De-Conversion

[jce]

In view of a recent trend of former bible believing persons concluding that faith in the popularly accepted doctrines of sin and salvation, heaven & hell, the fallen nature, redemption and the atonement of Christ are either not true or insignificant, I thought it would be interesting to see how many this number has grown to. If you have a "de-conversion" story, where you no longer believe these biblical topics, please share it.

I would also like to add the following scripture as significant to someone who has experienced a falling away:

*1 Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away. 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, 4 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?

This verse came to my attention as I wondered how I could ever abandon the faith and avoid the truth of scripture. Yes, perhaps I could focus on the things that are good in this life and allow myself to be diverted, but I cannot conceive of ever being able to "escape" the implications of the gospel for the remainder of my life after having been exposed to it. Surely, it would come back to me at my last breath as I would be unable to prevent my thoughts from turning toward God. To me, once one has been authentically converted by the Spirit and the Word, there is no going back to the place they were before that life changing event.

What do you think?

John

[Richard Amiel McGough]

In view of a recent trend of former bible believing persons concluding that faith in the popularly accepted doctrines of sin and salvation, heaven & hell, the fallen nature, redemption and the atonement of Christ are either not true or insignificant, I thought it would be interesting to see how many this number has grown to. If you have a "de-conversion" story, where you no longer believe these biblical topics, please share it.

I would also like to add the following scripture as significant to someone who has experienced a falling away:

*1 Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away. 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, 4 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?

This verse came to my attention as I wondered how I could ever abandon the faith and avoid the truth of scripture. Yes, perhaps I could focus on the things that are good in this life and allow myself to be diverted, but I cannot conceive of ever being able to "escape" the implications of the gospel for the remainder of my life after having been exposed to it. Surely, it would come back to me at my last breath as I would be unable to prevent my thoughts from turning toward God. To me, once one has been authentically converted by the Spirit and the Word, there is no going back to the place they were before that life changing event.

What do you think?

John
Hey there John,

I think that is a great post, and an excellent idea for a thread. Rose and I frequently talk about how we used to wonder how anyone could fall away once they had seen the truth of Christianity. It simply seemed impossible.

But time goes on and people and their perspectives change. What once seemed impossible now seems inevitable.

So let's look at the passage you shared. I will tell you how it strikes me and perhaps we will understand how I drifted from the faith. The first thing I note is that I do not believe that "the word spoken through angels proved steadfast." What word is he talking about? I know nothing of which he speaks - for that matter, I don't even know who wrote those words. How in the world could I base my fundamental beliefs on such hearsay?

The passage continues: "and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward." Oh really now? A just reward? David did not suffer any "just reward" for his violations of the law. He should have been stoned, but no, he went on being king and even added his adulterous girlfriend to his harem. He was both an adulterer and a murderer and he suffered no direct consequence on his person. No death penalty like that guy who picked up sticks on the Sabbath. But the innocent child that issued from his adultery? He was killed by God. Is that a just reward? A survey of the Bible quickly reveals that very few received their "just rewards." We see the innocent slain by command of God and the guilty go free. Those sound like empty words to me.

Continuing: "how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, 4 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?" OK - this hits the nub of the matter. People down through history have made many religious claims - obviously I can't believe them all. So what am I supposed to do? How am to know which are true and which are not? The answer is obvious. I need to weigh the evidence for the claims, and see if it is sufficient to warrant belief. But is thre really any evidence to weigh, or are these just empty claims? The unknown author says that the truth was confirmed by "signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit." Great! Can I confirm any of that? Nope. And worse, I can look around me today at millions of Christians who make the same claims and prove that they are false. For example, look at the Benny Hinn Salvation and Healing Carnival. Millions of Christians literally fall at the feet of that clown. Therefore, if the claims in the Bible look just like the false claims made by modern Christians, why should I believe any of it?

So though my thoughts will almost certainly "turn to God" when I die, I don't expect it will have anything to do with Christianity per se.

Thanks again for starting a great thread. I look forward to your response.

Richard

[Rose]

In view of a recent trend of former bible believing persons concluding that faith in the popularly accepted doctrines of sin and salvation, heaven & hell, the fallen nature, redemption and the atonement of Christ are either not true or insignificant, I thought it would be interesting to see how many this number has grown to. If you have a "de-conversion" story, where you no longer believe these biblical topics, please share it.

I would also like to add the following scripture as significant to someone who has experienced a falling away:

*1 Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away. 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, 4 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?

This verse came to my attention as I wondered how I could ever abandon the faith and avoid the truth of scripture. Yes, perhaps I could focus on the things that are good in this life and allow myself to be diverted, but I cannot conceive of ever being able to "escape" the implications of the gospel for the remainder of my life after having been exposed to it. Surely, it would come back to me at my last breath as I would be unable to prevent my thoughts from turning toward God. To me, once one has been authentically converted by the Spirit and the Word, there is no going back to the place they were before that life changing event.

What do you think?

John

Hi John,

All through my years of being a Christian I too could not conceive of ever giving up faith in "God". I would read stories of people who either lost their faith or converted to another religion and would think to myself "how could that be possible?" The place I am at today is not a one time decision, but rather a series of small steps taken one at a time in my search for answers to the many questions that had been pushed aside over the years.

I too would look at the many verses in Scripture that speak of falling away and think to myself that could never happen to me because I knew, that I knew, that I knew the "God" of the Bible was real. Like you John, I could not even conceive of taking the road of de-conversion when I was a Christian. The biggest revelation for me was when I realized that I had imported the "God" of my childhood onto the Bible without even giving it at second thought...when I found Christianity in my mid twenty's I just knew it was right. Looking back now I realize the Bible was the only book in the culture I grew up in that gave me a place to map my childhood god onto.

It was only when I was able to look at the Bible with truly open eyes, and felt the freedom to ask the really tough questions that I began to realize how blind I had been...I can honestly say I was blind but now I see!

All the best,
Rose

[Charisma]

Hi Richard,

To answer a couple of your questions: 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him,

The 'word spoken through angels' was the Law. That's what defined the 'transgression', 'disobedience' and 'just reward' (penalty).


I don't propose to expound the following verses, because the only way to understand them is to beat it out for yourself with cross-references and your brain.

The thing to notice is that the promise was made to Abraham's 'seed', Jesus Christ. He is the 'great salvation' which could not be obfuscated by the historically incidental establishment of 'the Law', which God gave because of sin; hence the reference to disobedience, transgression and 'reward' (for them).

