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 
You’re just lucky, Kathy, that that mean, horrible, lying, liberal atheist like Nate, was kind enough to give you as forum to rant on for the past couple of weeks, allowing you to vomit your bile and vehemence. And when you’re gone, the only thing anyone will remember about you will be your abrasive personality – everything you’ve said will be dismissed, because it wasn’t backed with evidence. And yet you fancy yourself quite the debater, clearly you don’t know the difference between a debate and an argument.
LikeLike
William and Howie,
My contribution to your parable.
So the boy heard his cousins, and he began to ask questions.
And the Convictions, opinions and advise of his friends and family reached him. The boy realised that other people who also believed they were married to the same partner he believed he was. And they shared how their marriage was.
the boy began to fear, what if he have run from my first love?
What if he had just forgotten my partner has done for him?
The fear ate away at him, until he felt trapped.
As time passed, the boy grew, and although he was frozen by these fears, he gradually made a decision.
“Love must involve interaction” he thought. If I am still married, then I am included in a shared marriage with countless others. like members of the same body. And some have told me what their relationship is like.
If they are married to the same partner as me, then they are all in love and married into the same marriage.
But even though the interaction between members might differ in uniqueness, the boy still felt that marriage and love must still involve interaction.
The boy did not know how this interaction would look like. But he then decided to step beyond his fears to seek it.
Ryan
LikeLike
apologies for the terrible grammar,
I’ll be away for the next few weeks. Hope everyone keeps safe and well.
LikeLike
Sorry Nate, could you please delete that last post I made at 1:27 am .
Here is an edited version.
William and Howie,
Here is my contribution to your illustration.
So the boy heard his cousins.
And the boy began to ask questions
And they shared how their marriage was.
And the boy realised something one day.
The boy realised that those other people who believed they were married, also believed they were married to the same partner.
And then the questions continued.
what if he had run away from his partner?
Had he not appreciated what his partner had done for him, and is doing for him?
The fear ate away at him, until he felt trapped.
The boy began to be tormented by doubts.
As time passed, the boy grew,
and before he knew it he was a man.
Although during times he was frozen by inaction, he gradually made a decision.
“If I am married to this partner, then I am a part of the same marriage. A marriage that includes countless others. As members of the same body”
The man realised he could not have a marriage without his partner.
The man thought
“Even though the interaction between members might differ, marriage and love must involve interaction and trust”
The man did not know what this interaction would look like.
But there were interactions that had already stood out to him as being things his partner had communicated to him.
He gradually decided to step beyond his fears and doubts.
And seek to find his partner.
But he got distracted often. and also desired to seek other things.
But he believed that seeking his partner was what he needed to do. Otherwise he would continue in the same cycle of distraction and inaction.
LikeLike
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.
You claim that we all have bias and that we are without objectivity because, even though we’ve read your claims and the miniscule sources you’ve given, we disagree. Yet, out of hand, without even reading the sources you’ve been provided you dismiss it as being “atheist propaganda”. We didn’t even call what you were providing “Christian propaganda”. This does not bode well for your claims of objectivity.
I question the stats Neuro.. I just don’t have much confidence in “studies” done by liberal organizations. I’ve seen how “objective” their studies are.
Did you even look at the study? I don’t have confidence in stats of most any nature simply because they can be slanted – in either direction.
And liberals always try to take tithing out of the equation.. that makes no sense. It’s the religious churches/ organizations that help the needy more than any liberal group.
The reason for this is that only a tiny fraction of tithing goes toward benevolence in most any church budget. Most tithes go toward administrative costs, education, missions, etc. In fact, where I live(in South Georgia), most churches take up a completely separate benevolence offering because their tithes don’t really go toward that. Have you looked at your church’s budget? Have you noticed how much goes where? Being the bastion of objectivity you are, surely you would have to realize that tithing doesn’t equal benevolence.
Sorry Graham, you’re wrong.. I didn’t dismiss anything, I just requested the source of Arch’s information. And yes, I DO believe it likely is from a biased source.. so?
True objectivity would hold out judgement about the source until it’s presented.
Only a truly arrogant person will claim what “can’t” be..
And yet, that’s exactly what you’ve been doing since you started commenting.
