Hello from a non-religious new person

[Refractive]

There are plenty of other believers of other religions, who likewise experience heights of emotions: Muslims, Mormons (with their warm feeling in their chest), Hindus, Buddhists, etc. You wouldn't accept the emotions they legitimately feel as evidence of the veracity of the experiences they've had, would you?

Why not? Depending on other factors as well, perhaps.

 

[Mike C.]

There are plenty of other believers of other religions, who likewise experience heights of emotions: Muslims, Mormons (with their warm feeling in their chest), Hindus, Buddhists, etc. You wouldn't accept the emotions they legitimately feel as evidence of the veracity of the experiences they've had, would you? I simply expand that to one other religion.

Those are natural feelings that anyone has when humbling oneself before a higher purpose or being. I expect to find those among all religions. As I said, though, even removing my emotions from the picture, I cannot deny the life-altering reality of my conversion. It seems that even if I were to reject the whole Bible, I could still point back to that moment and say to myself, "But I was saved, and something real changed me." I wouldn't be able to say, "It was only something I felt." It appears, then, that what we each experienced is different, according to my own estimation of things.

So, I still get happy and sad, and I do have great heights of joyous emotion at times even now, but perhaps not as regularly as when I was praising God in my everyday life. But I feel better about my state -- more balanced. My joyous states are over things that I know are real, they are from relationships with actual people. And I can honestly say I feel more content, and more at peace with myself, and at peace with the fact that there is nothing outside of the natural realm, and I have only this one life to live. I am happy about it.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

 

[Biblebeliever2007]

The Lord have mercy on you resonator. I feel deeply grieved for you after listening to your story about you losing your faith. This is very sad. I hope you feel welcome on this board. I can assure you that we Christians still love you resonator. We Christians love Jesus Christ our Savior because he gives us hope beyond the grave. We don't have to die in our sins. We can be forgiven.

 

[reasonator]

The Lord have mercy on you resonator. I feel deeply grieved for you after listening to your story about you losing your faith. This is very sad. I hope you feel welcome on this board. I can assure you that we Christians still love you resonator. We Christians love Jesus Christ our Savior because he gives us hope beyond the grave. We don't have to die in our sins. We can be forgiven.

Well, speaking of the lord having mercy on me, why shouldn't he, if he exists? If I truly accept the gift of eternal life now before I die, then I get to go to heaven and avoid an eternity (perhaps?) of torture and unpleasantness. But why can't I accept it 10 seconds after I die and I see hell open up before me? Why is it too late then? Why the games?

 

[Nick M]

To use some Christian terms, I had what I believed to be a personal relationship with Jesus, and had a salvation experience and commitment of my life as a disciple of Christ. I was also baptized in my local church.

I did the same. You were never saved, and are not now. If you ask Jesus for a relationship, and to have him live his life in you, (or whatever words they come up with) Jesus says no. The sin issue is in the way. You can not be his servant until you are saved. If you put the cart before the horse, you will remain in darkness.

The gospel is that he died for your sin. This requires no action on your part, besides believing it. And he was raised for the dead for you. If you don't believe this, you will never have life.

I taught Sunday schools, taught youth at discipleship weekend retreats, taught singles and young adults,

What exactly were you teaching since you didn't know the gospel? Or didn't believe it, you haven't said yet.

Shortly before I graduated, I had some misgivings about the modern Church, and how churches are often operated more as businesses and less as I thought they were intended to be.

Yep. They are mostly thieves. Especially the "Pentecostals" like Benny Hinn.

Feel free to start a thread on your thoughts.

 

[One Eyed Jack]

I was a Christian, with a serious and real belief, for 11 years (from about 18 to 29).

Well, at least you didn't tell us you were Christian for 18 years because your parents made you go to church when you were living at home.

 

[Town Heretic]

Well, speaking of the lord having mercy on me, why shouldn't he, if he exists? If I truly accept the gift of eternal life now before I die, then I get to go to heaven and avoid an eternity (perhaps?) of torture and unpleasantness. But why can't I accept it 10 seconds after I die and I see hell open up before me? Why is it too late then?