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, [that] the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance of the law, [it is] no more of promise: but God gave [it] to Abraham by promise. 19 Wherefore then [serveth] the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; [and it was] [B]ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but God is one. 21 [Is] the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. 22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. 24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Ooops ... hit submit too soon .... brb

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi Richard,

To answer a couple of your questions: 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him,

The 'word spoken through angels' was the Law. That's what defined the 'transgression', 'disobedience' and 'just reward' (penalty).

Hi Charisma,

I know that's a answer, of course, but then again, the Law was not spoken by angels. God spoke directly to Moses. And it could mean the entire OT, not just the Law. Or maybe just parts of the Law, not the whole Law. Or maybe something else? So there's a lot of ambiguity really. For example, Adam Clarke says:

If the word spoken by angels - The law, (according to some), which was delivered by the mediation of angels, God frequently employing these to communicate his will to men. See Acts 7:53; and Galatians 3:19. But the apostle probably means those particular messages which God sent by angels, as in the case of Lot, Genesis 19: and such like.
And now that I don't hold "doctrinaire" opinions that are based upon the assumption of Biblical consistency, I just say "I don't know" when I don't know.



I don't propose to expound the following verses, because the only way to understand them is to beat it out for yourself with cross-references and your brain.

The thing to notice is that the promise was made to Abraham's 'seed', Jesus Christ. He is the 'great salvation' which could not be obfuscated by the historically incidental establishment of 'the Law', which God gave because of sin; hence the reference to disobedience, transgression and 'reward' (for them).

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, [that] the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance of the law, [it is] no more of promise: but God gave [it] to Abraham by promise. 19 Wherefore then [serveth] the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; [and it was] [B]ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but God is one. 21 [Is] the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. 22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. 24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
That's a good cross-reference. You certatinly have a deep knowledge of Scripture.

But I think you miss the point of my comments. If you look at what I wrote I think you'll know what I mean. I was giving the reasons to jce why I don't find the Bible sufficiently compelling to believe.

[Charisma]

Hi Richard, :)

Thanks for your reply.


I was giving the reasons to jce why I don't find the Bible sufficiently compelling to believe. I'm sure God has enough patience for you to question everything, but please remember that God wants to be known, and His patience with you is to this end - to enable you to attain such a knowledge of Him that you are beyond questioning it (Him).

Remember also that your mind is the target for any number of the doubts which are available to be received. This will never cease. The time comes when, if you are being filled with the knowledge of God, you will know the difference in substance, and, you will be less available to receive the spiritual flotsam and jetsom of this world.

[jce]

Thank-you Rose & Richard for sharing your experiences. I have witnessed actions of other people of faith that took me unaware such as certain married couples who seemed at one time to be so committed to their faith, and each other, end their marriage in divorce. You can't help but ask yourself when you witness such an event "how did this happen... and so suddenly"! Of course the true answer is, you just need to live long enough. All things are possible.

I will be posting some questions for you soon, if you don't mind. I believe your situation is a most significant occurrence because of the vast knowledge and understanding that you possess, not only of the scriptures, but in so many other disciplines... and your decision begs many questions.

Stay tuned!

John

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi Richard, :)

Thanks for your reply.

I'm sure God has enough patience for you to question everything, but please remember that God wants to be known, and His patience with you is to this end - to enable you to attain such a knowledge of Him that you are beyond questioning it (Him).

Remember also that your mind is the target for any number of the doubts which are available to be received. This will never cease. The time comes when, if you are being filled with the knowledge of God, you will know the difference in substance, and, you will be less available to receive the spiritual flotsam and jetsom of this world.
Hey ho Charisma!

I remember when I was a Christian that it was hard to feel free to say what I really felt to God. Folks habitually feel they need to say only "high and liftd up" things about God. But then while reading the Psalms I saw some pretty authentic outpourings of human emotion and I realized that if God is God then he already would know my thoughts so I should just speak freely, and that real faith meant telling him what I really felt about everthing, including him.

But then I realize that he already knew my thoughts, so speaking them outloud to him seemed to be vanity, especially since all I got was my own echo in return. That's what really undermined the faith for me - the realization that I was talking to myself in prayer, and that I was upholding a "God concept" rather than a real God upholding me. that's why I've been harassing you with questions about how a person can discern between "God speaking" and their own imagination. It's a real issue that played a central role in my loss of faith in the traditional God of Christian theism who supposed goes about doing things (occasionally) but usually sits on the sidelines doing nothing but watchng the comedic tragedy of human history.

I understand why you might think God want's to be known, but it doesn't look like that to me. On the contrary, he looks more like a God who likes to hide himself. He never even bothered to introduce himself to most of the people he created. Most people have lived and died with no knoweldge of Christ or the Christian God. And a HUGE amount of the information about him is totally confused and filled with deception and false claims designed to hook the gullible and steal their money. We have Catholics vs. Protestants vs. JWs vs. Branch Davidians vs. Calvinists vs. Arminians vs sanity! Given ths kind of confusion, how could I conclude that God "wants" to be known through the dogmatic teachings of any book or religion?

It is interesting that you think of my mind as a "target for doubts that will never cease." Why is that? I don't suffer constant doubts about any other aspect of reality. The longer I live the more clearly I see and undestand thngs. The answer seems obvious - Christianity is a religion based on "faith" - believing things without any evidence. It is competing with other faiths for allegience. Most faiths are obviously wrong to everyone on the outside - you look at Islam or Hinduism and have a thousand reasons instantly on your fingertips about why they are obviously erroneous and should be rejected. But the Muslims and the Hindus have their thousands of reasons on their fingertips too that convinces them your faith is obviously wrong. I've merely taken the "intesection" of all religions and agreed with everyone that everyone else's religions are wrong. :p

So given everything you know about me, what do you think the solution would be from your Chrstian point of view?

I really appreciate your input,

Richard

[jce]

Rose & Richard,

So many questions, so little time. Here's my first question to each of you;

I would like to know what your world view is regarding the cosmos. With your accumulated knowledge of the sciences and philosophical perspectives, would you tend to believe that the cosmos is the result of time plus matter plus chance, or would you lean more toward design and a creator? Perhaps you could also include a brief comment on the persuasive evidence supporting your view.

Thank-you Rose & Richard. I'm looking forward to your reply.

