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 
Obviously you haven’t caught up on all the comments yet, so I’ll wait until you have.
LikeLike
Nate, you said:
“Just a note to everyone else:
Part of Kathy’s problem is that she has trouble looking beneath the labels she’s applied to everyone and seeing the person beneath. Let’s not be guilty of the same thing. Kathy is a real person with real loved ones, and we should try to keep that in mind as we talk to her. We should still speak honestly, but we need to make sure we’re not letting her situation and mindset become a joke to us.
I’m speaking to myself as much as anyone else. ”
Just more liberal ridiculousness and desperation. This is what liberals do.. you attack me, my words or my character INSTEAD of addressing the actual points.. you make accusations and then FAIL to back them up when I give direct specific requests. But, I’ll give another one anyway.. as if I’ll get a response.. you are the worst, here, at following through Nate..
.. PLEASE quote my words that prove that I’ve “labeled” everyone here WITHOUT seeing the person beneath.. please give your evidence for this claim Nate.. because I dont’ want to be guilty of this.. so seriously.. what do you base this on? And PLEASE BE SPECIFIC.
LikeLike
Nate said:
“Kathy, you did it again in your last paragraph.”
no, YOU just did it again Nate.. how many times must I type “SPECIFICS” in “ALL CAPS”.. and you all wonder why I use “all caps”.. lol..,
Nate, I don’t know what point you are making.. because you gave no specifics except “your last paragraph”… I see this as more dishonesty, Nate.
Also, I know of at least two nonbelievers in this discussion who are more libertarian in their fiscal views vs liberal. But you roll so many things into “liberal,” that it’s hard to do any apples to apples comparison
Do you really think I’m here for “fiscal” issues?? Again, “context” Nate.. it’s key.
LikeLike
Kathy, it’s your constant assertion that you know us “liberals” better than we knew ourselves. So far, you’ve shown an inability to consider a different point of view.
I don’t say any of that to be insulting.
LikeLike
Kathy, LIBERAL – here’s a SPECIFIC word. Which you keep using over and over and over again.
Got it????
That’s a LABEL.
LikeLike
Nate, you said:
“kathy, everyone on this planet has motivations for what they do and think. If you could spend some time trying to think through why people have some of the views that differ from yours, you may start to see that there are some valid reasons for them. ”
I’m going to cry.. I can’t take it any more.. Nate.. have you not noticed the word “pride” that I’ve typed probably a hundred times in your blog? THIS IS WHY I believe liberals have the views that they do. Prove me wrong. I WOULD like to believe it’s not pride.. but you all have only confirmed that belief with every comment you make.
LikeLike
Kathy, you said that atheists are almost always liberals. If you’re not talking about politics, including fiscal issues, then I don’t know what you’re talking about…
LikeLike
That you ascribe it to pride demonstrates what I’m talking about. That’s way too one-dimensional an adjective to cover there motivations of everyone who doesn’t agree with you
LikeLike
Carmen said:
“Kathy, LIBERAL – here’s a SPECIFIC word. Which you keep using over and over and over again.
Got it????
That’s a LABEL.”
BUT IT’S TRUE… and it’s the cause of all that’s wrong in society.. so sorry!.. I will continue to “label” people when the “label” fits.
You are attempting to silence me by using typical liberal tactics. You, as do the overwhelming majority of liberals, want to silence truth when it doesn’t support your chosen views/ beliefs.
LikeLike
“That you ascribe it to pride demonstrates what I’m talking about. That’s way too one-dimensional an adjective to cover there motivations of everyone who doesn’t agree with you..”
Ok, fine.. continue please.. back up your claim that it’s not pride that motivates liberals/ atheists.
LikeLike
“Ok, just point out ONE atheist here how doesn’t adhere to liberal views.. and I’ll gladly take back the word ‘all’… no problem. But I’m very confident that ‘all’ applies or else I wouldn’t have used the word.” – I think part of the problem, Kathy, lies in your definition of the word, “liberal.” A couple of people have thrown out definitions, from dictionaries, but I find those a bit sterile.
To me, a liberal is one who isn’t afraid to let life and society move forward in whatever direction it takes, confident that he or she can adapt to changing conditions. I am one of those. I can’t wait to see what’s over the next hill, to see what new things our scientists and doctors and thinkers are going to come up with.
Conservatives, as I understand them to be, envision little Opie Taylor running down the sidewalk, sliding a stick along the pickets in a white fence. They like that picture, of a time when a dog could catch a good nap in the middle of the street, when you never needed to lock your doors at night. but Mayberry is gone, and little Opie is a bald, 60-year old maker of some pretty incredible movies. We can’t freeze time, no matter how much we might like to do so.