Seriously? You went to seminary? Distinguish between choice/will and what you'd be describing here. And every premeditated murderer would likely stand down if certain of apprehension and annihilation.

Why the games?

I was just having the same sort of thought.

 

[reasonator]

I did the same. You were never saved, and are not now.

Well of course I wasn't, and am not now -- because the god of Christianity doesn't actually exist. But I thought I was, and I was authentic in my belief. But I love how it always comes down to this argument that I didn't really know what it was like to be a Christian when I was one, or didn't have the correct theology.

If you ask Jesus for a relationship, and to have him live his life in you, (or whatever words they come up with) Jesus says no. The sin issue is in the way. You can not be his servant until you are saved. If you put the cart before the horse, you will remain in darkness.

If this matters at all for you (it probably doesn't) I was Calvinist who believed in Reformed theology when I was a Christian, so of course I didn't believe it was anything I could do to save myself, it was all by the will and doing and election of god. I was not trying to imply that when I was a Christian I thought I saved myself somehow by doing something.

The gospel is that he died for your sin. This requires no action on your part, besides believing it. And he was raised for the dead for you. If you don't believe this, you will never have life.

What exactly were you teaching since you didn't know the gospel? Or didn't believe it, you haven't said yet.

I was teaching exactly what you wrote in your reply. I believed exactly what you wrote. I no longer believe it. Instead of doubting my prior authenticity as a Christian, maybe you should just accept that some people who do understand biblical theology (though there are many stripes and theological disagreement) can later disbelieve it.

 

[reasonator]

Seriously? You went to seminary?

Like, totally dude. And I was like, a totally real Christian who really believed I was saved by God's will in election in his mercy by predestination. I believed I could do nothing through works to earn salvation, since I was a dead man in sin, and dead men can do nothing to save themselves, but that it was purely by the mercy of God as he chose to let Jesus's sacrifice and holiness atone for my sin.

Of course, my question still stands. If God could do that for me before I die, why couldn't he do that for all of use before we die, or even as hell is opened before our eyes, why couldn't he change us from dead people in sin to being people alive in Christ?

Again, why the games from god?

 

[reasonator]

Well, at least you didn't tell us you were Christian for 18 years because your parents made you go to church when you were living at home.

Parents made me go to church when I was in elementary school. After that, I only went if I wanted to go. I still wasn't "saved," until high school. And even at that, I was a baby chrisitan until college. And that was all my decision, not my family's. Not sure what your point is, though.

 

[Town Heretic]

Like, totally dude.

Then unless it was mail order there's no excuse for you being stumped by the point that elicited my inquiry.

And I was like, a totally real Christian who really believed I was saved by God's will in election in his mercy by predestination. I believed I could do nothing through works to earn salvation, since I was a dead man in sin, and dead men can do nothing to save themselves, but that it was purely by the mercy of God as he chose to let Jesus's sacrifice and holiness atone for my sin.

Then you have a problem I set out in my adultery parallel. Care to address it?

Of course, my question still stands. If God could do that for me before I die, why couldn't he do that for all of use before we die, or even as hell is opened before our eyes, why couldn't he change us from dead people in sin to being people alive in Christ?

You're a creature of will. God isn't a producer of bad theater, which is what you'd reduce existence to. It goes to man's purpose. I'd advance that we exist for relation, are that object upon which perfect love can express itself. But relation requires choice, will. From that foundation come the noblest saints and worst depravity. God's desire is that we choose wisely, but the choice remains.

Again, why the games from god?

If the choice is between your errant understanding and God playing games, the only sensible answer eliminates the inquiry. Else, you're merely advocating your apostasy in as benign a fashion as you can and still advance it.

 

[reasonator]

Then unless it was mail order there's no excuse for you being stumped by the point that elicited my inquiry.

