RE: Deconverted by theology.
October 27, 2011 at 2:39 pm
(This post was last modified: October 27, 2011 at 2:42 pm by Ziploc Surprise.)
(October 27, 2011 at 1:56 pm)ElDinero Wrote: So Ziplock, were there any particular moments you can remember? Like, a certain phrase that kind of hit you in the face and made you think 'this is all wrong'?
Either way, welcome to the forums. On the plus side, I'm sure you'll find your experience to be a valuable ally.
Yes there were. In my enthusiastic study of FC, after reading many books I felt I was ready to read the really hard stuff. I read two books concurrently one was a giant horse choker of a book titled "Systematic Theology" by Wayne Grudem the other was called "Old Testament Survey" by a group of authors. I read the Grudem book in the usual manner in which fc's take in information. Counting the hits, (the things that supported belief in the religion) and discounting the misses (the things that did not support beliefs). I started with the foundation stones of the fc religion. These were the infallibility of the Bible and the arguments that support the belief that the bible was divinely inspired (specifically the very words of God). Almost all of the structure of fc resides on these foundation stones.
After a while of counting the hits and stacking the misses in a nice neat column behind me the column began to topple over. The last straw that toppled the stack was the clear and unarguable proof that the Bible was indeed fallible. That it was a concocted thing.
I will quote what was the last straw for me, this is out of the Old Testament book I mentioned above: "The evidence suggests a long history of transmission and development (this is referring to who authored the book of Genesis) a striking number of terms, facts, and remarks require an age later than that of Moses (the character who the fc's believe wrote the first 5 books of the Bible). Statements such as "at the time the Canaanites were in the land" (Gen, 12:6, 13:7) and "the people of Israel ate the manna...till they came to the border of the land of Canaan" (Exod. 16:35) imply tht Israel already occupied Canaan. Gen. 14"14 indicated that Abram pursued Lot's captors as far as Dan (a city), yet the place did not receive this name until the Danites captured it following the Conquest (josh. 19:47; Judg. 18:29).
After reading this I went and verified the evidence in the Bible (I didn't want to be deceived by Satin after all) and there it was in black and white. The OT book had other evidence that the Bible was a concocted thing and not dictated by God to only a few prophets who were specially anointed by God to write scripture. The pile of evidence toppled down on me and I had to acknowledge it's existence.
