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 
“Are you saying that if a person doesn’t know Hebrew or Greek they have no means or ability to question the veracity of the Bible’s claims? The implication is that they don’t even have the right to do so. ”
I am saying that when you get down to critical researching a book written in Arabic you ummm. I don’t know….errr……..ummmmm……well… might have to do some research into Arabic meanings in order to not be a hack when critiquing it? If you want to read it then fine get the translation and enjoy but if you are claiming to have read it and now are doing critical research then yes you need to reference the Arabic if its a book originally written in Arabic
Shocking concept to you? My goodness!!!
Like I said
Not the brightest people I have met online. To have to state something so elementary is further confirmation that you people delude yourself with how smart you allegedly are
LikeLike
@Mike
“I will apologize and retract my statement..”
When has that lie ever worked outside of your nightmares at night?
Does this mean you have evidence but refuse to show it, or have no evidence and once again are simply going to avoid the issue and obfuscate as all those schooled in fundamental apologetics do?
Are you going to answer the question, or not?
LikeLike
“Unfortunately my time for comedy must be put off now. The full day awaits” – so many to insult, so little time —
LikeLike
*sigh*
More mudslinging.
I never said I hadn’t done that. I just know that some people don’t have that luxury because they do lack the education or means to do so. I have done some of that, not to the degree in which I’d like. But on the points that I personally questioned I have referenced the original language. To be honest Greek and Hebrew are quite a bit more nuanced and can change the meaning that fundamentalist preachers try to put on some passages quite a bit depending on the words used. Understanding the original language and context provides quite a bit of nuance that the English language lacks. You know as well as I do that many Greek and Hebrew words have more meanings than our English words do and can be translated differently. So translators used the English word that best fit the context.
Your implication is, though, that if you can’t do that – for whatever reason – you should just be a Christian because you don’t really have grounds to question it.
Having already commented on this more than I was going to I think this will be my last on this post. I’m seriously sick and tired of the condescension and arrogance.
LikeLike
Carmen, you’ve got my vote for anything you want to run for! You GO, Girl!
LikeLike
“am saying that when you get down to critical researching a book written in Arabic you ummm. I don’t know….errr……..ummmmm……well… might have to do some research into Arabic meanings in order to not be a hack when critiquing it? If you want to read it then fine get the translation and enjoy but if you are claiming to have read it and now are doing critical research then yes you need to reference the Arabic if its a book originally written in Arabic”
everyone here has researched ancient greek and Hebrew yet we are still not experts on the language – even our research relies on translations from scholars. You’re trying to say that’s not good enough. you’re making it like one must know the language and this is absurd, but you’re an idiot, so I;m not surprised.
LikeLike
“Are you going to answer the question, or not?” – Ark, I think we all know the answer to that – Mike doesn’t GIVE evidence, he criticizes evidence.
LikeLike
Ruth, RE: “Your implication is, though, that if you can’t do that – for whatever reason – you should just be a Christian because you don’t really have grounds to question it.”
Couldn’t the converse of that also be said? If you can’t do that – for whatever reason – you should just be an Atheist because you don’t really have grounds to believe it.
LikeLike
And don’t leave, Ruth – that’s what he wants. If he can run everyone off, he wins by default.
LikeLike
I don’t think there is anything wrong with acknowledging that there are some things that believers accept on faith. My understanding is that faith is part of what believing in God involves, at some point faith comes in.
If people have evidence, and want to share it then great 🙂 but I don’t think there is any shame in saying I believe in faith on particular positions.
Its ok not to have all the answers, We’re all human,
and theists, I assume you also believe that God made all humans,
so therefore we are all masterpieces made in the image of God.
More intricately complicated and beautiful than a Rembrandt.
atheists, I assume you believe that humanity has a common ancestor. So we all share the same genetic make-up.
So if these things are going to be discussed, cant we treat each other decently
You can still disagree with each other, and clearly state why you disagree.
I’ll shut-up again now 🙂
LikeLike
And Ruth hit on something very important. To suggest that one can’t critique a passage without going back to the original language means God would expect everyone to accept Christianity a priori. And as she and William both went on to say, looking up Greek and Aramaic / Hebrew words still requires relying on translators. And the words can carry various meanings. It takes more than a couple of semesters at seminary to become an expert on any ancient language.