LikeLike
“William, while many religions can claim “martyrs”.. it doesn’t end there, even though your mind doesn’t want to accept this.. it’s a fundamental aspect of evidence.. the details!.. the specifics!..” – kathy
@kathy,
I agree, that;s why I think it’s you who’s not understanding the point. I’m saying, let’s speak about the specifics, the details.
And not all martyrs in other religions are suicide bombers. Even Islam has martyrs that werent murders too – so the point still remains.
Would you accept people as true Christians that murdered poeple in the name of christ? surely not. Similarly, there are those of other religions (even islam) who would mainatian that those who murder for their religion, are not truly followers of said religion.
So martydom is not evidence of truthfulness, but only devotion. So let’s discuss your details instead.
LikeLike
“Again William, your parable doesn’t take into consideration that God is not your betrothed spouse.. He is your Creator. An incredibly important difference. Yet, you just skip right over that part.:” – kathy
kathy, come on. This is a little ridiculous, It’s an analogy, much like parable you gave an illustration. Should I dismiss that parable because god isnt my boss and didnt entrust me with money to invest with?
“And THEN, you make arguments/ complaints that God isn’t relating to you like a spouse.. like a fellow human being. Which indicates that you have set up the “requirements” that God needs to meet in order for you to follow/ accept Him.. further showing that you refuse to acknowledge God’s superior position. See? Always, it ALWAYS leads back to the atheist’s issue with pride and ego. But, you have been blinded to this truth.. due to your own choices. Just like the parable… the Master took the single bag of gold from the one who spited him and gave it to the one who had the most. Your willing blindness will only continue to get worse and worse… while those who seek the truth, honestly, will continue to grow in their faith.” – kathy
I feel like you’re not being honest. The analogy was pretty clear. It’s not that god is like a spouse, but the similarity remains the same in that we’re supposed to have this close relationship with god. We’re expected to speak to him through prayer. he supposedly knows us intimately – yet despite all out prayers, he doesn’t speak back. And yet despite all his love for us, and his all powerful nature, he isn’t willing to even write his own letters to us, but had other guys do it?
And what even verifies that god dictated the letters? Oh, miracles. But we cant see them today, no, instead we must go on the claims that there were miracles that proved the that the guy who claimed there were miracles should stand as proof that his claim that he speaks for god is true.
Another point you keep missing is, I dont think I’m rejecting god. I think i’m rejecting the claims of men. You call me prideful and imply that i’m arrogant? Look, lady, you should take a long look in the mirror before you do that. You;’re going around here calling everyone ignorant, and declaring that you know know better than everyone.
I mean, if insist upon name calling and assigning motives to others, i can play too. You’re a dimwitted extremest, who links the US constitution (which i doubt you’ve even read) to righteousness and godliness. You don’t understand what “evidence” really means, much like you keep misusing “liberal.” You are the most ignorant person here, but also one of the most self-righteous – and you’re too stupid to see that you contradict yourself and say things that dont even make sense.
…or, we can skip all that – as I;d prefer to. let’s stick the topic and let’s try to use a reason and logic – it may be that we leave with agreeing – I’m okay with that. and you know, the constitution thinks that’s alroght too, so dont be liberal with it.
LikeLike
“I’ve asked for direct evidence, of my OWN words from several people in the last couple of days… from Arch, Nate, Nan, William and Ruth.. and probably others.. I’ve gotten not ONE response to my direct requests.” – kathy
kathy, are you stupid or are you a liar?
What are you talking about? Now, there’s plenty that you skip over and dont answer. What question have you asked that has not been answered?
evidence of what? if you’re talking about your request for evidence that disproves the bible, then you are a moron. you’ve gone on and on about how evidnce and proof arent the same, but when you ask for evidence that proves or disproves something, then that evidence is the same a proof. We’ve given evidence, although it may not be the same a proof in this regard.
But if this what you’re asking for, then you first give your evidence that disproves isalm (and you must read this one in Arabic to get the complete meaning, or Mike will chastise you for being lazy), buddhism and atheism. and if you cant, does that automatically mean they’re true? Who’s not being objective?
or, clarify what you’re talking about.
LikeLike
Portal – not to worry, I know what it’s like to have a terrible grammar, and my grampar was pretty bad too!
Enjoy your walkabout and kiss a koala for me!
LikeLike
William, I can’t see that you’ll have any more success beating your head against a wall than anyone else has in the last couple of days, but dog bless you for trying! 🙂
LikeLike
Portal, RE: ““If I am married to this partner, then I am a part of the same marriage. A marriage that includes countless others. As members of the same body” ” – so, he was a Mormon? And if his partner gets pregnant, who gets the blame?
