(November 21, 2021 at 11:28 pm)brookelauren25 Wrote: HappySkeptic, If you don't mind me asking, how has your training led you away from theism the past 10 years (though not initially?) Do you feel there is a disconnect between science and faith?

You have had some pushback because this actual topic was against the rules, and we do believe you are here to evangelize and not learn.  A more honest separate topic would be preferable.

My STEMM training has nothing to do with gods, and it didn't stop me believing in Christianity.  What stopped me believing is realizing that there isn't anything "up there" that is doing anything.  One doesn't need to work in science or computers to figure that out.  Most kids know you can't just ask for stuff and have it magically happen, yet somehow adult Christians believe just that (if God likes your prayer, and it is "according to His will").

Of course, education already taught be about Modern Evolutionary Theory, and Astronomy, but I knew those when I was still a Christian.  I never believed in a "young Earth", or one that was specially created for us.

Hey everyone, sorry it's taken me so long to get back on here. I've been really busy with family, work, and school, etc. I wasn't even sure I would get back on here but I did want to say a few things -

I am NOT trying to evangelize. Someone implied I was not rational for being a Christian and I brought up the eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus. I said this to give an example of how it is rational to be a Christian because there are logical reasons to believe it - not just emotional reasons. I wasn't making this comment to evangelize or try to evangelize.

Since I'm not here to evangelize, I'm not going to get into apologetics - or not on this thread anyway because I know it's not the place.

HappySkeptic - I don't believe in a "young Earth" either. I believe the scientific record on age of the earth, universe, etc. Do you think Genesis teaches a literal 6 day creation? I am curious if any of you have found Genesis to be a cause for unbelief because the scientific record seems to contradict what is taught in Genesis?

Claiming that there are eyewitnesses to an event that never happened isn’t exactly ‘rational’.

Boru

(November 28, 2021 at 4:20 pm)brookelauren25 Wrote: Hey everyone, sorry it's taken me so long to get back on here. I've been really busy with family, work, and school, etc. I wasn't even sure I would get back on here but I did want to say a few things -

I am NOT trying to evangelize. Someone implied I was not rational for being a Christian and I brought up the eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus. I said this to give an example of how it is rational to be a Christian because there are logical reasons to believe it - not just emotional reasons. I wasn't making this comment to evangelize or try to evangelize.

Since I'm not here to evangelize, I'm not going to get into apologetics - or not on this thread anyway because I know it's not the place.

HappySkeptic - I don't believe in a "young Earth" either. I believe the scientific record on age of the earth, universe, etc. Do you think Genesis teaches a literal 6 day creation? I am curious if any of you have found Genesis to be a cause for unbelief because the scientific record seems to contradict what is taught in Genesis?

At the Catholic school I attended, we were taught the Book Of Genesis is not meant to be taken literally. So no, that had nothing to do with my eventual atheism.

I parted company with the Church at 20. That was because of some of their more fatuous teachings.*** Still believed there was 'something'. Spent the next 20 years looking for that 'something'. Called myself an agnostic.  When I was 40 , one day I simply realised I no longer believed in god(s) or a long list of other superstitions.****

Took me a long time to understand that religious belief is based on faith, and is impervious to fact or critical thinking.  I found myself unwilling to argue with apologists. A very simple reason:   The people trained in Christian apologetics I've run across, use presuppositional argument. IE From the position of the existence of god(s) as a given. It is not. If it were the case, I wouldn't be an atheist. 

Becoming an atheist was never a choice. It was an inescapable conclusion after subjecting my religious beliefs to critical thinking and scientific method over a long period. It was a difficult and sometime painful journey.

***I don't mean to be unkind. This is the basis for that position: John 20:29  "Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."  (KJV)  Here Jesus is asking his disciples to believe him on faith. IE Belief in that not seen. Another meaning is superstition.


**** EG The virgin birth, the trinity, infallibility of the pope ,transubstantiation,  the concept that the church can assert a person is in heaven, IE a saint. It's actually very long list, with a lot of carry over into  protestantism.

(November 28, 2021 at 4:20 pm)brookelauren25 Wrote: Hey everyone, sorry it's taken me so long to get back on here. I've been really busy with family, work, and school, etc. I wasn't even sure I would get back on here but I did want to say a few things -

I am NOT trying to evangelize. Someone implied I was not rational for being a Christian and I brought up the eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus. I said this to give an example of how it is rational to be a Christian because there are logical reasons to believe it - not just emotional reasons. I wasn't making this comment to evangelize or try to evangelize.

Since I'm not here to evangelize, I'm not going to get into apologetics - or not on this thread anyway because I know it's not the place.

HappySkeptic - I don't believe in a "young Earth" either. I believe the scientific record on age of the earth, universe, etc. Do you think Genesis teaches a literal 6 day creation? I am curious if any of you have found Genesis to be a cause for unbelief because the scientific record seems to contradict what is taught in Genesis?

How do you know there were 500 witnesses, or any witnesses, for that matter?

The Bible, was'nt written for decades of more after the alleged events, but [b]unknown[/authors], and we don't even have an original copy. The oldest New Testemant document, is a credit card sized fragment from John, called P52. And it is no older than 125 CE. And on top of that, there are no contemporaneous accounts outside the Bible for any kind of corroboration.

So, if you think that believing anonymous texts, of supernatural events, with no oter evidence is rational, you seem to have a different definition of the word 'rational'.

