Agnosticism, Atheism, Bible Study, Christianity, Faith, God, Religion, Truth

Letter to Kathy Part 2

Nate

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.

Unknown's avatar

Published by Nate

2,018 thoughts on “Letter to Kathy Part 2”

  1. I guess Cathy doesn’t have the time to post her evidence for the existence of the Christian God for me.

    I abandoned conservative Christianity one month ago. I did so because I discovered this shocking fact: there is no evidence for Christianity other than “feelings” and “intuition”.

    1. We have no verifiable eyewitness accounts of the Resurrection.
    2. Paul only saw a bright light on the Damascus Road, not a resurrected, nail-pierced body.
    3. We have no testimony from any of the original disciples that they died refusing to recant.
    4. We have a Holy Book, the Bible, that was put together by Catholics, not God.
    5. Archaeological evidence shows without any doubt that the Patriarchs, the Exodus, the first Passover, the forty years in the Sinai, the Conquest of Canaan, the Great Kingdoms of David and Solomon never happened; never existed. They are fables.
    6. Archaeology has shown that ancient Canaanites, long before “Abraham”, worshipped a god named Elohim, and a lesser god named Yahweh, who later, was adopted by the Hebrews as their national god.
    7. So Jesus taught that he was the Son of a nonexistent Canaanite god, Yahweh; Jesus taught that he was the fulfillment of an event that did not happen (the Passover). Jesus made a mistake. Therefore Jesus could not be God.

    So all that fundamentalist/conservative Christians have left as evidence of the existence of their God is…warm fuzzy feelings and delusions that God speaks to them.

    Like

  2. @Gary
    7. So Jesus taught that he was the Son of a nonexistent Canaanite god, Yahweh; Jesus taught that he was the fulfillment of an event that did not happen (the Passover). Jesus made a mistake. Therefore Jesus could not be God.

    Excellent observation, Gary.
    Ooops?

    Like

  3. Confession time, ladies and gents! Jig’s up!

    Y’all know I’m a teacher but what you DIDN’T know was that Kathy is really my student. She was given the following ‘assignment’ –

    Find an atheist blog to proselytize on. When putting forth your case, make sure you use the following words as much as possible, for emphasis:

    – liberal (and really pound away at THAT one until the very mention of it induces eye-rolling)

    – pride (you KNOW they’re full of it!)

    – ego (that Freud; what did he DO?)

    – martyrdom (think: Jesus)

    – truth (and remember, yours is for REAL)

    – objectivity (it doesn’t matter if you don’t know what it is, make sure everyone ELSE knows the definition before you get finished with them!)

    Don’t worry about making sense. The main idea is to just keep pounding away at the theme – after all, those heathens out there are the enemy!

    You can win this competition with REPETITION!!!

    What d’ya think, arch – does she get the MILLION BUCKS???

    Like

  4. William you said:

    “they compare becuase people gave their lives for their beliefs.

    how do they differ?”

    And you said this RIGHT AFTER saying this:

    “let;s discuss the bible, pros and cons, as honestly as we both can. surely, we can agree to that.”

    Are you a product of the 60s? Or is this blatant dishonesty right after claiming you
    desire honesty?

    I JUST told you a short time ago and MANY other times who they differ.

    So which is it William.. you have mental issues because of too much drug usage
    or you’re just being blatantly dishonest?

    Like

  6. Here ya go, William: “I get your source under certain conditions?? Only a liberal..”

    If these are Christians, that means that THIS is what Christianity has devolved to – no wonder we want to get rid of it.

    Like

  8. “no one here is interested in “FINDING TRUTH”” – I’m hearing that to mean that you’re incapable of accepting, “I don’t know” as an answer – “I don’t know” can be the truth, certainly far more so than your magic man.

    Like

  9. “I’m fully aware that many liberals call themselves Christians William and visa versa.” – Do you see the implication here William? It’s that all “true” Christians must be conservatives, but if anyone later accuses her of saying it, she will claim she didn’t, because she has worded in such a way that leaves her wiggle room.

