RE: If you were ever a theist...
December 31, 2015 at 12:53 pm
(This post was last modified: December 31, 2015 at 12:54 pm by MTL.)
I was raised Baptist, in a strict, devout home.
I could not avoid the conclusion that Religion is far too full, far too often, of unholy things,
for me to ever be able to believe that it serves a Holy being.
The good things do NOT offset the bad things.
I also see how much the religions have in common with each other,
yet they all ultimately dismiss each other as heresy,
each asserting their way is the only right way
...that's a big red flag.
The only belief structure that stands out to me as remotely logical is Deism.
Believing in God,
...yet acknowledging that religious DOGMA is the unnecessary, unfounded, dangerous, arrogant and highly flawed human practice
of placing parameters onto that God,
and therefore questioning the legitimacy of all so-called Holy Writs, so-called Prophets, so-called Saviours,
and so-called concepts of Sin.
If I could conclusively say that I believed in God, then I'd be a Deist.
I'd reject all religious dogma as man-made, arrogant Heresy...because it claims to speak for God.
I don't really have any problem with Deism.
Simple belief in God,
without any Dogma or Religious bullshit,
is like a snake defanged,
or a skunk with it's scent glands removed.
it's more or less harmless.
But asking people to believe that one book or another speaks for god,
or that God needs Prophets to speak to mankind...that is the stinky, dangerous part.
(However, I can't personally even conclusively say I belief or don't believe,
so I am Agnostic).
I could not avoid the conclusion that Religion is far too full, far too often, of unholy things,
for me to ever be able to believe that it serves a Holy being.
The good things do NOT offset the bad things.
I also see how much the religions have in common with each other,
yet they all ultimately dismiss each other as heresy,
each asserting their way is the only right way
...that's a big red flag.
The only belief structure that stands out to me as remotely logical is Deism.
Believing in God,
...yet acknowledging that religious DOGMA is the unnecessary, unfounded, dangerous, arrogant and highly flawed human practice
of placing parameters onto that God,
and therefore questioning the legitimacy of all so-called Holy Writs, so-called Prophets, so-called Saviours,
and so-called concepts of Sin.
If I could conclusively say that I believed in God, then I'd be a Deist.
I'd reject all religious dogma as man-made, arrogant Heresy...because it claims to speak for God.
I don't really have any problem with Deism.
Simple belief in God,
without any Dogma or Religious bullshit,
is like a snake defanged,
or a skunk with it's scent glands removed.
it's more or less harmless.
But asking people to believe that one book or another speaks for god,
or that God needs Prophets to speak to mankind...that is the stinky, dangerous part.
(However, I can't personally even conclusively say I belief or don't believe,
so I am Agnostic).
