I lost my faith a while back

[Spectrox War]

Sorry about the delay. I've been a little under the weather. Still feel a bit off colour. Anyway, on with the show...

No, my faith presupposes that. My criticism of your declaration exists independent of that. It functions whether or not God exists objectively.

We are both in danger of making assumptions about what each of us believe about Christianity/ The Bible etc.

What do you believe precisely and why do you believe it?

By way of example. That you cannot trust and doubt, that they are mutually exclusive terms and that faith is a declaration of trust are not dependent on the object of that faith being actual. And doubt isn't a cold a man catches. It's a willful act, a choice to question that which faith/trust would preclude.

I agree with the first part. Some Christians told me they could have faith and doubt all at the same time but I found this to be contradictory.

It is possible to have a belief in something and then for doubt to set in which erodes the belief. e.g. I and many other children believed that every Xmas a jolly fat man dressed in red rode a sleigh that was flown by reindeer and distributed presents to every child on the planet in a matter of hours. When I was about 8, I began to suspect that I was not being told the whole truth. By the time I was 9, I was a-Santa Clausist.

The difference between this and Christianity is that when my parents realised I had figured it out, they stopped reinforcing the fantasy.

I don't consider doubt to be willful. It depends on evidence. If the evidence is poor for a particular claim, then I am entitled to a reasonable doubt about it. The nature of a rational mind is to follow the evidence, not lead it.

No, it doesn't. That God is described in masculine terms doesn't lead one, reasonably, to consider God as a sexed creature, which is an reflection of creation. Now demonstrate that rationality of yours and make an argument for your declarations when you return.

Why is God referred to as He all the time and why was his incarnation on Earth a man? Why was the Bible wriiten by men (unless you know of any female authors?). The Biblical God is very much male.

Which declarations are you referring to?

A sort of faith, but a stunted one. I set out why prior. You reserved your right to judge God, to question His authority and nature. That reservation isn't faith as the Christian should have it. It is more a rough enchantment with a subjective sense of probability.

I have written only a few hundred words on a discussion forum and yet you claim to know so much about me. I believed Jesus was my saviour. I felt purified and saved. I read and lived the Bible everyday. I wanted to tell everyone about it and how they could be saved. Strange how you consider this not to be enough. If this is not sufficient then what does constitute true Christianity? Stricter standards than what I have described would mean that there are very few genuine Christians out there. Most are simply paying lip-service to a God in that case.

Rather, I can rationally distinguish it from my own and what I believe is required of someone who would follow Christ. Your reservation was like unto the rich young ruler's wealth. And it cost you the full and redemptive experience of Christ.

There are lots of passages in the Bible that are simply pre-emptive strikes against critical thinking. This story is one, so is the parable of the sowing of the seed. So is the story of Doubting Thomas. None of them convince me I am doing anything wrong.

Faith doesn't fail. Only the men who lay claim to it do and if they do it makes a statement. And so the argument.

Faith is by definition a fail as far as I'm concerned. Faith is gullibility. It's belief in spite of the evidence.

You had a rationally undeniable reservation, a flaw in that faith. It is from that flaw that your apostasy arose.

What is the criteria for determining authentic faith? What percentage of people who claim to be Christian are actually saved? 1%? 0.1%? This seems a very strange cosmic soul-filtering system to say the least.

No. You're still very much asleep. You just heard Christ passing and stirred for a moment.

:e4e:

I get the feeling that you are trying to invalidate my experience by deploying the No True Scotsman Fallacy. You know nothing about me.

 

[Spectrox War]

What happened?

I suffered from an attack of honesty and I became afflicted with a sense of humanity.

In short I re-evaluated my position because it stopped making sense.

OK, so I once considered myself a satanist, but my problem was with the people in some churches not Christ or his discipline. Have you ever considered your issue isn't with the spirit or Love, but rather the insane ideals people believe? Which denomination did you belong to?

Maybe. But the source of Christianity is the Bible. I had to make an assessment of that.

Brought up CofE. When I became a passionate Christian I was a Baptist. Then I got into Methodism. Couldn't settle. Then I dropped all of it and felt so much better.

On what foundation do you base your logical and rational conclusions? I'm under the impression that there is no irrefutable foundation for human understanding so why should we believe your view is better than ours?

I honestly don't know how to answer that. Except that the scientific method (trying to find something wrong with a claim) and the Socratic method (asking pertinent questions) seem to work time and time again. Believing in something for no good reason is random and meaningless.