    Like

  11. “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.”
    No kidding. Why are you giving me my point back to me as if it’s your own??

    So, then, Kathy, you must mean t
    hese:
    Midianite massacre (32,000 virgins were kept alive) Num.31:1-35 – 90,000+
    God tells Joshua to stone to death Achan (and his family) for taking the accursed thing Joshua 7:10-12, 24-26 – 5+
    God tells Joshua to attack Ai and do what he did to Jericho (kill everyone) Joshua 8:1-25 – 12,000

    Now I have a lot more, if you like – you see, the Muslims that blew up the twin towers believed their god told them to do it, just as these clown believed their god did too.

    Like

  12. ” It’s that all “true” Christians must be conservatives, but if anyone later accuses her of saying it, she will claim she didn’t, ”

    lol, no Arch, that’s exactly what I AM saying.. no need to deny it, it’s the truth. There are no exclusively liberal beliefs that are compatible with Jesus’ teachings.

    Like

  13. “So all that fundamentalist/conservative Christians have left as evidence of the existence of their God is…warm fuzzy feelings and delusions that God speaks to them.”

    So in other words you read Till too? Awesome Dude.

    Like

  14. @Josh,

    In the midst of all the pleasant exchanges going on I just wanted to shoot a quick side note to you in reply to what you said before. Not sure if you ever figured it out but my approach to this is very similar to yours. I believe there are intelligent people who hold all sorts of different metaphysical world-views. I think these questions are tougher than all of us (yes me too) tend to make them out to be. I like the approach that Robert Kuhn and John Polkinghorne both express – you can see their very short discussion in my blog post dated 3/12 (it’s the 4th video there). Take a look if you are interested.

    Like

  15. “Mike, what you do is try to push people’s buttons like a troll. You do not know me so thank you in advance for not projecting your own short-comings on to me.”

    No what I knew is that you would probably know you would get your clocked clean if you kept on opining about Circumcision when you knew Abortion would be my point to expose the superior caring as a farce. I don;t know your position on it but I know there are some of your comrades here that are fine and dandy with it.

    Like

  16. “but I know there are some of your comrades here that are fine and dandy with it.”

    Since the majority of people who get abortions in the U.S. are Christians, I think you better hush your mouth before you get in too deep.

    “According to a study by the Guttmacher Institute, “Almost three-quarters of women obtaining abortions in 2008 reported a religious affiliation. The largest proportion were Protestant (37 percent), and most of the rest said that they were Catholic (28 percent) or that they had no religious affiliation (27 percent). One in five abortion patients identified themselves as born-again, evangelical, charismatic or fundamentalist; 75 percent of these were Protestant.”

    But if the conservatives keep chipping away at birth control, expect abortion to rise. Highest abortion rate among teens come from Christian families. Though the study suggests that attending religious services regularly indicates a lower-than-average rate of abortion, the fact remains: Professing Christians abort their children in large numbers. We estimate one in three adults in America today is the parent of an aborted child, and that rate is likely the same both inside and outside the church.”

    http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/40519-why-do-so-many-churchgoers-have-abortions

    Now, Mike — getting back OT — where is that evidence that Yahweh is the one true god?

    Like

  17. “But if the conservatives keep chipping away at birth control, expect abortion to rise. Highest abortion rate among teens come from Christian families.”

    Mike, that was my comment, the remaining comment after that came from the article and should have been in quotes.

    Like

  19. Oops! Have we hit the wall? Tried to post a comment (twice) and it isn’t showing up. If it finally does show up, sorry for the repeat. Not even sure if this will post …

    Like

  20. Gary, I’ve been asking Kathy the same question for a couple of weeks now, and getting the same answer – good luck with that. For a recent “deconvert,” you really seem to have your head on straight.