Here's a question for you. Right now, you could interview 100's of living witnesses about their alien abduction stories. Do you think it is rational to believe these living witnesses? Don't you think that getting testemony from actual living people is better than anonymous texts from 2000 years ago?

Let me be clear, I am not saying that these people are purposely lying, only that they are possibly misinterpreting some natural event.

Let me add, that, the Bible is not evidence for the Christian god claim. The Bible is the claim. If you can't see how quoting the Bible as your 'rational' reason to believe the Bible, is a circular argument, and therefore, by definition, irrational, then you are having even more basic logic problems.

One of the weakest assertions for rational that I've seen, but typically christian.

(November 28, 2021 at 4:20 pm)brookelauren25 Wrote: HappySkeptic - I don't believe in a "young Earth" either. I believe the scientific record on age of the earth, universe, etc. Do you think Genesis teaches a literal 6 day creation? I am curious if any of you have found Genesis to be a cause for unbelief because the scientific record seems to contradict what is taught in Genesis?

Of course not.  If it weren't from some wrong order of some events, some Christians could believe that Genesis is talking of the Big Bang and the evolution of Earth.

But Genesis does talk about a fall of Man and corruption of the Earth.  It is the reason for Jesus, and the reason why the Earth has to be destroyed in Revelation.  So, if it is all "just a story", then Christianity is false as well.

Still, I find that most Christians DO consider Genesis to be "just a story", and they skip over the OT and jump right to Baby Jesus.  They realize they aren't perfect, and take the promise of "remission of sins" to get into heaven as too good a possibility to pass up, even if they don't buy most of the theology.

(November 28, 2021 at 4:20 pm)brookelauren25 Wrote: I am NOT trying to evangelize. Someone implied I was not rational for being a Christian and I brought up the eyewitnesses to the resurrection of Jesus. I said this to give an example of how it is rational to be a Christian...

That's not rational at all, Brooke.  Have you ever seen a dead thing come back to life?  If something sounds outlandishly unrealistic, maybe it's just a tall tale rather than a historical account.

(November 29, 2021 at 1:18 am)HappySkeptic Wrote:

(November 28, 2021 at 4:20 pm)brookelauren25 Wrote: HappySkeptic - I don't believe in a "young Earth" either. I believe the scientific record on age of the earth, universe, etc. Do you think Genesis teaches a literal 6 day creation? I am curious if any of you have found Genesis to be a cause for unbelief because the scientific record seems to contradict what is taught in Genesis?

Of course not.  If it weren't from some wrong order of some events, some Christians could believe that Genesis is talking of the Big Bang and the evolution of Earth.

But Genesis does talk about a fall of Man and corruption of the Earth.  It is the reason for Jesus, and the reason why the Earth has to be destroyed in Revelation.  So, if it is all "just a story", then Christianity is false as well.

Still, I find that most Christians DO consider Genesis to be "just a story", and they skip over the OT and jump right to Baby Jesus.  They realize they aren't perfect, and take the promise of "remission of sins" to get into heaven as too good a possibility to pass up, even if they don't buy most of the theology.

No, it isn't that kind of Pascal's Wager. Most people are religious because they were raised religious. Buddhist parents have Buddhist children. Muslim parents have Muslim children. Christian parents have christian children. It is the single greatest influence. I was raised RCC and I was RCC as a kid. That lasted up until I was maybe 12. And had that "Wait just a minute" moment. I am a cliche. Having carelessly lost belief belief in Santa a year or two previous, I suddenly made that connection. My child reasoning was that "Santa and God are almost identical, so if my parents lied outright about Santa, and God is almost identical to Santa, what's the chances that God is also fake?" 

Christians generally don't like that comparison. It trivialises God, they say. God is real and Santa is fake, they say. Well...

Who can be everywhere at once? God or Santa?
Who knows if you have been good or bad and watches you all the time? God or Santa?
Who rewards or punishes you on the basis of spying on your every waking moment? God or Santa?
Who has an army of slaves to do his bidding in the background? God or Santa?

And so on.

Nevertheless, here I am some 40 years later and I still have moments where that indoctrination pops up. Why? Because it was beaten into me all my early life. Sometimes literally.

(November 28, 2021 at 4:20 pm)brookelauren25 Wrote: HappySkeptic - I don't believe in a "young Earth" either. I believe the scientific record on age of the earth, universe, etc. Do you think Genesis teaches a literal 6 day creation? I am curious if any of you have found Genesis to be a cause for unbelief because the scientific record seems to contradict what is taught in Genesis?

Welcome back, Brooke! I think it's odd for the six days of creation to be described as having mornings if they weren't meant to be taken as literal days. The only reason not to take it literally is overwhelming evidence that the events described took millions of years altogether. I certainly understand making the compromise of saying they were 'symbolic days' though, it's the only way to keep the book without denying the evidence from the one thing a capital c Creator must be the author of: the world we find ourselves in.

When I first read Genesis I believed it and took it literally. It was the barbarity of the Bible sanctioned by the God it describes that convinced me it wasn't an authentic representation of a perfect and omniscient being. Reading the Bible cover-to-cover didn't make me an atheist, but it did make me an agnostic theist. I believed in a Creator, but not that one, so I was in the position of still believing and being aware I couldn't know. I think it took me about 20 more years to get to atheist.