John

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Rose & Richard,

So many questions, so little time. Here's my first question to each of you;

I would like to know what your world view is regarding the cosmos. With your accumulated knowledge of the sciences and philosophical perspectives, would you tend to believe that the cosmos is the result of time plus matter plus chance, or would you lean more toward design and a creator? Perhaps you could also include a brief comment on the persuasive evidence supporting your view.

Thank-you Rose & Richard. I'm looking forward to your reply.

John
That's a great question John.

I've always tended towards idealism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism) - the idea that mind/spirit is the foundation of reality. This has been my view before, during, and after being a Christian. But it is very compatible with Christianity of course. The world we experience is like an idea in the Mind of God - created by the Word of God articulating the ideas.

Your question concerning time + matter + chance is missing a crucial element - natural law. But even when I include it, I don't think that time + matter + chance + natural law "explains" everything. It is a materialist view that falsely assumes that there are "things" that can be isolated from other "things." But that's an abstraction. Nothing can be truly isolated, and the concept of an individual "thing" is not even well defined. Think of a chair - remove a sliver from one leg. Is it still a chair? How much can be removed before it's not a chair? There is no clear line of demarcation between one thing and another. Like words, things are just useful abstractions.

On the other hand, I think that time + matter + chance + natural law does explain almost everything that is subject to scientific investigation. The origin of the cosmos, the evolution of life, things like that. But I do have big questions about the origin of the DNA code itself. It's very hard to imagine how that could have happened through time + matter + chance + natural law. But this doesn' help any religion gain credence, since no religion says that God created DNA and the first cell and then all life evolved over a few billion years. Of all the religions of the world, it looks like Hinduism got closest to the right answer on this point.

I think the universe was "designed" in the same way that my unconscious mind "designs" my dreams. They are obviously the product of some kind of intelligence but I don't think there was any agency involved. I don't think God sat in heaven designing the cosmos. I think the God/Mind/Cosmos (including us) is a single manifestation of "THE ALL" - and each of us are just what "the universe is doing" at the point where we are.

[jce]

That's a great question John.

I've always tended towards idealism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism) - the idea that mind/spirit is the foundation of reality. This has been my view before, during, and after being a Christian. But it is very compatible with Christianity of course. The world we experience is like an idea in the Mind of God - created by the Word of God articulating the ideas.

Your question concerning time + matter + chance is missing a crucial element - natural law. But even when I include it, I don't think that time + matter + chance + natural law "explains" everything. It is a materialist view that falsely assumes that there are "things" that can be isolated from other "things." But that's an abstraction. Nothing can be truly isolated, and the concept of an individual "thing" is not even well defined. Think of a chair - remove a sliver from one leg. Is it still a chair? How much can be removed before it's not a chair? There is no clear line of demarcation between one thing and another. Like words, things are just useful abstractions.

On the other hand, I think that time + matter + chance + natural law does explain almost everything that is subject to scientific investigation. The origin of the cosmos, the evolution of life, things like that. But I do have big questions about the origin of the DNA code itself. It's very hard to imagine how that could have happened through time + matter + chance + natural law. But this doesn' help any religion gain credence, since no religion says that God created DNA and the first cell and then all life evolved over a few billion years. Of all the religions of the world, it looks like Hinduism got closest to the right answer on this point.

I think the universe was "designed" in the same way that my unconscious mind "designs" my dreams. They are obviously the product of some kind of intelligence but I don't think there was any agency involved. I don't think God sat in heaven designing the cosmos. I think the God/Mind/Cosmos (including us) is a single manifestation of "THE ALL" - and each of us are just what "the universe is doing" at the point where we are.

Richard,

Am I correct to assume that based on the overall content of your reply... You lean towards design. if so, is there anything other than DNA that would suggest that our universe has been finely tuned by an intelligent entity to provide us earthlings with a suitable habitat? If not, on what are you relying for evidence that would lead you to conclude the alternative?

I want to assume that you are inclined to see it as one or the other and not a confusion of the two possibilities.

Thanks Richard for taking time to discuss. Also, I would like to hear Rose's thoughts too.

John

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard,

Am I correct to assume that based on the overall content of your reply... You lean towards design. if so, is there anything other than DNA that would suggest that our universe has been finely tuned by an intelligent entity to provide us earthlings with a suitable habitat? If not, on what are you relying for evidence that would lead you to conclude the alternative?

I want to assume that you are inclined to see it as one or the other and not a confusion of the two possibilities.

Thanks Richard for taking time to discuss. Also, I would like to hear Rose's thoughts too.

John
Hey there John,

I think it is more accurate to say that I lean towards "mind/consciousness" as the underlying "stuff" of the universe. I don't believe that DNA was "designed" by a conscious agent because that involves many metaphysical assumptions that I don't hold. So DNA is just another mystery to me. Evolution adequately answers the general question of "how we got here" given that DNA somehow showed up on the scene.

I am vary familiar with the Fine Tuning argument since my brother-in-law Dr. Robin Collins is a leading authority in that field. We talk frequently and I've proof-read chunks of the manuscript of his forthcoming massive book on the topic. The video below is from a lecture he gave last April at the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion:


http://youtu.be/rRsFOAgGZZs

Now the thing is that "Fine Tuning" doesn't necessarily imply a "designer" and the "God" it implies (if any) is far too removed from any traditional human religion to be of much relevance. The Muslims, of course, love Fine Tuning because to them it proves Allah.

Therefore, we are at the "not" in your question "If not, on what are you relying for evidence that would lead you to conclude the alternative?" My answer is simple - the question about our ultimate origins is a metaphysical question. I don't have a firm opinion in any particular direction because there is little if any evidence upon which to base any conclusion. So I just let it be. I certainly would never base any life choices upon such metaphysical speculations.

Great chatting!

Richard

[heb13-13]

Thank-you Rose & Richard for sharing your experiences. I have witnessed actions of other people of faith that took me unaware such as certain married couples who seemed at one time to be so committed to their faith, and each other, end their marriage in divorce. You can't help but ask yourself when you witness such an event "how did this happen... and so suddenly"! Of course the true answer is, you just need to live long enough. All things are possible.

I will be posting some questions for you soon, if you don't mind. I believe your situation is a most significant occurrence because of the vast knowledge and understanding that you possess, not only of the scriptures, but in so many other disciplines... and your decision begs many questions.

Stay tuned!

