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 
Arch said:
“You don’t know how to discuss, Kathy, the idea of a discussion with you is out of the question.
Which bachelor has the prettiest wife, Kathy – none, bachelor’s don’t have wives. Which religion is the most credentialed – none, all religions are bogus, and thus don’t have credentials. Case closed.”
Nan said:
“Kathy, your “points of substance” have been refuted time and time again. The problem is you simply can’t see beyond your own “objectivity” to recognize when someone has pointed out the error of your thinking.”
Do either of you know what I mean by “substance”?? Clearly you don’t even though I’ve spelled it out for you… it’s to actually address THE POINTS.
Making personal, opinionated judgments is NOT addressing the points.. yet, you both keep doing it.. you all prove me right in every comment you make and you can’t even see this.
It’s mind boggling. Again, pride blinds you.. it steals your objectivity/ awareness.
LikeLike
“I’m guessing by your response that you must be fulfilled and inspired having such derogatory language spoken of and to you when someone else’s truth is that you are mistaken? Are you sure you are loving your neighbour as yourself?”
quite. want to come over and knock on their doors and ask them ??
Now do you wish to make a substantive point as to why begging that you can properly research a document in Spanish without referencing spanish is not a bonehead stupid claim to make.? Because I stand by it. Its one of the silliest claims I have ever read in my life.
“TBlacksman, the passage you shared with me reflects what many modern day churches seem to tend to do. It’s likely why Christianity is under such attack these days as well.”
Would you like me to make social commentary on why it is in most polls atheism cannot hit double digits. I am game but as i think you can gather I am not really impressed with drive by pontificators. Add something of value or even engage in a debate/discussion and I might grant you some credibility from my side.
LikeLike
You have no points to address, Kathy, that don’t involve a supernatural entity, which you cannot prove exists – prove that to our satisfaction, and let’s take it from there.
LikeLike
“After the fall of Jerusalem in the 6th century BCE, they came back from Babylon late in that century, speaking Aramaic, and continued to do so – Yeshua spoke Aramaic, not Hebrew. ”
which is irrelevant to the question. Hebrew manuscripts would refer to the old testament /Tanach predominantly written in Hebrew. Yeshua was the new testament. to answer Ruth’s question manuscriptswere mostly copied not translated. Modern Hebrew is in fact a bit different from biblical Hebrew.
LikeLike
‘You have no points to address, Kathy, that don’t involve a supernatural entity, which you cannot prove exists – prove that to our satisfaction, and let’s take it from there.”
You lost the claim of rejecting based on the supernatural when you went to Krauss’ everything from nothing religion. That cat is out the bag and not going back in either.
LikeLike
“that’s just another of his ways of trying to wiggle out of it.”
Speaking of “wiggling out” do I need to post AGAIN the two points I posted last to KC? They could attach some wires to you and you could power your city with all the gyrations you’ve employed to avoid answering. Say the word and I can copy and past them again
LikeLike
TBlacksman, acting a little high and mighty there don’t you think?
You are aware that by neighbours Jesus was referring to fellow human beings, not just those living in your immediate vicinity?
There is no sense in engaging you in discussion when there is such hypocrisy in your position.
LikeLike
Arch said:
“You have no points to address, Kathy, that don’t involve a supernatural entity, which you cannot prove exists – prove that to our satisfaction, and let’s take it from there.”
Wrong Arch.. my point is extremely valid since we have NO other valid explanation. Again, I’ve asked you several times to give an alternative possibility.. you haven’t.
Plus, here’s the other big problem with your supernatural dismissal.. natural laws/ science actually argues AGAINST the logic of existence. Atheists ignore that fact.. you try to pretend it’s not true. You all even actually put forth “ideas” of how to get something from nothing.. it’s comical to witness.
LikeLike
“TBlacksman, acting a little high and mighty there don’t you think?”
NO I don’t think so . Practically everything you ave posted in this thread has been pontification so its seems a little pot calling the Kettle black there.
“You are aware that by neighbours Jesus was referring to fellow human beings, not just those living in your immediate vicinity?”
As the verses I showed indicate the passages you cite do NOT mean that people cannot speak plainly the truth. Plus to be honest after reading a bit of your blog its quite apparent to me you really are not in a position to teach about the Bible.
“There is no sense in engaging you in discussion when there is such hypocrisy in your position.”
If that was your idea of a discussion and substance then we agree – there was little sense in it.
LikeLike
I’ve drawn the same conclusion, as many of us have – he doesn’t engage, he merely bounces around an issue and obfuscates, while hurling invectives, much like an ape hurling feces. As far as I can tell, he’s a waste of skin. Kathy has a chance to be human, but with Mike goading her, she’s rapidly deteriorating.
LikeLike
RE: “we have NO other valid explanation” – I’m not agreeing that that’s true, but why do we NEED one? How about saying, “We don’t currently have a valid explanation, but tossing a supernatural, magical entity into the mix, sure isn’t gonna do it!”
We’ve bought into BS beliefs for thousands of years, one of which actually has the earth balanced on the back of a stack of turtles – how much good has it done us to have those? Whether or not you accept Krause’s thesis is irrelevant to me, the point is, that a valid explanation WILL be found at some point, just as relativity was discovered at the beginning of the last century, and when it is, it will be scientific and will not involve any supernatural entities – OR turtles.