@Carmen
Thanks for sharing your story! And I can identify with your thoughts on trying to tell your grandkids about Communion. We recently went to a service with my grandmother (which was weird after being gone so long), and the preacher was talking about living for Christ above all else. He acknowledged how difficult it was, and he asked “how many of us wake up each morning thinking yes, I’m ready to die today?” I knew what he meant, but my 5-year old was sitting in my lap, and I noticed him very slightly shake his head back and forth at that statement. I had to stifle a grin. I’m glad my kids aren’t being brought up in that environment.
LikeLike
Ah, Portal – “Blessed are the peacemakers –” Assuming they have a high tolerance for frustration —
LikeLike
William, look into the Textus Recepticus, the work of Erasmus, in which there were nearly as many errors as accuracies, yet thousands of Bibles were printed using those error-ridden texts. Let’s hear it for “inerrant”!
“Um, yeah, well, but they were inerrant originally!” – So, are you saying that your god lost control after that? Not very godly of him, was it?
LikeLike
“I knew what he meant, but my 5-year old was sitting in my lap, and I noticed him very slightly shake his head back and forth at that statement.”
“Whachoo talkin’ ’bout, Willis, I just GOT here!”
Cracked me up!!
LikeLike
Which strengthens the case against simply banning him.
If he were offering reasoned arguments he might be worth engaging, but this is simply not the case. He would rather argue the toss over the merits of fictional text – in itself somewhat if a silly exercise – than face the consequences of having to put up or push off.
He brings absolutely nothing to the blog; he is simply an ass of the first order.
He isn’t even a fun ‘dickhead’.
LikeLike
Your obsession with “dickheads” is yet another reason why you and I will never shower together.
LikeLike
Phew….
LikeLike
Ah’m SAYin’ —
LikeLike
Christian:
Christianos, Christian, a follower of Christ (Strong’s G5546)
– someone who is a follower of Christ (CARM)
– a follower of Christ; one who professes belief in Jesus as the Christ and follows his teachings. (about Christianity)
– a person who believes in the teachings of Jesus Christ (Merriam-Webster)
– relating to or professing Christianity or its teachings (Oxford)
– of, relating to, or professing Christianity or its teachings. (dictionary)
– professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus. (freedictionary)
And this excerpt from Foundation For Christian Studies:
So…
If at any point in your life you once professed belief in Christ and made an effort to follow his teachings…. you were a Christian.
LikeLike
Nate
STILL no answer to my follow up question Nate?? Exactly HOW is Buddhism more credentialed than Christianity?? I know you were hoping that an “answer” to my first question would make it all go away.. but nope, that’s not how it works, I’ve got a point of TRUTH to make.. if you are truly objective, you will follow through and either prove my point wrong or acknowledge my point correct.
Mike, excellent comments.. we both see right through Nate’s story. He is trying so hard to claim objectivity with his experience of “finding truth”, which, I really think he believes he’s been objective…. but his comments only confirm what we’ve already known.. it’s PRIDE.. all the way through.. that’s what is at the root of his rejection of God. He didn’t like having to answer to God for his sins… because, really, he just doesn’t sin, he owes no “apologies”… sin is a made up concept.. just like God. His story is very much like Nan’s.. pride is at the root of their decision to reject God. And again, the Bible WARNS us about this trap.. those who are wise will head this and all the other warnings.. and then there are those who clearly never will.. their pride is too strong.. they are under it’s control.
Ruth, you said:
“Kathy has asked a number of times for us to declare which religion has the most evidence for it’s truth regardless of what value one puts on the evidence. I’m finding that paradoxical. If little to no value is put on a “piece of evidence” that evidence would be inadmissible – a non-starter, which is why this particular question keeps going round and round. Evidence that carries no sway wouldn’t be evidence.”
Ruth, you clearly aren’t giving up in trying to render my question “invalid”.. due to your desire to “save” Nate.. but, you’ve failed again..
Who gets to decide which evidence is valuable? I’m guessing that would be.. liberals? Like they believe they should be the deciders of everything? (and they do believe this).
Nope, sorry, all claim they have evidence.. and it’s the EVIDENCE that is weighed when a person decides a religion is true or false.. clearly ALL of you have decided that all are false.. so you’ve examined the evidence… my questions is a simple request to give your opinion as to which one has the most evidence to support it’s claimed truth.. an opinion you have! or else you’ve dismissed these religions based on nothing but ignorance and bias.