LikeLike
@Ryan (Portal):
Oh no, any chance of kindness on this post is all lost now. 😉
I liked your version of the illustration because I’m guessing it represents your own travels in dealing with these deep questions, and gaining an understanding of the perspective of others (especially the kind ones) is a big part of my own travels.
Have a great break! And be careful when kissing those koalas, because they may just kiss you back!
LikeLike
“I “know” God is our Creator because of my relationship with Him, because of answered prayers and other ways He has revealed Himself to me in my life.” – kathy
kathy, this is insightful, thanks.
How does god answer your prayers?
How has he revealed himself?
when i was a christian, i believed these things too, except not literally, in that i didnt think god answered me back verbally – usually it was in the form of nothing (a “no”) or someone or something or some opportunity, or my own action that granted the “yes” – of course, i believed god had answer the “yes” through other means or by using other people.
I beleave he revealed himself to me through the bible and creation.
But now, not being a Christian, things seem to workout just as well as they had before, and I’m still just as at peace.
And having a relationship with god through his revealed word seems just as intimate now as having a relationship with Anne Frank after reading her diary. Hence my earlier parable. And the created world seems to counter what the bible says creation was like…
of course, your experiences may be different than mine, and that;s why I’m curious.
LikeLike
@ Ryan,
I’ll be away for the next few weeks. Hope everyone keeps safe and well.
Hope you have a great time! And I second what Howie said.
“There goes the neighborhood!”
LikeLike
“You claim that we all have bias and that we are without objectivity because, even though we’ve read your claims and the miniscule sources you’ve given, we disagree. Yet, out of hand, without even reading the sources you’ve been provided you dismiss it as being “atheist propaganda”. We didn’t even call what you were providing “Christian propaganda”. This does not bode well for your claims of objectivity. ”
Sorry Ruth that won’t work. It was a nice try but its a collective lie (you did presume to talk for your group using the pronoun “we”) I have been told by Arch , Ark and others that any Egyptologist or Archaeologist that is a theist/Christian despite credentials cannot be relied on essentially because they are not atheists (after all you can always state its their beliefs that make them biased) .
This trying to have your cake and eat it does not bode well for YOUR claims of objectivity.As you an Arch have demonstrated you have beliefs about materialism that you cannot substantiate. Whether you admit it or not you are like all the other people on the planets with your own set of biases.
LikeLike
“before I do that i wanted to comment on your quote here though. I dont understand it. Why does you pointing out another possible meaning “fizzle” my argument, but a possibility that differs from yours doesnt “fizzle” your argument?”
Thats easy William. You are attempting to show a contradiction. Doesn’t matter if It were the Bible, the Koran, Josephus or any other ancient writer or for that matter even someone in the present. Its similar to accusing a writer of lying. Once you show that he/she might have been telling the truth the claim is defeated. You might THINK the person is lying but the real possibility of another meaning means the claim cannot be proven.
LikeLike
Thank you for your very detailed explanation, Kathy.
You mentioned that Christianity has more evidence than other religions, but the only evidence you listed was:
“I “know” God is our Creator because of my relationship with Him, because of answered prayers and other ways He has revealed Himself to me in my life.”
Is that the only evidence? Since your relationship is with a Being that you cannot see, touch, or hear speak to you in an audible voice that I too could hear, aren’t you asking me to trust your feelings and intuition as evidence for your God? I have read statements by Mormons, Muslims, and Hindus regarding their feelings and intuition of the presence of THEIR god in their lives, many answered prayers, and other revelations of his/its “presence” in their lives, so why should I believe you over them?
LikeLike
This trying to have your cake and eat it does not bode well for YOUR claims of objectivity.As you an Arch have demonstrated you have beliefs about materialism that you cannot substantiate. Whether you admit it or not you are like all the other people on the planets with your own set of biases.
If I have cake, I’m going to eat it.
Secondly, I never placed an inordinate amount of certainty about those beliefs. I started out saying I don’t know, which was not a concept you are familiar with, apparently. When goaded into providing some explanation for that which I don’t know I posited an alternative to a god. Simple as that. And if we need to go back through the comments to verify that we can. I also said I was good with “I don’t know”. Just because I don’t know doesn’t mean I plug a particular god into that spot. If that’s how you want to play it, that’s cool. It’s your belief. But when I say I don’t know, I really don’t know. That whole materialism business doesn’t have particular evidence either. So I’m not claiming it to be the be-all-end-all that you claim about your god.