That's always a great thing

I agree.

 

[Spectrox War]

What did you believe in before these few months?

I've already covered this in previous posts. I could expand if you want to be more specific.

 

[Spectrox War]

Another foreigner. lain:

Do you like rugby?





:chuckle:

Can't stand it.

 

[Spectrox War]

Yep.

I used to be very religious myself, but I wasn't very serious about God. Now I am very serious about God, but not that religious, if that makes any sense.

Afraid not. It sounds too much like that viral internet video which annoyed me.

I can't think of a definition for religion which meant that Christianity wasn't one.

Religions are to do with gaining personal enlightenment, and usually involve the worship of a God or Gods, using particular rituals and dogmas. There's usually a Holy Book, miraculous claims, allegorical stories and a belief in an afterlife. Christianity ticks all those boxes.

 

[Spectrox War]

You can love an idea, like marriage. In fact, before I was married, I loved the idea of it but a marriage takes two.
▼notice▼

▲I do not question you had an experience, I question whether it was a relationship with Him. If one did, they would have a seriously hard time denying He existed.▲
You are talking about Christianity (it) rather than Christ (Him).

I want to deal with this "having a relationship with Jesus" thing right off the bat.

I used to think I had a relationship with Jesus. It was an almost palpable sense of presence I felt whenever I prayed or read Scripture.

Now I think that "relationship" means something quite different. For a relationship to exist, the other person has to actually exist and it has to be a 2-way interaction. I realised my "relationship" with Christ was just one-way and I was providing all the input. I would have to know what that person was like in detail so that they were real 3-D personalities, not just a character in a book.
I would have to see them in the visible light spectrum and hear them in the audible range of 20Hz to 20kHz.

I would know about their various habits and preferences. I would perhaps if I knew them well be able to have a laugh and a joke with them and be playful. I would know whether they trimmed their beard everyday and whether they enjoyed a pint of beer.

Jesus seems very one dimensional when I read the Bible. He may have existed and done some of the things that were written about in the Gospels but most of the characater is unconvincing and contrived.

 

[Spectrox War]

Welcome to the forum Spectrox :wave2:

Cheers

 

[Spectrox War]

Many people believe that our government rigged 9/11, that they imploded the buildings for their own purposes. This defies logic and reason yet people still believe it.

Just because many people believe this, doesn't make it true. People can be wrong (in large numbers). I was.

And creation does not violate the laws of science. God created the "laws of science" when He created life, the universe and everything. There is no disconnect between science and faith. They are not mutually exclusive.

I don't agree. Maybe creation is unnecessary to explain the world as we know it.

Science and faith (with a Big F) are incompatible IMO. Science follows the evidence. Faith leads it. If science doesn't know the answer, it admits it. It doesn't assume that Goddidit. There's no shame in not knowing.

 

[Spectrox War]

So anything that violates known laws of science cannot possibly be true? What led you to that conclusion?

Name me one thing that exists and is true that violates known laws of science. I can't think of anything.

 

[Spectrox War]

If there is a God, then the miracles and other tall tales are completely rational.

IF - the most powerful word in the English Language.

 

[Spectrox War]

~*~*~

Welcome to the forum.

One can lose something, but maybe find it again, in another form.



pj

Maybe you're right.

 

[Spectrox War]

It doesn't seem so to me if you think a rock can create itself out of nothing.

I don't believe a rock can create itself out of nothing. All we know is that something comes from something. We can't say anything about something coming from nothing because we don't have a "nothing" that we can examine.

A common misconception is that The Big Bang Theory states that the Universe was created from nothing. That isn't necessarily the case. "Something" exploded. It was an expansion event. That is all. God didn't necessarily light the blue touch paper.

 

[Spectrox War]

Welcome to TOL.

Although, I'm am perplexed that if you feel happier without God and His wisdom, that you would then join a site that is geared toward God and His wisdom.

I enjoy debate. I like to challenge assumptions. I think it's healthy for society to do that. I think God is the biggest assumption there is.