    Like

  21. “Since the majority of people who get abortions in the U.S. are Christians, I think you better hush your mouth before you get in too deep.”

    Nate can ban me but you can never hush me with your silliness Neuro. Your poll means not a lick to me because how people define Christian isn’t even Christian. If you define Christian as everyone who holds the name or who identifies as catholic and or protestant then you expose that you have no idea what Christianity is much less been a dedicated one as you claim. Your own poll even bites your point in the rear by indicating among those who have abortions only 20% identify as born again

    Meanwhile There are FAAAAAAAR more conservatives opposed to slaughtering babies then there are liberals

    “But if the conservatives keep chipping away at birth control, expect abortion to rise. ”

    Catholics my dear. most protestants have no issue with contraception and since you seem to be saying that abortions rising would be a bad thing when can we expect you to get all upset and jump behind a ban on abortion like you do children losing foreskins?.

    Or ahem is it just the foreskins that get you outraged? If so pish posh you can always keep them on the dead babies eh? So long as those foreskins stay on its not “barbaric” after all.

    “Now, Mike — getting back OT — where is that evidence that Yahweh is the one true god?”

    Prophecy. You want to improve on Ruth’s barf that as long as any people really really want a nation they can get it? That would be good and then we can move on to several I haven;t even begun to touch on. Speaking of which…….

    ANNOUNCEMENT

    I’d like to take this time to say that if there are any Brits on this blog – YOU ALL SUCK

    If you really wanted the new world badly enough you would still have it and if you put your minds to it you can come over and reclaim the US of A any time you want.

    Nate and his readers say you can – thats evidence enough. lol

    Like

  22. “What d’ya think, arch – does she get the MILLION BUCKS???” – certainly in the “Don’t worry about making sense” department. The thing that makes me think you’re yanking our chain, is that her “Reverse Ignorance” article was written Nov. 6, 2008, so if she IS your student, she was already nuts LONG before she ever got to your class!

    Like

  23. Arch said:

    “Now I have a lot more, if you like – you see, the Muslims that blew up the twin towers believed their god told them to do it, just as these clown believed their god did too.”

    Sorry, not the same thing. Islam is a false religion.. it’s evident by it’s own teachings and lack of compelling evidence for it’s truth. Those people have no excuse for murdering others “in the name of their god”.

    Attempting to compare that with the events surrounding our Creator and how He established Himself with His creation is a fail.

    Like

  24. @ NN
    I agree—get ’em while their young is, was, and always will be the golden rule of indoctrination. “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” (Proverbs 22:6) was emblazoned on a banner at the vacation BS I attended.

    Speaking of serendipity…

    “Study: Religious children more likely to believe fantasy than non-religious children

    Look at the P-value differences between religious and secular children in Table 2

    ——————————

    Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal

    Judgments About Fact and Fiction by Children From Religious and Nonreligious Backgrounds

    Kathleen H. Corriveau, Eva E. Chen and Paul L. Harris

    Abstract

    In two studies, 5- and 6-year-old children were questioned about the status of the protagonist embedded in three different types of stories. In realistic stories that only included ordinary events, all children, irrespective of family background and schooling, claimed that the protagonist was a real person. In religious stories that included ordinarily impossible events brought about by divine intervention, claims about the status of the protagonist varied sharply with exposure to religion. Children who went to church or were enrolled in a parochial school, or both, judged the protagonist in religious stories to be a real person, whereas secular children with no such exposure to religion judged the protagonist in religious stories to be fictional. Children’s upbringing was also related to their judgment about the protagonist in fantastical stories that included ordinarily impossible events whether brought about by magic (Study 1) or without reference to magic (Study 2). Secular children were more likely than religious children to judge the protagonist in such fantastical stories to be fictional. The results suggest that exposure to religious ideas has a powerful impact on children’s differentiation between reality and fiction, not just for religious stories but also for fantastical stories.

    Like

Comments are closed.