Arch, you said:
” – I’ve given you a half-dozen pieces of information – “answers,” if you will – that you’ve not even bothered to look at, much less consider, and yet you accuse us of not putting forth “real effort to search out the answers”. ”
Arch.. WHY would I waste my time looking at your “information” when you can’t even defend the claims you’ve already put forth?? I have no reason to believe your “information” is anything more than a waste of time because you obviously aren’t applying objectivity.. I’ve asked you SEVERAL times now what your explanation is for our existence if not a Supreme Being.. you have not answered this.. so whatever you put forth is just basically a bunch of crap.. same old stuff that I’ve seen/ read / heard before. I have zero confidence in your opinions and judgments due to your lack of objectivity. And I have zero desire to waste so much time reading the endless atheist propaganda. Convince me it won’t be a waste of time.. THEN I’ll consider your recommendations.
William, you said:
” “I NEVER asked for which one Nate thought was true William. Please re-read my comments.. you’re twisting and distorting just like everyone else in order to get Nate out of this dilemma he has put himself in by refusing to apply honesty and objectivity.” – kathy
@kathy
You asked which religion had the most credentials toward it being true. I don’t thinK i misread anything.”
Wrong. Why would I ask which one Nate thought was true when I KNOW he’s a claimed atheist? That would make no sense William. My question is asking for an opinion on what religion has the most evidence to support IT’S claimed truth.
“I’d still like for you address my questions to you.”
And I still want to.. thanks for reminding me, I’ll try to address them later today..
LikeLike
It’s funny when someone accuses others of lacking objectivity while simultaneously refusing to look at the evidence they’ve provided.
Anyway, that’s fine Kathy, let’s go ahead and play your game:
I think Buddhism’s credentials are better because it needs no credentials. Its precepts are simply principles that anyone can discover, even if they happen to follow another religion.
Next question..
LikeLiked by 1 person
“You asked which religion had the most credentials toward it being true. I don’t thinK i misread anything.”
Wrong. Why would I ask which one Nate thought was true when I KNOW he’s a claimed atheist? That would make no sense William. My question is asking for an opinion on what religion has the most evidence to support IT’S claimed truth.” – kathy
I think you misread what i said i read…
unless you are not asking for which religion has the most credentials toward it being true? and by true, I assume you mean the claim that it’s from god.
I’ll say that Buddhism has less errors in it than the bible. You;d say the the bible doesnt have errors, so I’ll just say “apparent errors.” Buddhism has less apparent errors – my take anyway, but again, i really dont think any has any divine credentials.
again, which roach do you think is prettiest?
LikeLike
and kathy, you’ve been reading all of these too. If you think mike is a good example or of good character., it’s an indication that you’re a poor judge of character.
you guys are both “christain” so i understand siding with him to some degree, but wonder how much doctrine you share and wonder if you really with his arguments or if you’re simply agreeing becuase his conclusion (no matter how poorly conceived) ends up with “therefore jesus.”
LikeLike
Well, OK. I couldn’t resist. I had to check in and see what was going on. Unfortunately, more of the same. Nevertheless, I simply couldn’t let a couple of comments go unanswered:
@Kathy
A looooong time back, you said this: “[A]ll four Gospels are excellent sources of evidence.” As I read this, my immediate question was … “who says?” Oh yeah, Kathy says.
And, Kathy, all that stuff about the “credentials” of any religion … it seems no matter how people answer your question, you aren’t satisfied. So OK … just for you, Kathy, I’ll say it … “No other religion has more credentials than Christianity.” Does that make you happy? I may not believe this, but it seems this is what you want to hear so now someone has said it.
I continue to be amazed how you can sit in judgment over others and their relationship to Jesus/God — past or present. I suppose it’s because you see yourself as the “perfect Christian” and anyone who doesn’t measure up to your standards falls under the category of “atheist/liberal.” No matter how you cut it, Kathy, your good friend Jesus said in the book known as Matthew (7:1-3; KJV): “1 Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. 3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?” Remember, this is from the very bible that you hold so dear and are totally convinced is inerrant and from “God.” Oh, and by the way, the definition (which you are so fond of using) of “judge” is “to form an opinion or conclusion about; to regard as either good or bad.” So, in other words, to make it simple, Jesus says not to form opinions or conclusions about others … either good or bad. Then he adds this (paraphrasing) — stop looking at the other person’s faults until you examine your own.
Finally, I think everyone who has been reading your comments recognizes you are totally dedicated to your beliefs. And, contrary to what Mike says, no one is trying to de-convert you. We just don’t agree with your perspective on things.
LikeLike
“Convince me it won’t be a waste of time.. THEN I’ll consider your recommendations.” – you don’t get it, Kathy – I don’t care whether or not you consider my recommendations, you’re not worth the effort. You ARE the waste of time.
LikeLike