John

Hi John,

When I was a younger Christian these things astounded and surprised me, too. But, knowing the enemies of Life in Christ much better today than yesterday, I am not surprised. Satan, the world and the flesh have never taken a day off, to my knowledge.

Why do you think Peter tells us to be VIGILANT?

Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: (1Pet 5:8)

Have you never had any big battles? Granted, many we bring on ourselves through ignorance and sin.

Paul says that we "should not be ignorant of his devices". (Paraphrase). That tells me that Paul knew his enemy and instructed others to do the same.

All the best,
Rick

[Rose]

Rose & Richard,

So many questions, so little time. Here's my first question to each of you;

I would like to know what your world view is regarding the cosmos. With your accumulated knowledge of the sciences and philosophical perspectives, would you tend to believe that the cosmos is the result of time plus matter plus chance, or would you lean more toward design and a creator? Perhaps you could also include a brief comment on the persuasive evidence supporting your view.

Thank-you Rose & Richard. I'm looking forward to your reply.

John

Hi John

The viewpoint I hold today came from an accumulation of knowledge that in a way happened quite by "chance", in no way did I set out to prove the Bible wrong. My journey began with the freedom to ask questions and follow my intuitions, it seemed that every step of the way the right information was made available to me whether in book form or from the internet. Little by little the need for "God" was pushed farther and farther back till there was very little need for a creator except to start the initial "ball rolling" so to speak. I could trace life back to the formation of DNA, and matter back to the point of singularity from which everything began.

Secondly, my search lead me into a more careful examination of the Bible and the reasons why I should believe it was inspired by "God"? I found that many of the stories like the Creation and Flood stories had their origins in earlier myths and were altered to fit new ways of thinking. Also, the "God" presented in the Bible was totally in keeping with a male warrior along with every presentation coming from a male/masculine perspective. How was a female suppose to relate to a picture presented of "God" that was so unbalanced and one sided...it's like a girl being raised by a father in a tribe of male warriors and never having any female contact. The whole feminine side was missing, women are spoken of in Scripture, but only in a secondary manner; the focus is always on the male. Earlier myths always had gods and goddesses, but with the advent of monotheism the mother figure was stripped away and only the father remained, consequently the male had to give birth in the form of "the word" which was spoken by the male god to create (give birth) to everything.

How that for starters? :pop2:

Rose

[jce]

Thanks Rose for taking time state your view. So, with your good start, we are underway!

It sounds as though you accept the science of the Big Bang, which seems to be the most popular cosmological argument. I have no problem with that theory, it certainly seems mathematically probable and the resulting effect is more than metaphysical.

Assuming the BB is true... what is your opinion of its probable cause?

John

[jce]

Hi John,

When I was a younger Christian these things astounded and surprised me, too. But, knowing the enemies of Life in Christ much better today than yesterday, I am not surprised. Satan, the world and the flesh have never taken a day off, to my knowledge.

Have you never had any big battles? Granted, many we bring on ourselves through ignorance and sin.


All the best,
Rick[/SIZE]
[/COLOR]

Hi Rick

Thanks for getting involved.

God has been good to me in that He has not placed anything on me that I did not bring upon myself (no trials of Job for sure). I have long thought to myself that our challenges (listed in the proper order in scripture) are:

The World
The Flesh
The Devil

Most of us are so occupied with the things of the this world and either suppressing or giving in to the flesh that we never encounter the 3rd challenge. What purpose would it serve. He finds us already in the place he wants us.

Those who have had to endure his malicious attacks, are not many and not very well known (IMO). They are the ones of whom the world is not worthy and are to be found among forgotten. Adonirum Judson comes to mind.

I firmly believe that if we ever truly overcome the desirable accumulations and selfish indulgences of this world, for the sake of the Gospel of Christ, we might then become a target.

In the mean time, most will enjoy life's little diversions until their allotment of time is finally past. Better to say "I once was dead, but now I am alive" rather than "I once was resurrected, but have now re-buried myself in "STUFF"".

Best to you too Rick.

John

[jce]

Hey there John,

I think it is more accurate to say that I lean towards "mind/consciousness" as the underlying "stuff" of the universe. I don't believe that DNA was "designed" by a conscious agent because that involves many metaphysical assumptions that I don't hold. So DNA is just another mystery to me. Evolution adequately answers the general question of "how we got here" given that DNA somehow showed up on the scene.

My answer is simple - the question about our ultimate origins is a metaphysical question. I don't have a firm opinion in any particular direction because there is little if any evidence upon which to base any conclusion. So I just let it be. I certainly would never base any life choices upon such metaphysical speculations.

Great chatting!

Richard

Richard,

I cannot imagine trying to keep up with all of your communications. Are you really Richard, or one of his clones?

I am probably making this topic more tedious than interesting. I was simply trying hear from you, your own personal opinion as to where all this stuff, whether metaphysical or objective, came from? You must have an opinion. Either,"It's all here by chance" or "It's all here by design".

Be patient Richard (whichever Richard you are).

John

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard,

I cannot imagine trying to keep up with all of your communications. Are you really Richard, or one of his clones?

I am probably making this topic more tedious than interesting. I was simply trying hear from you, your own personal opinion as to where all this stuff, whether metaphysical or objective, came from? You must have an opinion. Either,"It's all here by chance" or "It's all here by design".

Be patient Richard (whichever Richard you are).

John
If there are many Richards, they are all within this single head! :lmbo:

I don't feel you are being tedius at all. On the contrary, I like your approach and find it very interesting! I enjoy these short "back and forth" posts - they are a lot easier to manage than big long and involved posts which we often generate on this forum. I love them too, but they are challenging and they take a lot of time to compose. These short, sweet, and to the point posts flow much most quickly, and I think they lead to better communication.

Now you are asking the ultimate philosophical question - why is there something rather than nothing? Believe it or not, that was my favorite question as a child. I would image a vertical line dividing my field of vision and I would put everything exists - Cats, Trees, The Universe, God, Dogs and Everything - on the right side, and then compare it with "absolute nothingness" on the left and ask myself "Why is there something rather than nothing?" This little game would consistently give me the strangest feeling - quite indescribable and enjoyable - like a direct link to the "Ultimate Mystery." Of course, I never answered it, and I don't think I ever will.