Again with the personal attacks. For the most part, the response I've gotten from you and others is ad hominem. No, my degree isn't mail order. Even if it were, you would still be committing a genetic logical fallacy. I don't have to have a degree at all to make a point. But no, my degree was an authentic, four-year, work-my-butt-off degree.


And I did answer your adultery example. You just didn't like how I answered it. Your adultery example was made because you assume I was surprised that I did not get a kindred response from you and others. I am not surprised; I have gotten the response I expected, from there I went about answering questions and addressing the personal attacks on my backstory.

Let's consider a variation on your example:

let's say I'm married and I love my wife. I'm faithful and trusting and have been since the day I married. Now then, one day you happen by. You're also married and tell me that you love your wife as well, and that if anything you had qualms about the seriousness with which your brethren approached the institution.

Then, one day my wife and I both came to the realization that we no longer accepted monogamy as the true and best way to live life. I slept with my secretary. How kindred would you feel?

 

[Nick M]

But I thought I was, and I was authentic in my belief.

I am sure you were authentic in your belief. But you were not saved.

or didn't have the correct theology

No, just a matter of believing the gospel.

If this matters at all for you

It does. I prefer that you become reconciled to God. But those that reject him I will not shed a tear over their choice.

I was Calvinist who believed in Reformed theology when I was a Christian

Calvinism is false, including its gospel. Don't you think it would be cruel and unjust for God to arbitrarily select people to life and death?

I was not trying to imply that when I was a Christian I thought I saved myself somehow by doing something.

You can't save yourself. He saves you, when you believe. It is like a party. You have an invitation to go, but you still have to accept the invitation.

I was teaching exactly what you wrote in your reply

It doesn't seem so from here. You said you asked Jesus into your heart, or something simliar. The Bible says that isn't salvation, nor the steps to it. Be sure to start a thread on your objections.

 

[reasonator]

I am sure you were authentic in your belief. But you were not saved.

Do you really think that at this point, when I no longer believe in the supernatural realm, or in religion in general or Christianity in particular, that I care whether you think I was actually saved under your worldview, or not?

From my perspective, I am just as "saved" now and then as you are now.

We can split theological hairs over whether "asking Jesus into my heart" was the proper way to describe the salvation and sanctification process, but you must understand that to a large degree I just don't care about those distinctions much anymore since I have cast away the whole lot of beliefs in the first place. I care about those distinctions only to an amused, intellectual degree.

 

[zippy2006]

Well, speaking of the lord having mercy on me, why shouldn't he, if he exists? If I truly accept the gift of eternal life now before I die, then I get to go to heaven and avoid an eternity (perhaps?) of torture and unpleasantness. But why can't I accept it 10 seconds after I die and I see hell open up before me? Why is it too late then? Why the games?

It's a good question, but the presuppositions implicit within it are far too "fundamentalist" for my liking. What does God punish us for? What does the punishment consist of? is it extrinsic punishment at all? What is salvation?

I think I would have significant disagreements on the answers to those questions with anyone who phrased the original question as you did.

:e4e:

 

[Refractive]

. But no, my degree was an authentic, four-year, work-my-butt-off degree.

From where? Also, did you miss my first post? Here it is:

I realize there are heaps of people who think they are Christian, but in reality have no clue what it's like to "have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ," or to experience true repentance and acceptance and devotion. I, however, am not one of those people. I experienced those things, whether you like to believe that I did or not.

But obviously you did not, as you are now an atheist. So you had a relationship with ..... your own imagination?

What would have made you think you ever had such a relationship in the first place?

I think this is important since when I have a personal relationship with someone, there has always been myself and the other person and I don't think later on, no matter how many years pass, I can suddenly believe the other person never existed.

You started out insisting you had a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. As I said, obviously, you did not. So, why did you think you did?

 

[reasonator]

From where?

It was one of the Southern Baptist seminaries, and that's as much as I'd like to say at this time.

Also, did you miss my first post? Here it is:



I think this is important since when I have a personal relationship with someone, there has always been myself and the other person and I don't think later on, no matter how many years pass, I can suddenly believe the other person never existed.

