Fairly new and hoping for advice and help

[Rampant.A.I.]

Hello all! I was a Messianic Jewish believer, and have recently turned Agnostic, thanks to reading part of Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion." (Which I am trying to finish now.) I am about to start the Orthodox Messianic equivalent of seminary, and I was hoping that I could come to the people here for help in my research, as I'm worried that the science classes will be heavily biased and possibly contain misinformation. I want to really address both sides of the issue, and I know I need to discuss things with both sides in order to use as unbiased an approach as possible.

You changed your belief after reading part of a book, you even read any scripture, if part of a book written by a man who shows no real knowledge about who God is convinced me to change my belief, I would have considered I had no real belief. It's good you are trying to answer questions you have, be careful what material you choose, but keep up the search and don't be so fast to give up your belief.


GC

This is bullshit. Why should anyone ever have to "be careful what material they choose" to read. Sounds like someone is afraid of contradictory evidence, and is intent on brainwashing himself over and over by restricting the content of what he reads, lest he discover anything that actually makes him think.

[Bob Kelso]

Hello all! I was a Messianic Jewish believer, and have recently turned Agnostic, thanks to reading part of Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion." (Which I am trying to finish now.) I am about to start the Orthodox Messianic equivalent of seminary, and I was hoping that I could come to the people here for help in my research, as I'm worried that the science classes will be heavily biased and possibly contain misinformation. I want to really address both sides of the issue, and I know I need to discuss things with both sides in order to use as unbiased an approach as possible.

First of all;



Secondly, read Dawkins for biology (he's not so great with anything else), and check out Hitchens and Harris for religion, Dan Dennett isn't bad either imo but not everyone is a fan of DD.

You changed your belief after reading part of a book, you even read any scripture, if part of a book written by a man who shows no real knowledge about who God is convinced me to change my belief, I would have considered I had no real belief. It's good you are trying to answer questions you have, be careful what material you choose, but keep up the search and don't be so fast to give up your belief.


GC

"Be careful what material you choose"? Really GC? You're so bloody pathetic.

[Sinbad]

be careful what material you choose, but keep up the search and don't be so fast to give up your belief.

That should read:

Dont be careful what material you choose, but keep up the search and give up your belief.

[Esquilax]

You changed your belief after reading part of a book, you even read any scripture, if part of a book written by a man who shows no real knowledge about who God is convinced me to change my belief, I would have considered I had no real belief. It's good you are trying to answer questions you have, be careful what material you choose, but keep up the search and don't be so fast to give up your belief.


GC

Ooh, gee, I wonder what materials GC would recommend we be "careful" of and which we shouldn't be?

Is there a single reference or source that's overtly non-christian or atheist that you would accept as a part of a search for answers, GC? Or will you finally just admit that you don't give a shit about anything but the things that confirm what you already believe?

[potch]

I was partially motivated to begin my search for answers of how reliable the bible was when I fell in love with somebody of the same gender and realized how painful it was for us to both have to force ourselves to be apart because of our beliefs. I decided, for him, that I would do my absolute best, despite my actual bias TOWARD theistic belief, to try to take an unbiased look at both sides of the issue.

Being told that you're going to burn in hell every day because you're gay is not exactly good for the soul, but nevertheless I tried to understand why God would punish me that way. I would even dare to say that I do understand the answer, at least somewhat. I decided that if my search led me to seeing faith as true in the end, I would grit my teeth and live life without the love of my life. I decided that if it wasn't true, I would finally tell him that I want to be with him for life. You might say that in that case I'm already biased. It's true that I'm biased toward the person I love, but I'm also biased toward NOT burning in hell for eternity. Overall, I'm very confused. I try to deal with these things logically, but I'm only 20, and I'm a social work major in college with only a basic understanding of science. This whole thing has been very stressful at times, trying to be completely unbiased and weigh all these arguments and data while he's on the other end of Skype telling me how much he loves me, and my Rabbi is on facebook telling me I'm doomed to hell if I don't get rid of these feelings.

By the way GC, I mentioned Dawkins because he was the first to really make me doubt, but I've also been listening to debates online almost every day, have been reading stuff on the historicity and inerrency of the bible, such as Dr. Bart Ehrman and Richard Carrier, have bought "The Origin of Species" as well as Michael Behe's "Darwin's Black Box," and intend on buying every book I can snatch up about both sides of the issue.

[SteelCurtain]

Potch,

It is devastatingly sad to me that you would even, for a moment, consider throwing away your happiness in a human connection because of some bronze age understanding of sexuality. Even if you continued belief in a god---one that made you the way you are, and threatens punishment for sharing love with a consenting adult---what makes this sin any worse than premarital sex or a wife giving her husband a blowjibber?

Keep reading. Keep questioning the things you 'know' to be true. If you are gay, you are setting yourself up for some emotional trauma in staying with the synagogue. It will be impossible, not to mention incredibly unhealthy, as a human being, to just be celibate. You will fail at that. You have a chance to be happy in your life, and even if you are still a believer, you will have to hide something that no one should ever be ashamed of if you are that close to the organization.

[potch]

Potch,

It is devastatingly sad to me that you would even, for a moment, consider throwing away your happiness in a human connection because of some bronze age understanding of sexuality. Even if you continued belief in a god---one that made you the way you are, and threatens punishment for sharing love with a consenting adult---what makes this sin any worse than premarital sex or a wife giving her husband a blowjibber?

Keep reading. Keep questioning the things you 'know' to be true. If you are gay, you are setting yourself up for some emotional trauma in staying with the synagogue. It will be impossible, not to mention incredibly unhealthy, as a human being, to just be celibate. You will fail at that. You have a chance to be happy in your life, and even if you are still a believer, you will have to hide something that no one should ever be ashamed of if you are that close to the organization.

Unfortunately, SC, it's not even just celibacy. My Rabbi is putting pressure on me to marry a woman (Someone he would set me up with), with the promise that with enough behavioral modification I will "become a man" and be cured of my homosexuality.

[SteelCurtain]

[JesusHChrist]

Greetings op.

In your search for knowledge, study the evidence available for the foundational Jewish history, the exodus.

Spoiler , there isn't any support for it. All a bunch of hooey.

No enslavement in Egypt, no Moses, no wandering in the desert. None of it.

Now, if that is obvious bullshit, the rest of the house of cards tumbles down.

Myths on myths.

So the upshot is, live your life how you see fit, not the way desert barbarians would have you live it.

[MindForgedManacle]

I think Robert M. Price and Richard Carrier might be better than Ehrman in terms of the historical techniques used (some qualms about "direct modelling", I believe it was called, being used). Or at least that's the impression I get from some criticisms of Ehrman's work. Admittedly, this was brought to my attention by 2 linguists who are Christians on a show they put out, but their rather unique theological views and deep knowledge make me less skeptical of their claims (which they gave some explanation of, to be sure) than if it had come from, say, a Christian apologist. Regardless, Ehrman's works are pretty good reads. I rather enjoyed his "Misquoting Jesus".