It makes no sense to me to answer the Ultimate Question in terms of "chance or design" because any possible "designer" is part of the qestion and so cannot be the answer! :p

Now I get the impression you want to drop down a level from the Ultimate Question to ask something much less profound, and perhaps even answerable - "Why do we and our universe exist?" Are we here by "chance" or "design?"

The first step in any philosophical inquiry is to properly formulate the question to be answered. The word "chance" makes people think of rolling dice. That leads immediate to a false conception because it ignores natural law. What happens when you randomly throw a bunch of iron filiings all over a piece of paper with a magnet under it? The result is "pure chance." But it is also highly structured because of the magnetic field. So which is it? Chance or design? The real question is between "nature vs. agency." Did things evolve through natural law, or were they consciously designed by an agent? My answer to that is pretty simple - despite the efforts of the "Intelligent Design" advocates, there has never been any demonsrable proof that anything in nature requires an agent for explanation. The whole "argument from design" is really a "God of the Gaps" kind of argument. It fails the moment we discover the natural cause of whatever phenomenon is being used as "proof."

So to finally answer your question, where did "all this stuff, whether metaphysical or objective, came from?" Who knows? I don't even know what that "stuff" is. Is it "mindstuff?" Is it "matter"? What is my relationship to it? What am I? Am I made of the "matter stuff" or am I a separate "soul" made of "mind stuff" or both (monism vs. dualism)? There are major questions for which we have no answers, and they are all inseperable from the question of "chance or design."

Bottom line: No matter what answer I might lean towards, I don't see how I could base my life or any religious belief upon such speculations. There are just too many questions.

[Rose]

Thanks Rose for taking time state your view. So, with your good start, we are underway!

It sounds as though you accept the science of the Big Bang, which seems to be the most popular cosmological argument. I have no problem with that theory, it certainly seems mathematically probable and the resulting effect is more than metaphysical.

Assuming the BB is true... what is your opinion of its probable cause?

John

Hi John

I really don't know the cause of the Big Bang...whether it be designed or natural would be speculation on my part and have no bearing on my everyday life. Even if a divine creator designed the Big Bang and all the laws of nature to start the "ball rolling" it seems there is no personal involvement beyond that.

All the best,
Rose

[heb13-13]

Hi Rick

Thanks for getting involved.

God has been good to me in that He has not placed anything on me that I did not bring upon myself (no trials of Job for sure).

Hi there John,

There is really a lot in your short post.

Are you saying that you see no value in suffering? "God has been good to me". John, let me ask you a question: What do you think about Christ's sufferings? Do you think they were necessary and why?

I do agree that if we just look at what benefits us, we may have a different outlook regarding suffering.

2Ti 2:12

If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:

It is through suffering that we are conformed to His image and come to know Him. The fellowship of His sufferings (Phil 3:10).

Picking up our cross daily and denying the flesh is a form of suffering. It's not just the big stories of torture and persecution that you hear about. Picking up your cross daily in America is no walk in the park. It is a different kind of suffering, striving against sin and not blood.

Act 5:41
And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name.

It is through suffering that the Body of Christ is enriched and grows in love and that the knowledge of Christ's love increases.

Col 1:24
Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:

Suffering is used to test our hearts and purge us of that which is not of Him. It is used to mature us.
1Pe 5:10

But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you.

I certainly have not covered all the blessings of suffering.


Most of us are so occupied with the things of the this world and either suppressing or giving in to the flesh that we never encounter the 3rd challenge. What purpose would it serve. He finds us already in the place he wants us.

I know what you mean by "occupied with the things of the world" and "giving into the flesh", but not quite sure I know what you mean by "suppressing the flesh". Should I assume that you mean picking up your cross and denying the flesh?


Those who have had to endure his malicious attacks, are not many and not very well known (IMO). They are the ones of whom the world is not worthy and are to be found among forgotten. Adonirum Judson comes to mind.

"Are not many" - Although we cannot quantify the number, it is probably a very small company relative to the rest of the world's population. What exactly is the point you are trying to make. Are you saying that you don't suffer in anyway for righteousness sake? What about for being a follower of Jesus. Do you suffer for that?

Luke 6:26
Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets.


I firmly believe that if we ever truly overcome the desirable accumulations and selfish indulgences of this world, for the sake of the Gospel of Christ, we might then become a target.

So then, you are saying that you are not a target because you are not overcoming fleshly things. Please don't let me put words in your mouth, but the sense I get from your own words is that you are saying that you are not suffering for the cause of Christ.


In the mean time, most will enjoy life's little diversions until their allotment of time is finally past. Better to say "I once was dead, but now I am alive" rather than "I once was resurrected, but have now re-buried myself in "STUFF"".

Not quite sure what your second sentence means. Maybe you could clairify it for me.

Just an short anecdote for you which some don't think is very useful. My 19 year old daughter has been through a lot of suffering in her short little life. It's not an easy thing for a Mom and Dad to witness. The other day she came to her Mom and I and told us that she was glad that she had gone through the suffering which she did (she still has some ways to go). She said that she would not be so close to the Lord or know Him like she did if she had not been through the suffering. That is an amazing thing for a 19 year old girl to realize.

But we all react differently to pain and suffering. Some see it as a blessing after the fact. And some are actually able to see it as a blessing when "in the" suffering. The peaceable fruit of righteousness is one of the results. Others, see suffering as something to be avoided. For this simple reason many avoid the cross of Christ because they don't want to deny their flesh, they don't want to suffer.

It's not easy to be a Christian in the biblical sense and to follow the Lord with ALL your heart, ALL your soul, ALL your mind and ALL your strength. We put a lot of effort into following many things in this life, when we are being asked to follow Him. This world will grind you up and spit you out, but Jesus says, "Come to me all ye that labour and are heavy laden and I will give you rest". There may be a lot of suffering in following Christ and everyone of us will count the cost and decide whether we think it is worth it or not. The Bible tells us it is worth it, but we all have to be convinced, don't we?


Best to you too Rick.

John

Thanks a lot John. God bless you,
Rick

[throwback]

In view of a recent trend of former bible believing persons concluding that faith in the popularly accepted doctrines of sin and salvation, heaven & hell, the fallen nature, redemption and the atonement of Christ are either not true or insignificant, I thought it would be interesting to see how many this number has grown to. If you have a "de-conversion" story, where you no longer believe these biblical topics, please share it.

I would also like to add the following scripture as significant to someone who has experienced a falling away:

*1 Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away. 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, 4 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?

