Your messages are very moving I can sense what a crazily emotional time this must be for you, but an exciting and liberating one.

I'm so relieved to hear your "chick" was completely understanding. I have my suspicions that a great deal of Christians pay lip service and don't really believe half of the stuff they say they do, because they know it is ridiculous and flatly contradicts all of reality. I hope you and your family continue to work things out. And credit where credit is due, you guys put the food on the table, not God!

There's no harm in retaining any wisdom you find from the bible, being atheist/agnostic has no requirement to reject the whole bible. There's nothing wrong with having a mental image of Christ either, as a role model or friend. Jettison what is harmful, and keep what helps you.

If you have any apologetics people have put to you that are causing you doubt, feel free to post them here and we'll dismantle them.

(June 17, 2015 at 10:06 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: I would be happy to chat with you about any of these issues; I have a wife and kids, too, but I am a Christian. Does that mean I'm biased? Sure.

But wouldn't it be fair to say right up front that everyone who is a regular member of an Atheist Forum is biased AGAINST Christianity?

If so, why would their answers be any more objective than yours or mine?

I don't have a problem w/ chatting with Christians about these issues.  Everyone is biased.  I don't think anyone who has read the entire thread can really posit that everyone here has been entirely "against" Christianity.  As a matter of fact, one (I am assuming) atheist proposed I simply change my concept of God to an impersonal one, which is more on par than rejecting a notion of God all together.  I'm mostly agnostic, but deism best describes my thoughts of a god if one existed.

Atheists carry infinitely more intellectual honesty than the fundamentalist Christian.  Even in the most liberal churches, you will find evangelical fundies waiting to dump on you the same old stuff.  That's why I'm here, talking to people who mostly share my same *actual* beliefs: that humans are primates, the Earth is billions of years old, that there is no personal god, etc.

I appreciate you reply.  I wouldn't have a problem exchanging ideas with you.

---

(June 17, 2015 at 9:39 pm)ignoramus Wrote: Thanks for sharing your experience and thoughts with us.
I find it fascinating watching a potential unravelling of indoctrination occur if front of our eyes.
As you know, the world isn't going to change because of it.
It's just a state of mind.....Always was.

Catch....(and a big welcome)

/catches, puts in pocket/  Thanks!

The unravelling of indoctrination has been absolutely terrifying.  I'm not at the point that it makes me happy yet.

---

---

(June 18, 2015 at 3:56 am)robvalue Wrote: Your messages are very moving I can sense what a crazily emotional time this must be for you, but an exciting and liberating one.

I'm so relieved to hear your "chick" was completely understanding. I have my suspicions that a great deal of Christians pay lip service and don't really believe half of the stuff they say they do, because they know it is ridiculous and flatly contradicts all of reality. I hope you and your family continue to work things out. And credit where credit is due, you guys put the food on the table, not God!

There's no harm in retaining any wisdom you find from the bible, being atheist/agnostic has no requirement to reject the whole bible. There's nothing wrong with having a mental image of Christ either, as a role model or friend. Jettison what is harmful, and keep what helps you.

If you have any apologetics people have put to you that are causing you doubt, feel free to post them here and we'll dismantle them.

So this post means a *GREAT* deal to me.  Everything you said has totally made me happy I decided to post here.

You have to understand that this is the first time I've interacted with atheists without defending the faith (notice I didn't say, "my faith").  I was really worried about exposing my dorsal here, but have been shown reason to be very glad I did.

Thanks!!!!!!

Quote:As a matter of fact, one (I am assuming) atheist proposed I simply change my concept of God to an impersonal one, which is more on par than rejecting a notion of God all together.

Anti-theist, more than anything else...actually(lol).  Think a few of us suggested something in that periphery though.  We're just hard hearted fuckers like that I guess? Seems to be the overriding notion with the apologists in our midst at the moment?  

So, it wen't well with the wife.....that's good stuff man, real good stuff, conversation still ongoing with her? We get alot of deconversion stories that go south at the whole "brought it up with the spouse/family" moment.
You're fortunate.

You might really like this subforum, btw......just pages and pages of stories similar to yours.

http://atheistforums.org/forum-12.html

hit the button...doo eeeet.

(June 18, 2015 at 9:25 pm)Rhythm Wrote:

Quote:As a matter of fact, one (I am assuming) atheist proposed I simply change my concept of God to an impersonal one, which is more on par than rejecting a notion of God all together.

Anti-theist, more than anything else...actually(lol).  Think a few of us suggested something in that periphery though.  We're just hard hearted fuckers like that I guess?  

I see you've met Randy.......we're sorry.

lol!

... as for Randy ... I was once him, so I know he actually does mean well.  If he believes what he says and didn't copy/paste that from some apologist site... he's likely a good person, same as most people.

... But yea ... I definitely didn't need to have such a huge issue addressed with such small-minded non-sense.

---

(June 17, 2015 at 10:43 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Hi, I can't address the fear of hell part of this because thought I was raised in a Christian household, hellfire was not denied so much as politely ignored, like grandmother's farts.  And I never actually believed.

This. And me too!

Jenny A Wrote:What I get absolutely is the fear of hurting Christian relatives by telling.  I also get that the church can be an important social place and that parts of it can and are good for some people.  But, perpetually lying is good for no one, you included.  It doesn't do good things for your sense of well being, integrity, or self respect and it won't do good things for your relationship with the people you are lying to whether it's your wife or your kids.  And pretending to believe what you do not is lying.

I told my wife today that if this is how a closeted gay person feels before coming out... my fervor for tolerance in society has increased infinitely.

Jenny A Wrote:I would be lying to you if I said it won't matter to your wife.  It will matter.  It certainly mattered to my parents when I told them and it still matters to my mother.  She alternates between willfully forgetting and attempting conversion and it's been a good 35 years now. . .  But she's still my Mom and we still love each other.  I suspect that if you tell your wife and you don't vilify Jesus in the process that the results may be similar.

Already had the conversation. She supports me! True-motha-f'ing-love ... for the win!

Thanks for your reply!!!!!!!

Finally figured out how to show the source code of posts. w00t.

---

(June 18, 2015 at 9:25 pm)Rhythm Wrote:

Quote:As a matter of fact, one (I am assuming) atheist proposed I simply change my concept of God to an impersonal one, which is more on par than rejecting a notion of God all together.

Anti-theist, more than anything else...actually(lol).  Think a few of us suggested something in that periphery though.  We're just hard hearted fuckers like that I guess?  Seems to be the overriding notion with the apologists in our midst at the moment?  

So, it wen't well with the wife.....that's good stuff man, real good stuff, conversation still ongoing with her?  We get alot of deconversion stories that go south at the whole "brought it up with the spouse/family" moment.  
You're fortunate.  

You might really like this subforum, btw......just pages and pages of stories similar to yours.

http://atheistforums.org/forum-12.html

hit the button...doo eeeet.

Evid3nc3's series on his deconversion was pretty epic.  I don't think I could come across genuine in a post.  Perhaps I'll do a video.

Having a heart felt account that expresses emotion, something I'm much better doing off the keyboard, is paramount to having a Christian understand and relate to my experiences.

I'm for it tho... recording what and how this all happened to me.

(June 18, 2015 at 12:58 am)Spacetime Wrote: Sorry mate.  I'm sure you're a spectacular person.  But unfortunately our conversation is limited to a topic I'm currently heated about.  Forgive any offense I've caused.

No offense taken.

You're looking for evidence that God exists? How can I present physical evidence when God is pure spirit? Even when God did take on flesh, not many believed...though the miracles were performed before their eyes.

However, the physical resurrection of Christ suggests that his claims about being divine were legit. Why would He lie? Let me ask that another way: You love Christ, and He loves you beyond all measure. Why would He intentionally lie to you about being God?

I've never served in the military...I was born "in between" the various conflicts which required service. Just a timing thing, I guess. But I can imagine that you may have served under officers whom you did not like...maybe even hated...but you obeyed because you had to, right?

Now, imagine that God makes His presence known in a dramatic way that is unmistakable. You know He's God, and you know He's watching. How long would it be before you resented God for interfering in your affairs?

You speak of God not doing anything for humanity while the scientists are doing all the heavy lifting when it comes to curing diseases, etc. Great! God has given us the ability to develop technology and medicine to improve our lives. Animals were not given that ability, so thank you, Lord. But let's say for the sake of argument that God did begin to heal this one person...or prevent a murder of another. If He does that for one or two, wouldn't He be obligated to heal us all? To prevent every murder? Every rape? Every divorce? Eventually, our lives would be so free from suffering that we would consider a hangnail to be a great injustice requiring God's intervention? But at what point would God have to eliminate free will in order to accomplish this utopian existence? And if we are not morally free, and we are forced to serve and obey God, why would we love Him since we had no other choice?

Just a few thoughts from someone whose views are decidely out of step with the crowd here.  

(June 18, 2015 at 9:13 pm)Spacetime Wrote: I don't have a problem w/ chatting with Christians about these issues.  Everyone is biased.  I don't think anyone who has read the entire thread can really posit that everyone here has been entirely "against" Christianity.  As a matter of fact, one (I am assuming) atheist proposed I simply change my concept of God to an impersonal one, which is more on par than rejecting a notion of God all together.  I'm mostly agnostic, but deism best describes my thoughts of a god if one existed.

Atheists carry infinitely more intellectual honesty than the fundamentalist Christian.  Even in the most liberal churches, you will find evangelical fundies waiting to dump on you the same old stuff.  That's why I'm here, talking to people who mostly share my same *actual* beliefs: that humans are primates, the Earth is billions of years old, that there is no personal god, etc.

I appreciate you reply.  I wouldn't have a problem exchanging ideas with you.

Great!

But you and I are not fundamentalists; we're Catholics, and Catholic theology is far more mature and nuanced than that of which you speak, agreed?

As you probably know, the Church has no problem with evolution, for example.

Yes, it does.  
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-evolution


There was no Adam and Eve, we are not their ancestors, there isn't even a -possibility- of this story being true.  The church demands that it be -held to be true-...regardless. 

Perhaps another example would be both factually correct, and help to elucidate the point you wish to make?

(June 18, 2015 at 9:31 pm)Spacetime Wrote:

(June 17, 2015 at 10:43 pm)Jenny A Wrote: Hi, I can't address the fear of hell part of this because thought I was raised in a Christian household, hellfire was not denied so much as politely ignored, like grandmother's farts.  And I never actually believed.

This.  And me too!

Jenny A Wrote:What I get absolutely is the fear of hurting Christian relatives by telling.  I also get that the church can be an important social place and that parts of it can and are good for some people.  But, perpetually lying is good for no one, you included.  It doesn't do good things for your sense of well being, integrity, or self respect and it won't do good things for your relationship with the people you are lying to whether it's your wife or your kids.  And pretending to believe what you do not is lying.

I told my wife today that if this is how a closeted gay person feels before coming out... my fervor for tolerance in society has increased infinitely.

Jenny A Wrote:I would be lying to you if I said it won't matter to your wife.  It will matter.  It certainly mattered to my parents when I told them and it still matters to my mother.  She alternates between willfully forgetting and attempting conversion and it's been a good 35 years now. . .  But she's still my Mom and we still love each other.  I suspect that if you tell your wife and you don't vilify Jesus in the process that the results may be similar.

Already had the conversation.  She supports me!  True-motha-f'ing-love ... for the win!

Thanks for your reply!!!!!!!

You're very, very, welcome.  I'm glad it turned out well.  Love is a wondrous thing.

(June 18, 2015 at 11:35 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Yes, it does.  
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-evolution

---

Quote:Adam and Eve: Real People

It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism). 
In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: "When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own" (Humani Generis 37). 
The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, "The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents" (CCC 390).

---

There was no Adam and Eve, we are not their ancestors, there isn't even a -possibility- of this story being true.  The church demands that it be -held to be true-...regardless. 

Perhaps another example would be both factually correct, and help to elucidate the point you wish to make?

Wow.  Those fuckers are even more retarded than I recalled.

(June 18, 2015 at 11:35 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Yes, it does.  
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-evolution

---

Quote:Adam and Eve: Real People

It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism). 
In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: "When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own" (Humani Generis 37). 
The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, "The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents" (CCC 390).

---

There was no Adam and Eve, we are not their ancestors, there isn't even a -possibility- of this story being true.  The church demands that it be -held to be true-...regardless. 

Perhaps another example would be both factually correct, and help to elucidate the point you wish to make?

Quote from the same article:

"Concerning biological evolution, the Church does not have an official position on whether various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.

"Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are.

"While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution."

End. Quote.