be incorrect to judge all of Christianity by the KKKs actions, it’s incorrect to judge all of Islam by the terrorists’ actions.
LikeLike
“says WHO Ron?
Says the dictionary and centuries of common usage….that’s WHO!”
No, it doesn’t.
LikeLike
You have some very misguided notions about what “liberal” means. No one else uses the term that way, and I think you’d be well served to pick another word for this group you’re describing. Why not just go with the term “evil”? I think that would cause a lot less confusion.
LikeLike
Kathy, RE: “Sorry Arch, the Christian God never commanded us to kill all the infidels. There is a huge difference between the two religions.” – what would you say was the population, men, women and little children, of the world at the time of the flood? How many Canaanites did he command us to kill? How many Amalikites? How many bellies did he order us to rip open so that we could abort the fetus? Have you added those up? I have those figures somewhere, but I was hoping you might have your own set, as part of your “compelling evidence” collection —
LikeLike
RE: “So, by your reasoning, I should learn all about Satanism, as much as I have Christianity before I dismiss it?” – I thought you said you were objective, if so, then yes.
LikeLike
No, it doesn’t.
Ah, yes it does. From Oxford:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/credential>credential
– a qualification, achievement, quality, or aspect of a person’s background, especially when used to indicate their suitability for something
– a document proving a person’s identity or qualifications
– a letter of introduction given by a government to an ambassador before a new posting
Other dictionaries grant similar definitions. While you’re entitled to your own opinions, you’re not entitled to make up your own facts and definitions.
And I concur with Nate. The world contains liberal Christians and conservative atheists, and everything in between. So how about setting down that label gun of yours and conversing with us as real human beings, instead of just blasting away at caricatures of what you think we are? You did say you were objective, right?
LikeLike
According to the best calculations, Kathy – your god ordered 2,270,365+ killed in the Bible alone, not counting those he murdered in the flood and at Sodom and Gomorroah, so yeah, he’s a real sweetheart —
LikeLike
Nate, you said:
“There’s really not a difference. The KKK and terrorists both believe they’re following their respective religions. Maybe they’re following correctly, maybe they aren’t. ”
Wrong Nate.. there REALLY is a MAJOR difference. One IS following the true teachings and the other is NOT. What they believe is irrelevant to the debate of the actual religions.
“But the point remains that just as it would be incorrect to judge all of Christianity by the KKKs actions, it’s incorrect to judge all of Islam by the terrorists’ actions.” ”
That would ONLY be true if the terrorists were not following Islam’s actual teachings.. which, again, they ARE.
LikeLike
“This was for the Jews.. NOT non believers. – but to Muslims, Kathy, YOU are the non-believer.
LikeLike
How about infidel (Noun: A person who does not acknowledge your god) instead of liberal (Noun: A person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties; Adjective: Showing or characterized by broad-mindedness, tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition. Synonyms: big-hearted, giving, generous)
Note that there’s nothing about liberals not “respecting the rights of others.” In fact, by being tolerant, they are much more inclined to show respect for the rights, opinions, or practices of others.
LikeLike
“You all can’t have it both ways. These comments imply that scientific knowledge disproves God.” – Wrong again, Kathy. Theists have been able to point to gaps in scientific knowledge and say, “Well, god did THIS…(pointing to whatever was done in that gap),” but as scientific knowledge grows and the gaps get filled, there becomes less and less that theists can point to and claim their god did. Clearly you made no effort to understand what I was saying.
LikeLike