You may not agree with my definition, and that’s fine, but here’s what I’d like – I’d like you to make a brief bullet-list of the beliefs you consider “liberal” – and by brief, I don’t mean short, make it as long as you like, but each of the beliefs should be single-sentence, no paragraph-long tirades, and I’ll gladly tell you honestly which of them I accept and which I do not. Fair?
No tricks on my part, this is your chance to move away from assumptions about what anyone believes, into the world of fact.
LikeLike
Ruth, you said:
“You made the comment elsewhere that you have to come to sites like this one because we won’t come to you to debate. I, personally, don’t go to Christian websites to debate for the very reason that I believe that the host has a right to their beliefs. I blog on my own site if I have something to say about it. ”
Ruth, I had made a comment just today that I support everyone’s right to their beliefs. You are making a common liberal erroneous assumption.. that when people disagree with them, they think they’re being told they don’t have a right to their beliefs. I’ve never understood this reasoning. Nate has a blog.. open to the public.. in it he makes claims, insinuations and worst of all, he does it under the guise of “objectivity”. Well, when you are misleading people, there are always going to be others who will point out the dishonesty. Especially when the false claims and deceptions are so detrimental to people. I’ve asked Nate how he can spread his “truth” when he has no real evidence to support it.. he has no proof that the Christian God doesn’t exist.. yet has no problem enticing/ encouraging people to leave their faith.. this is very disturbing.. it was very disturbing the very first time Nate tried to “convert” me, in the very same way that people try to get others to know about Jesus… it gave me a very strange, uncomfortable feeling.
If I believed Nate or any of you were truly applying objectivity, I’d have an entirely different tone.. but it’s the fundamental dishonesty that is motivating me to be so blunt. And it’s not because of how you all were brought up or your personal experiences or life stories etc.. it can ONLY, ULTIMATELY be attributed to pride and ego. If I could help you all see this, what an accomplishment that would be! Because, again, pride really IS destructive… “it always comes before a fall”… and losing your eternal soul IS the ULTIMATE “fall”.
LikeLike
Kathy, here’s the sin I see in you. Arrogance. You are positively GLOATING over the fact (as you see it, anyway) that you’ve got something you believe Ruth hasn’t got – eternal life. This arrogant assumption of yours is a fantasy, Kathy. A complete fantasy, just like a Harry Potter story. Like it or not, the truth is you will die like every other living thing on the planet. Sorry, Kathy, but THAT’s the truth.
LikeLike
What would LIKE us to say, Kathy? That we agree with everything you say? That the bible is true, that God is real, that we are all “LIBERALS”? I think most everyone that has contributed to this blog has tried to demonstrate their reasons for not agreeing with you and have earnestly tried to engage you in conversation. Yet, because we don’t agree with you, we are SCREAMED at and told we are full of pride and ego, that we are all ATHEISTS/LIBERALS and aren’t being “objective.”
I think each of us respects the fact that you are a sincere and ardent Christian. However, since you came onto this blog (which is run by an atheist), it would seem prudent for you to respect our point of view as well … without losing your temper and SCREAMING at us.
LikeLike
Kathy, 2 things:
In order to find out that pride isn’t the motivator for everyone who disagrees with you, simply get to know them. Surely there are some people in your life that hold different views from you, but that you still view as good people…
Secondly, you defended Bush earlier by saying he may have been wrong about an issue, but that didn’t mean he was lying. So why do you ascribe the views of everyone else here too dishonesty?
LikeLike
Carmen, I think this says a lot. Kathy writes:
“losing your eternal soul IS the ULTIMATE “fall”.”
Death Anxiety: Death anxiety is the morbid, abnormal or persistent fear of one’s own death.
A 2013 study involving people from the US, Turkey, and Malaysia found that religiosity is positively correlated with increased fear of death, meaning more religious individuals fear death more. In a study done by the University of Padova, it has been shown that those who have death anxiety are more likely to think of their cultural group as somehow different from other groups. A certain cultural group when faced with the question of death will humanize their own group and in turn, dehumanize other cultural groups.
LikeLike
I gave you the opportunity, Kathy, in my last comment, for you to rationally discuss the terms, “liberal” and “conservative” – have you not reached my comment yet, or are you ignoring it, and choosing that the vitriol continue?
LikeLike
“So why do you ascribe the views of everyone else here too dishonesty?”
So Far:
misleading people
fundamental dishonesty
false claims
deceptions
lies
LikeLike
NeuroNotes – that’s another of the things I realized along the way. Religion gives people hope that the only thing they know – living – will go on forever. I understand the fear, but once you realize that THIS is the only life you are going to get, it makes most people embrace living with ardent enthusiasm. I see absolutely no reason to waste my precious time spreading the message of a Bronze-Age, mythical book by an unknown author(s).