This verse came to my attention as I wondered how I could ever abandon the faith and avoid the truth of scripture. Yes, perhaps I could focus on the things that are good in this life and allow myself to be diverted, but I cannot conceive of ever being able to "escape" the implications of the gospel for the remainder of my life after having been exposed to it. Surely, it would come back to me at my last breath as I would be unable to prevent my thoughts from turning toward God. To me, once one has been authentically converted by the Spirit and the Word, there is no going back to the place they were before that life changing event.

What do you think?

John

For me, I basically grew up and was a believer for as long as I can remember. I don't have that 'turning from sin' conversion story because for the entirety of my life, I have basically abhored sin and tried to practice righteous living. Perhaps because that is my sorry, unlike many believers I because someone that "majored in minors" and was very analytical and "doctinally sound" from a young age. I always yearned for a deeper knowledge and understanding and felt that I should be able to back up my beliefs with solid reasonable arguments and proof that I was correct.
For years the status quo that I had went unchallenged (at least in my mind) as I felt I could and had always "defended the faith" well and proved my points when discussing issues of faith with those that had opposing beliefs (growing up as a member of the Church of Christ will make you that way).

Things started changing as I found that many that disbelieved the scriptures also analyzed them and were able to break them down in an unbiased way not reflecting the preconceptions of their particular brand of faith. That challenged me to do the same and surprisingly I came to many of the same conclusions that they had. I went from a very fundamental view of heaven/hell, the soul/spirit, and premillennialism to a view of Heaven/Hell and the soul that was more in line with 7th Day Adventists and JW's than my own denomination. After that and more intense study I found that my understanding of the scriptures was more in line with what partial preterists believed than what was being taught at most churches I knew of.

So over the course of a 3 or 4 year period I went from a "Hell fire and brimestone" advocate to a Partial Preterist that believed that a literal return of Jesus and resurrection of the saints had taken place way back in the late 1st century and that man was a living soul that died completely at death as opposed to man having a living soul that lives on beyond the grave. In the midst of all of that, I was still a stance Bible believing Christian advancing the sola-scriptura montra for all to see and hear. I had become skilled at rationalizing the irrational in order to mask some of the issues that many found problematic with the scriptures. My tipping point was when I finally realized that the Bible in fact did have some real issues and errors that could not be rectified without having to change scriptures themselves. Issues like why Luke's account of Stephen's speech in Acts 7 had Stephen, a man filled with and speaking through God's Holy Spirit errantly discussing various Old Testament stories. In addition there is also the big issue of Jesus not fulfilling many of the Messianic prophecies mentioned in the Hebrew scriptures and having NT writers depict things as Messianic that had no Messianic connotations in the Hebrew scriptures. Finally, and this may seem like a small issue to some, but the issue of when Jesus was born and the contradictory records of Luke and Matthew really caused me concern. Luke has Jesus being born when Quirienus was governor of Syria and during the time of a census, which if correct would have had to occur at or around the year ce 6. Matthew has Jesus being born during the life and reign of Herod the Great who happenned to die in the year 4 bc. These accounts are irreconsilable (sp?) and force one to conclude that either Matthew or Luke's account is wrong, or both are wrong. And if we must pick and choose what is right, how can we know what if anything in scripture is right? Because of this I could no longer honestly affirm that the scriptures inerrant or divinely inspired, and I had to come to grips with the idea that my entire faith was based on believe in 2000 year old writings of men that were not writing God-given and inspired words, but rather writers that wrote from the point of view of their beliefs, prejudices, opinions, and limited knowledge.

[jce]

For me, I basically grew up and was a believer for as long as I can remember. I don't have that 'turning from sin' conversion story because for the entirety of my life, I have basically abhored sin and tried to practice righteous living. Perhaps because that is my sorry, unlike many believers I because someone that "majored in minors" and was very analytical and "doctinally sound" from a young age. I always yearned for a deeper knowledge and understanding and felt that I should be able to back up my beliefs with solid reasonable arguments and proof that I was correct.
For years the status quo that I had went unchallenged (at least in my mind) as I felt I could and had always "defended the faith" well and proved my points when discussing issues of faith with those that had opposing beliefs (growing up as a member of the Church of Christ will make you that way).

Things started changing as I found that many that disbelieved the scriptures also analyzed them and were able to break them down in an unbiased way not reflecting the preconceptions of their particular brand of faith. That challenged me to do the same and surprisingly I came to many of the same conclusions that they had. I went from a very fundamental view of heaven/hell, the soul/spirit, and premillennialism to a view of Heaven/Hell and the soul that was more in line with 7th Day Adventists and JW's than my own denomination. After that and more intense study I found that my understanding of the scriptures was more in line with what partial preterists believed than what was being taught at most churches I knew of.

So over the course of a 3 or 4 year period I went from a "Hell fire and brimestone" advocate to a Partial Preterist that believed that a literal return of Jesus and resurrection of the saints had taken place way back in the late 1st century and that man was a living soul that died completely at death as opposed to man having a living soul that lives on beyond the grave. In the midst of all of that, I was still a stance Bible believing Christian advancing the sola-scriptura montra for all to see and hear. I had become skilled at rationalizing the irrational in order to mask some of the issues that many found problematic with the scriptures. My tipping point was when I finally realized that the Bible in fact did have some real issues and errors that could not be rectified without having to change scriptures themselves. Issues like why Luke's account of Stephen's speech in Acts 7 had Stephen, a man filled with and speaking through God's Holy Spirit errantly discussing various Old Testament stories. In addition there is also the big issue of Jesus not fulfilling many of the Messianic prophecies mentioned in the Hebrew scriptures and having NT writers depict things as Messianic that had no Messianic connotations in the Hebrew scriptures. Finally, and this may seem like a small issue to some, but the issue of when Jesus was born and the contradictory records of Luke and Matthew really caused me concern. Luke has Jesus being born when Quirienus was governor of Syria and during the time of a census, which if correct would have had to occur at or around the year ce 6. Matthew has Jesus being born during the life and reign of Herod the Great who happenned to die in the year 4 bc. These accounts are irreconsilable (sp?) and force one to conclude that either Matthew or Luke's account is wrong, or both are wrong. And if we must pick and choose what is right, how can we know what if anything in scripture is right? Because of this I could no longer honestly affirm that the scriptures inerrant or divinely inspired, and I had to come to grips with the idea that my entire faith was based on believe in 2000 year old writings of men that were not writing God-given and inspired words, but rather writers that wrote from the point of view of their beliefs, prejudices, opinions, and limited knowledge.