 

[Spectrox War]

Welcome to TOL Spectrox War! :e4e:

Thank you kind Sir

 

[Spectrox War]

Well, I seem to be coming way late to the party, and you are probably long gone by now, but I will post a couple of comments, anyway.
I presume that you mean you lost faith in whatever religious beliefs you used to hold, back then. It's not really possible to "lose faith" all together, as we humans have very limited knowledge, and so must act on faith most of the time. The question is, what is it that we are placing our faith in, as we act out our lives. And the answer to that question can and does change according to character and circumstances.
Yeah, the labels don't really mean much, anyway. It's certainly possible to be of two minds about an idea as over-arching as "God". In fact, if we think about it, most ideas have more than one 'side' to them, and often those sides oppose to each other.
My guess is that you were taught a childish concept of God and Christ, and you finally grew up. So that the childish concepts you'd been taught just weren't acceptable, anymore. I'd say that's a good thing.

But the question might be asked, have you considered a more grown up concept of these ideals? Are you aware that there are more logical and reasonable ways of conceiving of these ideals?
Well, I'm not here to convince anyone of anything. All I can do is share my perspective, for others to do with as they wish.

I'm still here. I appreciate your comments and identify with the non-judgemental tone in your prose.

I haven't found a more grown-up interpretation of Christianity or spirituality I'm afraid.

Although I quite liked The Law of Attraction a few years ago. But it's got flaws. One of which is that one of the figureheads (James Arthur Ray) was put in prison for unlawfully/ neglectfully killing 2 people in a Sweat Lodge during one of his courses! I think the Law of Unintended Consequences is a more powerful Law!

 

[Spectrox War]

do you believe in OLAL?

once lost always lost

If that was directed at me, then no I don't necessarily believe that. If compelling evidence for Biblical truth showed up, I would convert.

For me to be a Christian again, I think what would have to happen is that a dove would have to materialise in front of me and start quoting Bible verses. Or an amputee grows his arm back after being prayed for. Or the stars in the sky rearrange themselves to form the words "I AM." It would all need to be verified scientifically as well!

 

[Spectrox War]

So what were these things that were tall tales?
Do you have something specific that you remember?
If you do I am sure that someone here can logically explain it, the problem will arise when you get 100 other posts on the same topic all varied. You wouldn't have time to go into all of there arguments and thus confusion is the result. Like having 4 people talk to you at once.

:cheers:

Too numerous to mention all of them. Maybe I should write a general piece about why I no longer believe the Bible is the true and accurate message from an all-moral, all-loving, all-knowing superbeing.

But for starters:

The OT has a talking snake, a talking donkey, Noah's Ark, parting of the red sea, burning bush.

The NT has all the miracles - the most ridiculous ones being the withering of the fig tree & the zombies walking into Jerusalem after Jesus death in Matthew's Gospel.

 

[Spectrox War]

i was miserable a lot of the time b4 i went back to the Church i was raised in... and there is only ONE Church tht God established on Earth through Christ - the Roman Catholic

i tried other "churches" but, even tho i found some good there, i never... uh... How to say it? i nver really got anywhere until i found (re-found) the RCC

i cannot put into words, esp in this small space... all that has happened to me since then... but 3 words rather sorta work: Hell, Purgatory, Heaven... which 3 words sum up life in this sinful world. The word Purgatory is not in the Bible but the concept of having to endure certain fiery ... stuff... is there ... 1 Cor 3:13

St Mt 18:23... i could go on and on

I started reading the OT and THAT caused me to lose my faith... It was only something uniquely Catholic that brought it back: thinking of the Real Presence of Christ in the Church (24/7). When i am There... I see the truth about my life... This is where"hell" comes in because sometimes i dont like what i see... but... with Jesus by my side, I'm more than OK

So are the OT and the NT talking about the same God or two different Gods?

 

[Dr.Watson]

You're assuming the adherent hasn't already passed through his skepticism into answer and faith, in which case, to borrow from a friend of mine: "For that which can be known, repeating the question never changes the answer." So why would they?

This would be a sufficient answer if I could convince myself that we don't obviously have diametrically different usages and definitions of the word "knowledge". There is absolutely no way, empirically, you could know anything about your God, let alone any gods. Hence the importance of your faith. Skepticism and faith are mutually exclusive approaches, but not ends. You cannot be skeptical about your religious faith and yet still remain religious.

And in the absence of any evidence at all, skepticism is superior to faith. And this can be supported empirically by simply examining history. For example, it used to be believed that dogs, since they obviously don't have souls, couldn't feel pain. And so a dungeon master could whip and torture a dog while laughing thinking that the dogs cries were merely tricks of the devil to stir empathy for a damned being. There are countless examples like this riddled all throughout our history of where a skeptical approach wouldn't have led to the horrors that faith did.

 

[Stripe]

Can't stand it.

:shocked:

:angrymob: