How I got Out of Religion.

[tavarish]

---

1- I was talking about 40 authors over all, both NT and OT, my wording was a little off. I don't punctuate as often as I should.

Np....Real quick though, are you talking about the King James type version we have today? Or the one before in which had a few more books that, of course, were taken out?

2- I agree that Atheist are not trying to turn religion into Science. I was just getting a little frustrated. Science and religion both have degrees of freedom or Scalable values for unproovable assumptions. I just happen to have defined mine as faith and science uses numbers. Both are just mental constructs.

Thanks for the clarification....

3-I've already gone over the slave thing elsewhere. The laws of Moses established how to treat a slave, the laws of Jesus, pointed to those laws as parable for living. Any salesman would speak to you in a language you understood with common terms for the local area. A salesman from Louisana would have to try some new language when selling things in Maine.

I understand that and get the point, but he still never went against Slavery in any shape form or fashion.. Even 600 years before a Jesus Character there were those who talked highly against owning another man as property of some type.
I've heard the arguments from a "Christian" stand point about slavery in the Bible and no matter how someone bow ties it up and slaps a greeting sign on the front, it's still slavery and someone would "Assume" that god-son would know the immorality in it, but we never heard/read a counter from him.

4- I'm not farmiliar with the hell references not being in the OT, perhaps you could suggest some reading, with links. As far as what I do know about hell ""I believe that hell is essentially separation from God, so we can have hell in this life and hell in the life to come..," Graham told an interviewer in 1991." But to describe hell in vivid terms like I might have done 30 or 40 years ago, I'm not at liberty to do that because whether there is actually fire in hell or not, I DO NOT KNOW." - Billy Graham. I know hell is shown 31 times in the OT in the KJV, but zero in the NIV, because it's more about a state of the soul not a geographic location.

The 31 times in the Hebrew O.T. Bible was "Sheol"(Grave) not "Hell". The Christians changed this and "Hell" by the "MASS" majority is viewed as a place and is still taught to the masses as the fire pit down under.
Regardless that you do not believe this to be as described and majority followed...(Which I'm glad you don't), it's still "Real" to the ignorant majority that peddle this garbage.

If you search out the Tanakh (Torah) which of course is the O.T. (But with some odds and ends redefined) you'll see the word "Sheol" not hell..... Hell wasn't the only one that was mislabeled. "Virgin" was another great screw up.. The Hebrew word "almah" which literally means "Maiden/girl" was wrote translated into Greek as "Parthenos", which is where the mishap takes place..Parthenos literally meaning Virgin.. "Bethulah" is the Hebrew word for "Virgin".... There is a difference....

5- As far as justifying slavery I'm aware the Bible never attempt to say it is unjust. It was written by men and inspired by God. Perhaps eternal salvation was more important message to convey to feeble minds than items of commerce and trade. Some slaves sold themselves into it. True most were war criminals I believe, but it was day-to -day life back then. To come out against it outright would have obviously crippled it's message spreasing through the populace. Jesus never condones it, merely uses it as an example through metaphor.

I replied on your number 3 comment:


Thanks again for the replies....

---

1- I personally prefer KJV for a quick reference; but, I use an old catholic apocrapha, and comparitive studies, as well. If the words seem uniquely out of time (that lolcats and hiphop bible are ridiculous) then I try and get back to the more original hebrew or Koine Greek.
3- Jesus perhaps had more important things to impart. The disciples got it though, Paul preaches out against prostitution and slavery, I'm sure more than that do as well. It's not a bow and the son of God was a Jew and I think his main point in being here was to help move theists of the time away from abrahamic laws based off moses with a corrupt checks and balances to spiritual laws based off a better understanding of God, balanced with the holy spirit.
4-I agree there were a lot of misinterpretations, hell, homosexual, virgin, etc. I think a lot of the more apologetic variances of Christianity can see that and in their attempt to reconcile inerrant views with literal mistranslations they allow a lot of the more "story book" views to flourish.The best you can do is try and get the best context possible to base your views on, if you were to use it. I, unlike most atheists, do not deem it witout any merit (or simply a good read/ laugh whatever )though.

---

What is interesting in most of these conversion stories is that once a person stops believing in Jesus and/or the Bible they become an atheist. There are other religions. There are ideas about "God" that have nothing to do with the Bible or any religion. Yet, when people leave one belief they tend to leave them all.

Because when you leave the religion that you were indoctrinated with, your reasons for leaving are foundational most of the time. Basically, you realize the entire notion of God is nonsense, so you aren't inclined to seek out something with similar foundational falsehoods.

---

What is interesting in most of these conversion stories is that once a person stops believing in Jesus and/or the Bible they become an atheist. There are other religions. There are ideas about "God" that have nothing to do with the Bible or any religion. Yet, when people leave one belief they tend to leave them all.

My wife used to bean evangelical christian but is now a spiritualist medium.

Wow....that's like trading AIDS for Hepatitis.

---

Really I thought it had more to do with somatization, splitting or denial (or maybe in the best case sublimation). It appears from my perspective to be in effect going from belief A to counter-belief A instead of disregarding the belief and if necessary identifying with belief B. I admit that a few atheists I've met on here are more "I don't believe there is evidence to support your belief in God" but as a whole a lot of the atheists I've spoken with are simply anti-theism.. which seems more reactionary and emotional than rational, IMO.

I'd say I agree with you, but the anti-theism is a function of the overly theistic society we live in. Not wanting to have a totalitarian overlord judge you is inherent to anyone that embraces the concepts of free will and thought. Atheism can serve as a means of bringing such a notion into reality and it can demonstrate that you don't need a God to live a happy, fruitful, morally just, and exciting life.

Personally, I can't say I do enjoy the idea of someone watching over me all the time, especially one that judges constantly (thought crime), and based on that, sends me to a place of eternal reward or torment. It's just as well that there is no evidence to support such a claim.

A new-found atheism can bring about emotions in certain individuals, many of those can be irrational, but it's mainly based on the want to disassociate from theistic society.

There is also a difference in the general concept of God or gods, and the Christian God. I'd say I'm a strong atheist in terms of the Christian God, and why there are those who uphold such an obviously barbaric, jealous and morally defunct deity is beyond me. I do find it interesting that many people I've asked about Christianity haven't read the bible, but defend it as evidence for their version of what God is.