Until then, I’m perfectly fine with no explanation at all.
LikeLike
Wow, Nate! Your patience speaks of your kind character, not an ancient book or a magical prayer language.
Re: Jesus Camp (referencing Harry Potter) …warlock bad, prophet good? Mystical literature is still mystical literature, no matter if “Holy Bible” is on the cover or not. At least the Potter series hasn’t turned my nine year old into something he’s not, unlike the Bible.
It appears to me that an all powerful god isn’t really the Almighty if he needs a few Evangelicals to hog this blog in an attempt to convert us. Then again, maybe their staunch arguments are to convince themselves to remain in the faith. Many of us deconverts recognize that “righteous indignation”. We were stuck in that sort of doubt and confusion ourselves for years. Dear Evangelicals, it’s seriously okay to question.
Here’s to a good weekend and week ahead to everyone! Enjoy your friends and families, breathe in some fresh air!
Peace,
Charity
LikeLike
“Plus to be honest after reading a bit of your blog its quite apparent to me you really are not in a position to teach about the Bible.”
Mike to be honest, you don’t think anyone is in a position to teach about the bible or know how to be a christian unless they receive instruction from you first.
As far as the sunrise/sunset and the sun standing still thing, if I had the perfect answer that 7 billion people on the planet unanimously agreed with, you would tell me how stupid and ridiculous my explanation was. I’ll pass. Keep listening to those crickets.
LikeLike
He just seems hardened in his ways, not realizing the inconsistencies between his approach and his faith. I’m sure he means well, like all of us, he is working with what he has come to understand so far. There’s no sense in holding that against him. Beating the unruly does not tend to tame, but instead harbours more resentment. That does little good in opening connection to wider understandings.
LikeLike
“Keep listening to those crickets.” – Listening?! He not listening, he’s EATING them!
LikeLike
“Beating the unruly does not tend to tame” – yeah, but it’s a lot more fun than beating a dead horse, trust me!
Just kidding – yes, you’re right (hangs head) – “Forgive me father, for I have sinned –“
LikeLike
TBlacksman, offering to grant me credibility isn’t a way of acting high and mighty? You may wish to reconsider your view.
Speaking plainly the truth is good, I don’t disagree with that. I wouldn’t have brought it up if you were doing just that.
Thank you for the blog visit. I am not claiming to be teaching a definitive view of the Bible, my blog is focused on exploring perspectives of it, and focusing on the troubles I’ve seen with how it is commonly understood that go against the humanitarian lead that Jesus takes.
LikeLike
Lucky for you Christianity doesn’t have the market on forgiveness cornered, regardless of what might be claimed.
LikeLike
Indeed.
LikeLike
“TBlacksman, offering to grant me credibility isn’t a way of acting high and mighty? You may wish to reconsider your view.”
No you might consider using some common sense because you just can’t read very well. I wrote
” I might grant you some credibility from my side”
If you are suggesting that I can’t decide on what I find credible to me on your say so then you are pretty high on the high and mighty list.
“Speaking plainly the truth is good, I don’t disagree with that. I wouldn’t have brought it up if you were doing just that.”
And when were you appointed the arbiter of what i was or was not just doing? See how you are getting back to your own high and mightiness? 🙂 Pontificators often do. Take a bow. You are our own best example of what you criticize
LikeLike
“I’ve seen with how it is commonly understood that go against the humanitarian lead that Jesus takes.”
actually thats what I meant. You don’t speak for Jesus since frankly your blog betrays you don’t even know what he is about. You merely try to input your idea of ‘humanitarian lead” and incorporate him into your own ideology something I see others have taken you on about.
However I thought we had agreed this discussion made no sense (since it never was one)
LikeLike
” I’ll pass. Keep listening to those crickets.”
🙂 🙂 Of course you will KC because that saves you the embarrassment of saying
“Mike I really tried to come up with something but……….I got nothing”
so what else is there to listen to besides the crickets?
LikeLike
He’s foaming and spitting again —
LikeLike
” the point is, that a valid explanation WILL be found at some point, just as relativity was discovered at the beginning of the last century, and when it is, it will be scientific and will not involve any supernatural entities – OR turtles.
Until then, I’m perfectly fine with no explanation at all.”
It was almost as if as you wrote that you had “Somewhere over the rainbow’ playing in the background. Its really quite clear you have no understanding of the issues. Science will NEVER ever give a rational explanation for what Krauss was attempting to answer – ultimate causation. There are only two options
either something must exist that has no cause or causes are of an infinite regression.
Either option stops science in its track because science cannot be invoked to explain what has no explanation. Despite your speech invested with all the faith and worship of scientism scientific progress has been limited to how things work. We ‘ve made no progress on on any question about ultimate causation and its dubious science is even intended for such a task
So you can write your “WILL”. in caps, bold letters even a different font because science itself teaches us thatt the answers for that lay outside of our cause and effect universe. How you think with such assurance scientists will breach the singularity which is unbreachable is beyond me …and beyond common sense.
furthermore something without cause is pretty much indistinguishable from a supernatural concept in and of itself. So click your heels all you want and say you’d rather be in Kansas but you are stuck with a supernatural meta-physcical concept somewhere.
LikeLike
“such assurance scientists will breach the singularity which is unbreachable is beyond me” – as, obviously, are so many, MANY other things as well.
LikeLike