Now, Harry Potter? Excellent adventure! (P.S. Kids recognize that it’s fiction)
LikeLike
“I understand the fear, but once you realize that THIS is the only life you are going to get, it makes most people embrace living with ardent enthusiasm.”
Carmen, initially facing my mortality was a bitter pill to swallow, but as you mentioned, I eventually found myself living with ardent enthusiasm and a greater respect for life. After years of intense indoctrination to not be of this world, and being told that my flesh was always warring with this spirit, it was truly like being born again when I let go and fully embraced being alive. No longer believing in the supernatural made my senses acutely aware of all the beauty the natural world had to offer.
I have no problem with people believing in an afterlife and I can certainly understand how that can be comforting. But as Phil Hellenes poignantly stated in his video Dust That Sings
“All we have to do is not lie.
* Don’t say you know its name.
* Don’t say it told you to tell people what to do with their lives.
* Don’t say that those who believe otherwise must be punished.
* Don’t say it sends earthquakes and tsunamis.
* Don’t say it ever hurts anyone for any reason because that’s sick.
But most of all, don’t give away our dignity!”
LikeLike
there are always going to be others who will point out the dishonesty. Especially when the false claims and deceptions are so detrimental to people. I’ve asked Nate how he can spread his “truth” when he has no real evidence to support it.. he has no proof that the Christian God doesn’t exist.. yet has no problem enticing/ encouraging people to leave their faith.. this is very disturbing.. it was very disturbing the very first time Nate tried to “convert” me, in the very same way that people try to get others to know about Jesus… it gave me a very strange, uncomfortable feeling.
Kathy, not everyone who disagrees with you is being dishonest. People can see things in a different way and not be dishonest. I think it’s very disingenuous of you to basically call us all liars simply because we disagree with you.
You haven’t proven a single thing you’ve accused any of us of. Even if we might..might…be wrong on a point – which you haven’t proven – that wouldn’t mean we were lying. People can be wrong and not be lying. I think you’re wrong about a lot of things but I haven’t called you dishonest because I know you genuinely believe what you’re saying.
You haven’t proven anyone here is deliberately lying, you haven’t proven anyone here is ignorant – deliberately or otherwise – you haven’t proven any of the points you’ve made about scripture. All you have is your interpretation of it. All you have is your fear of anyone who is different. All you have is your fear of hell. All you have is your belief that there is a supreme being who is a creator. For all you know to be a fact this supreme creator could be malevolent, not an all-loving, all-good God. I’m not sure why. You haven’t proven that evolution didn’t happen. In fact, I provided several links to primary sources for human evolution. There is no doubt within the larger scientific community that this is true. There was a lot of death and suffering prior to any fall that could have taken place because there was death and suffering that had to have occurred for man to reach a state of knowledge of right and wrong. He wasn’t created good in the garden You have chosen to look at that as atheist propaganda. You have chosen to ignore that this is a legitimate way to look at things. You have refused to even acknowledge it.
I’m not afraid of hell. I don’t believe it exists even if there is a God. I have very good reasons for believing that. I’d like to give people that relief. That their loved ones who aren’t believers aren’t going to hell. That the idea of eternal torment is bogus.
You are uncomfortable with the thought of Nate trying to “convert” you. It made you uneasy. Yet, you have no hesitation at the thought or idea of trying to convert someone to Christianity. What you might not understand is that most of us didn’t “convert” to atheism. We deconverted from Christianity. We do not believe it is truth or Truth. Nor do we believe in any other proposed gods. So that leaves us, well me anyway, agnostic about any the existence of a god. I live practically as an atheist because I see no evidence for a god. There is no arrogance in that. Arrogance has no part in it.
I’m not sure why that threatens you. It obviously does. So much so that you feel the need to denigrate anyone who believes that. The fact that you can’t see your rants for what they really are is bizarre and puzzling. If you were really applying objectivity you would see that people can and do hold differing beliefs without being a threat to your way of life. If you were truly applying objectivity you would see that your rants about liberals/atheists hold nothing more than beliefs. They are not facts, they are not truth. They are simply stated beliefs. Stating them over and over again doesn’t make them truer.
Even when someone is apologizing and making an attempt to see where you are coming from you cannot show any grace. You have not shown any grace during this entire exchange.
You’ve also stated elsewhere that you always have these kinds of exchanges with liberals/atheists and you can’t understand why. You implied that it was all the fault of the liberals/atheists. But if you continually have these types of exchanges perhaps you might consider the common denominator in those exchanges and take a long look in the mirror? Perhaps the problem isn’t with everyone else. Maybe, just maybe, it might have something to do with your ability to communicate.
LikeLike
@Kathy,
You said:
Ruth, I had made a comment just today that I support everyone’s right to their beliefs. You are making a common liberal erroneous assumption.. that when people disagree with them, they think they’re being told they don’t have a right to their beliefs.