Hello and "Thank-you" for sharing your story.

In view of the apparent inconsistencies of the scriptures, has this shaken your faith in Christ and caused you to abandon your hope in eternal life? Do you still believe that Jesus is God manifest and that His sacrifice on the cross has purchased your redemption?

[throwback]

Hello and "Thank-you" for sharing your story.

In view of the apparent inconsistencies of the scriptures, has this shaken your faith in Christ and caused you to abandon your hope in eternal life? Do you still believe that Jesus is God manifest and that His sacrifice on the cross has purchased your redemption?

It TOTALLY has shaken my faith and caused me to be doubtful of any hope that I had acquired through faith in the scriptures. If the scriptures cannot be trusted, then what reason is there to believe that they are correct about Jesus, eternal life, etc.?
I do not believe that Jesus is God manifest anymore for various reasons. Paramount among them is because many passages of scripture speak out against such even being a possibility. For the most part in the scripture's depiction of Jesus it shows readers that Jesus was God's Anointed huMAN as opposed to a GodMAN. I used to believe and still WANT TO believe that Jesus' resurrection happenned and made it possible that I too will one day be raised to a life without end under the peaceful reign of Jesus and his Bride within the all-encompassing universal Kingdom of Heaven. But my want to, the evidence, and the facts do not equate, so I must face the realistic possibility/probability that no such hope exists. And as time passes, I am learning to better cope with what I feel is a sad reality.

[jce]

It TOTALLY has shaken my faith and caused me to be doubtful of any hope that I had acquired through faith in the scriptures. If the scriptures cannot be trusted, then what reason is there to believe that they are correct about Jesus, eternal life, etc.?
I do not believe that Jesus is God manifest anymore for various reasons. Paramount among them is because many passages of scripture speak out against such even being a possibility. For the most part in the scripture's depiction of Jesus it shows readers that Jesus was God's Anointed huMAN as opposed to a GodMAN. I used to believe and still WANT TO believe that Jesus' resurrection happenned and made it possible that I too will one day be raised to a life without end under the peaceful reign of Jesus and his Bride within the all-encompassing universal Kingdom of Heaven. But my want to, the evidence, and the facts do not equate, so I must face the realistic possibility/probability that no such hope exists. And as time passes, I am learning to better cope with what I feel is a sad reality.


I think that many believers would be sorry to hear that. May God reveal Himself to you afresh. He lives and will reign throughout all eternity with His saints, in whose company you once were joyful. May God grant you the grace of restoration.

For by grace are you save through faith AND THAT not of yourselves, IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD, not of works, lest any man should boast. Eph 2: 8 & 9

Blessings to you.

John

[throwback]

I think that many believers would be sorry to hear that. May God reveal Himself to you afresh. He lives and will reign throughout all eternity with His saints, in whose company you once were joyful. May God grant you the grace of restoration.

For by grace are you save through faith AND THAT not of yourselves, IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD, not of works, lest any man should boast. Eph 2: 8 & 9

Blessings to you.

John

Those hearing it aren't nearly as sorry as the man saying it. I treasured my faith, I lived by my faith, and I defended my faith to the nth degree until it became clear that my faith was baseless, not founded upon reality, and would provide me with nothing more than a hope of a future that is not guaranteed, verifiable, and perhaps not even realistic. In the end what has been lost is the hope and expectation I once carried inside my heart. Regaining that hope has no bearing on the reality of anything, so as Paul said, "I count everything but loss" for the cause of knowing truth.

[lenvande]

Hello and "Thank-you" for sharing your story.

In view of the apparent inconsistencies of the scriptures, has this shaken your faith in Christ and caused you to abandon your hope in eternal life? Do you still believe that Jesus is God manifest and that His sacrifice on the cross has purchased your redemption?

Throwback,

Regarding dating the birth of Jesus, you might be interested in looking at Stephen E. Jones' study on the issue. He uses biblical, extrabiblical, and astronomical data in exploring the timeline. Here is a link to the relevant chapter:

http://www.gods-kingdom-ministries.org/books/secrets/Chapter9.cfm

Good luck.

Len

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Those hearing it aren't nearly as sorry as the man saying it. I treasured my faith, I lived by my faith, and I defended my faith to the nth degree until it became clear that my faith was baseless, not founded upon reality, and would provide me with nothing more than a hope of a future that is not guaranteed, verifiable, and perhaps not even realistic. In the end what has been lost is the hope and expectation I once carried inside my heart. Regaining that hope has no bearing on the reality of anything, so as Paul said, "I count everything but loss" for the cause of knowing truth.
It looks like you have gained something of much greater value than any faith in dogmas taught by others could ever give. You are walking in your own authentic integrity. Nothing could be of higher value since all values depend on integrity.

If the Bible really is from God, I think it must be a test of our integrity to see if we will admit the truth of what it actually says.

[Rose]

Those hearing it aren't nearly as sorry as the man saying it. I treasured my faith, I lived by my faith, and I defended my faith to the nth degree until it became clear that my faith was baseless, not founded upon reality, and would provide me with nothing more than a hope of a future that is not guaranteed, verifiable, and perhaps not even realistic. In the end what has been lost is the hope and expectation I once carried inside my heart. Regaining that hope has no bearing on the reality of anything, so as Paul said, "I count everything but loss" for the cause of knowing truth.

Hi Throwback,

I know how you feel...I too treasured my faith for 25 years and it wasn't my intention to have to give it up, but in much the same way when a child finds out Santa Claus isn't real there is no way he can go back to believing...I couldn't go back to my faith once the spell was broken. What started with simple questions that couldn't be answered has grown to an immense pile of errors, discrepancies, contradictions, and outright falsehoods that I couldn't explain away.

Whereas now I don't have the same hope in my heart that I did when I was a Christian, I do feel at peace with my place in the universe, and find myself being more concerned with helping others to better their lives in this life.

All the best,
Rose

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi Throwback,

I know how you feel...I too treasured my faith for 25 years and it wasn't my intention to have to give it up, but in much the same way when a child finds out Santa Claus isn't real there is no way he can go back to believing...I couldn't go back to my faith once the spell was broken. What started with simple questions that couldn't be answered has grown to an immense pile of errors, discrepancies, contradictions, and outright falsehoods that I couldn't explain away.