You started out insisting you had a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. As I said, obviously, you did not. So, why did you think you did?

It's a good question. I believed I had a personal relationship for the same reason people who are still Christians think they currently have a personal relationship with Jesus: Because the term "relationship" is used in a different way than people normally use the word, and secondly, the psychology of people in general allows them to believe religious concepts out of social peer pressure.

I know now that a true relationship is with someone who actually exists; who is able to communicate back to you. When I prayed and talked to Jesus, I wasn't doing anything differently than if I were talking to a tree. There was no response. I would feel "led" by the Spirit, and I thought this was God's way of speaking back to me, but I know now I was listening to my own inner thoughts and desires for things.

 

[alwight]

You started out insisting you had a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. As I said, obviously, you did not. So, why did you think you did?

More obviously then perhaps nobody has relationships with dead people.

 

[Town Heretic]

Again with the personal attacks. For the most part, the response I've gotten from you and others is ad hominem.

Not an ad hom at all. Noting that someone with a seminary education should have an answer for the question you posed is a reasoned response/challenge to your narrative as presented or the genuineness of your method. You made a point of listing your credentials in attempting to support the notion that you were once like any of the faithful, so you rest a great deal on your thumbnail sketch of yourself. It's fair to question any part of that when it appears logically inconsistent.

I don't have to have a degree at all to make a point. But no, my degree was an authentic, four-year, work-my-butt-off degree.

In order: I didn't say that you did and if it didn't prepare you for that answer you should consider legal recourse.

And I did answer your adultery example.

No, you didn't, unless you did it in a post not directed at me. I'm reading our conversation. I don't have time to spend on much more at present. Now if your set out below is any indication then you missed the point of my parallel. I'll note how when we get to it.

You just didn't like how I answered it. Your adultery example was made because you assume I was surprised that I did not get a kindred response from you and others.

Amusingly enough, an errant assumption on your part that fails to surprise.

Let's consider a variation on your example...Then, one day my wife and I both came to the realization that we no longer accepted monogamy as the true and best way to live life.

There's the heart and point of my objection and you don't appear to understand it. Apostasy isn't an accident. Doubt isn't a cold that you catch. It is a process and you entertain it. And much like the man who claimed to love his wife until one day he cheated on her, when a man's actions don't support his declarations it's time to question his understanding or his veracity.

You cannot love God and doubt Him any more than you can love your wife and betray her. While you may feel a great affection there is something you hold above it and that isn't love, only an approximation of its shadow. That sort of love/faith is doomed from the inception.

Your "I care about those distinctions only to an amused, intellectual degree" underscores my conclusion in the wise young ruler response I made some time ago. I hope you live to regret it and amend the vanity that preceded you inevitable fall.

 

[reasonator]

@townheretic: Your comments on vanity are amusing since that's all you've demonstrated toward me, in your snide putdowns, since you started your replies in this thread. And I happened upon some other posters in this forum who seem to agree with your poor way of communicating with people.

I don't have time to get into it much right now, but your insistence on this adultery example misses some logical points.

You said:
"when a man's actions don't support his declarations it's time to question his understanding or his veracity."

I wouldn't disagree with that statement, but it would only apply to me in the negative way you are intending if I continued to proclaim myself a Christian, and yet my actions didn't support my declaration. Then I would of course be a hypocrite, a liar, and a fake. The same holds true with the adultery example you gave, which is why it fails as a good example in relation to me. If I proclaimed myself married and faithful, but then cheated on my wife, then my actions would not support my declaration, of course.

But that is not close to my situation, which is why your example fails. I am not proclaiming myself to be a christian now. I used to be. And when I was, I lived the life. So a more accurate marriage example would be that I was faithful to my wife, and then our relationship changed and we divorced. But throughout, my actions supported my declarations.

If there is any misunderstanding about your marriage example and my response to it, I would submit that rather than my poor, insufficient theological education, perhaps it's your inability to communicate clearly, and in a charitable way.