Honey, you can make comments til the cows come home but you have repeatedly demonstrated that this is simply not true. You can disagree with a person’s beliefs or positions without calling them:
dishonest
misleading
ignorant
deceptive
lying
This is not simply disagreeing. This is disrespectful. You can state your position without being insulting and rude. Disagreeing and stating your position does not require belligerence. You seem to think that the folks here have gotten upset because you just “telling the truth and they don’t like it”. No, Kathy. Nobody likes to be called names and have their integrity questioned. It is not fundamentally dishonest to disagree about beliefs. It is fundamentally dishonest to claim certain knowledge about things for which we do not have certain knowledge.
You continually refer to our pride and ego. You haven’t proven anything in that regard. Again, stating your belief that it’s pride and ego that cause us not to believe in God is not a fact, it’s a belief. You have no evidence to back that claim up. Just because you think it doesn’t make it a fact.
All the while you’re calling our pride and ego a problem you fail to see the pride and arrogance in your own position. You believe that some supreme being created an entire universe just so you can exist. You believe that this same supreme being killed his own child to save your hide and the hide of mankind. We ain’t that special.
LikeLike
Nate, you said:
“Kathy, 2 things:
In order to find out that pride isn’t the motivator for everyone who disagrees with you, simply get to know them. Surely there are some people in your life that hold different views from you, but that you still view as good people…
Secondly, you defended Bush earlier by saying he may have been wrong about an issue, but that didn’t mean he was lying. So why do you ascribe the views of everyone else here too dishonesty?”
Nate, I’ve gotten to know all of you by your own words. And my conclusion is that you all are motivated by pride and ego. Every time I’ve made this claim, it’s been accompanied by WHY I believe this.. which is ALWAYS based on your very own words. I’m being honest, and I’m backing up my claims. At this point, you would then address my specific points as to why I believe what I do.. but, this is where the process of “finding truth” FAILS miserably.. because you all DON’T address my specific points, Nate.
And I defend Bush because I know of no evidence that indicates he was lying. But I HAVE the evidence that you all are being dishonest.. again, the reasons/ specifics accompany every accusation I make. I don’t know what else I can do.. the problem is not with me.. it’s with you/ liberals.
LikeLike
Ruth, you said:
“Honey, you can make comments til the cows come home but you have repeatedly demonstrated that this is simply not true. You can disagree with a person’s beliefs or positions without calling them:
dishonest
misleading
ignorant
deceptive
lying
This is not simply disagreeing. This is disrespectful. You can state your position without being insulting and rude. ”
Ruth.. “honey”…. I’ve tried to appeal to your honesty by simply disagreeing.. I’ve tried to be understanding and “nice” and actually make some kind of progress… but when I start making personal accusations, it’s because there is a LACK of honesty by you and others. And guess what? THAT’S “disrespectful”! Respect is a two way street, Ruth. If all of you would debate honestly and with true objectivity, I wouldn’t have to be “rude” by pointing out your lack of such. And again, every time I make an accusation of pride or lack of honesty.. it’s accompanied by the specific reasons. And this is the very opposite of what I get from you all.. I get accusations without anything to actually back it up. And if I do get specifics, and I defend/ explain how you are wrong, I then get nothing. It’s all here. If I’m lying it’s here for you to prove me wrong. And if it turns out that I am wrong, I’ll apologize.
LikeLike
And again, every time I make an accusation of pride or lack of honesty.. it’s accompanied by the specific reasons.
Could you cite an example. Every time I’ve seen you make these accusations they’re merely rhetoric. I haven’t seen any specific reasons other than failure to acknowledge God and that we disagree with you. You haven’t backed up a single claim of dishonesty.
Ruth.. “honey”…. I’ve tried to appeal to your honesty by simply disagreeing.. I’ve tried to be understanding and “nice” and actually make some kind of progress… but when I start making personal accusations, it’s because there is a LACK of honesty by you and others. And guess what? THAT’S “disrespectful”! Respect is a two way street, Ruth. If all of you would debate honestly and with true objectivity, I wouldn’t have to be “rude” by pointing out your lack of such. And again, every time I make an accusation of pride or lack of honesty.. it’s accompanied by the specific reasons. And this is the very opposite of what I get from you all.. I get accusations without anything to actually back it up. And if I do get specifics, and I defend/ explain how you are wrong, I then get nothing. It’s all here. If I’m lying it’s here for you to prove me wrong. And if it turns out that I am wrong, I’ll apologize.
Where is your specific reason in any of this? It’s simply an accusation. Your own words betray your own dishonesty, lack of objectivity. When we quote your own words back to you, all you say is we’re quoting you wrong. No, we’re copying and pasting what you’ve said.
LikeLike