LikeLike
“Thats easy William. You are attempting to show a contradiction. Doesn’t matter if It were the Bible, the Koran, Josephus or any other ancient writer or for that matter even someone in the present. Its similar to accusing a writer of lying. Once you show that he/she might have been telling the truth the claim is defeated. You might THINK the person is lying but the real possibility of another meaning means the claim cannot be proven.” – mike
thanks. i agree with that then. Cant be proven and in many cases cant be disprove – so we’re such often times to evaluate evidences fro ourselves.
But while I may not have proven my case, you have not proven yours either – and that doesn’t necessarily imply that we’re on equal footings either.
LikeLike
Mike said:
That’s fine, Mike. I think William is right that such a standard means that almost nothing counts as a contradiction. Even your suggestion about the women seeing the stone rolled away could be reinterpreted, as William showed. But again, if this is your standard, then okay.
My standard is slightly different. For instance, when John 18:28 says the Jews had not yet eaten the Passover, I take that to mean the Passover seder, of which there is one per year. You said it could have been in reference to the Chagigah. I disagree, as I think it would have then said “Chagigah” instead of “Passover,” but this is just where we disagree.
At the very least, I don’t think anyone could claim that this is a clear issue where the gospels all obviously agree. God, if he inspired the gospels, allowed them to be composed in a way where the details don’t always match up.
LikeLike
I’ve still got reading to do, but i believe mike was right and i was regarding the high sabbath, in that the actual passover meal was not the high sabbath, but that the first day of the FOUB was…
however, John is still translated as saying the day of preparation was the day they were getting ready for the passover. Now, mike could be right – every greek scholar may have mistranslated the passage – but this seems suspect to me, but since I am not a scholar, i cannot say for sure.
If greek doesnt have punctuation, then some mechanism must be in place to get context across and avoid such confusion… but i’m not a greek scholar, so I really have little but trust them in most cases.
is there a translation that reads the way mike says it should read?
LikeLike
@William,
you said:
That’s right William – the very parable she pasted was an analogy that included a human as analogous to God. In fact in some places the bible uses the very same analogy of marriage so while I don’t think she did it on purpose I thought Kathy was focusing on irrelevant issues in her response.
I’m always more than willing to admit my own imperfections, and if there is some creator God who is perfectly good then it would logically follow that I am imperfect compared to that being, so this charge that somehow we’re prideful in that we just think we’re the most awesome thing since sliced bread just doesn’t seem to apply in the analogy. While we could never expect the extremely religious to believe us, your analogy tried to express what our perspective is, and some reasons why we have that perspective. We are doubtful that this invisible being truly exists, especially the versions of this being put forth by more traditional versions of religion. Kathy and others witnessing here are doubtful of other versions of this being as well, so if being doubtful implies arrogance then we are all arrogant. In that case the word arrogant kind of loses it’s meaning.
LikeLike
This is certainly where I fall, Nate. There are certainly things that don’t match up, and not only in the Gospels or the NT. Here are a couple articles, maybe mostly for Kathy and Mike’s benefit, detailing some ways of understanding the Scriptures in a way that is different than our modern, Western, highly detailed minds tend to look at things. These kinds of explanations sit well with me, though I know they likely wouldn’t sit well with others on this thread. But, I think the honest look that they give at the way the Scriptures were obviously compiled at least doesn’t avoid the problems that certainly exist.
The Modern Inerrancy Debate
Revelation and Inspiration
LikeLike
I agree, Josh. While I don’t necessarily agree with those conclusions, I at least respect they’re willingness to see the Bible for what it is.
Thanks for the link.
LikeLike
good points, Howie. I agree.
I know that i call names here from time to time, but typically in retaliation to show that anyone, from any position can do that. It may be childish of me to do so, and like you point out with calling someone “arrogant” or “prideful,” it really does nothing for the argument – either side could make that claim, so it is typically moot.
It really is best left unsaid while we focus on the real points. even Proverbs 15:1 says to take care in how you speak to others, because delivery can affect how the message is taken – i’d do well to remind myself of that more often.
LikeLike