Whereas now I don't have the same hope in my heart that I did when I was a Christian, I do feel at peace with my place in the universe, and find myself being more concerned with helping others to better their lives in this life.

All the best,
Rose
And I would add that I had committed everything to my beliefs. I gave all my time and money to propagating Christianity. So it's not something I just gave up lightly. But truth rules, and I had to be true to what I believed. What choice is there? If Christianity is based on faith then it must be believed or it is nothing.

But I wouldn't say I have any less "hope" of eternal life. On the contrary, I now see that all have "aionios zoe" by the very fact of thier existense. It is a state of mind, a kind of conscious that is always available to those who seek it.

[jce]

Thanks to Rose, Richard and Throwback for sharing their unusual experience regarding their departure from the Faith.

It would be good to hear from someone else who may harbor some concerns over apparent errors in the scriptures but still hold fast to the basic message of hope it proclaims. The book may appear to have discrepancies, but it is certainly not void of Truth.

John

[Rose]

Thanks to Rose, Richard and Throwback for sharing their unusual experience regarding their departure from the Faith.

It would be good to hear from someone else who may harbor some concerns over apparent errors in the scriptures but still hold fast to the basic message of hope it proclaims. The book may appear to have discrepancies, but it is certainly not void of Truth.

John

Hi John, :yo:

That is what is so wonderful about the freedom I now have...it allows me to hold onto the truths that the Bible contains while letting go of all the errors...:sBo_reflection2:

Rose

[jce]

Hi there John,

There is really a lot in your short post.

Are you saying that you see no value in suffering? "God has been good to me". John, let me ask you a question: What do you think about Christ's sufferings? Do you think they were necessary and why?

I do agree that if we just look at what benefits us, we may have a different outlook regarding suffering.

2Ti 2:12

If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:

It is through suffering that we are conformed to His image and come to know Him. The fellowship of His sufferings (Phil 3:10).

Picking up our cross daily and denying the flesh is a form of suffering. It's not just the big stories of torture and persecution that you hear about. Picking up your cross daily in America is no walk in the park. It is a different kind of suffering, striving against sin and not blood.

Act 5:41
And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name.

It is through suffering that the Body of Christ is enriched and grows in love and that the knowledge of Christ's love increases.

Col 1:24
Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:

Suffering is used to test our hearts and purge us of that which is not of Him. It is used to mature us.
1Pe 5:10

But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you.

I certainly have not covered all the blessings of suffering.



I know what you mean by "occupied with the things of the world" and "giving into the flesh", but not quite sure I know what you mean by "suppressing the flesh". Should I assume that you mean picking up your cross and denying the flesh?



"Are not many" - Although we cannot quantify the number, it is probably a very small company relative to the rest of the world's population. What exactly is the point you are trying to make. Are you saying that you don't suffer in anyway for righteousness sake? What about for being a follower of Jesus. Do you suffer for that?

Luke 6:26
Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets.



So then, you are saying that you are not a target because you are not overcoming fleshly things. Please don't let me put words in your mouth, but the sense I get from your own words is that you are saying that you are not suffering for the cause of Christ.



Not quite sure what your second sentence means. Maybe you could clairify it for me.

Just an short anecdote for you which some don't think is very useful. My 19 year old daughter has been through a lot of suffering in her short little life. It's not an easy thing for a Mom and Dad to witness. The other day she came to her Mom and I and told us that she was glad that she had gone through the suffering which she did (she still has some ways to go). She said that she would not be so close to the Lord or know Him like she did if she had not been through the suffering. That is an amazing thing for a 19 year old girl to realize.

But we all react differently to pain and suffering. Some see it as a blessing after the fact. And some are actually able to see it as a blessing when "in the" suffering. The peaceable fruit of righteousness is one of the results. Others, see suffering as something to be avoided. For this simple reason many avoid the cross of Christ because they don't want to deny their flesh, they don't want to suffer.

It's not easy to be a Christian in the biblical sense and to follow the Lord with ALL your heart, ALL your soul, ALL your mind and ALL your strength. We put a lot of effort into following many things in this life, when we are being asked to follow Him. This world will grind you up and spit you out, but Jesus says, "Come to me all ye that labour and are heavy laden and I will give you rest". There may be a lot of suffering in following Christ and everyone of us will count the cost and decide whether we think it is worth it or not. The Bible tells us it is worth it, but we all have to be convinced, don't we?



Thanks a lot John. God bless you,
Rick

Hey there Brother Rick

Sorry for the long delay in responding to your post. Still working for a living I am so the luxury of extra time is somewhat limited.

First, I want to let you know that my disparaging comments were not directed toward you personally. When I voice criticism, it is often myself that I am pointing the finger at. God has been extremely generous to me with my wife of 40 years, 3 wonderful children and 11 above average grandkids! Trials, sure I have experienced some, who has tried to live the life of Christ and not found themselves in a battle against the lusts of their own flesh and trying to resist the excesses of this culture. With that said, I do not think that I have had to contend with Satan one on one. I think if I were to truly deny myself and willingly surrender everything to Christ, he might show up. But I don't think I pose much of a problem to him.

I do find it discouraging that so many in our own time think of Christianity as the enemy. It is frustrating that they seem to be clueless that the teachings of Christ are the solution to creating a stable society. But even more so are the ones who claim to be followers of Christ do little or nothing to stand up for what is right. I have come to the place where, apart from divine intervention, our country will end up like every other great nation. Devoid of any saving faith in God and conquered by our enemies. I think it is inevitable. All governments of men must fail, only the Kingdom of God will endure forever. But what could be wrong with that? The Creator in charge in His Rightful place... As King of Kings and Lord of Lords!!!

Blessings to you Rick and to your family.

John

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Thanks to Rose, Richard and Throwback for sharing their unusual experience regarding their departure from the Faith.

It would be good to hear from someone else who may harbor some concerns over apparent errors in the scriptures but still hold fast to the basic message of hope it proclaims. The book may appear to have discrepancies, but it is certainly not void of Truth.

John
Hey there John,

I agree completely. I think it would be very good for folks to share their struggles and how they dealt with them so that they could continue in the faith. In my case, I didn't "deal" with most of the bothersome issues at all. For example, I was never "comfortable" with the doctrine of hell because it seemed unjust and evil, but it was believed by most Christians so I just put it on the back burner. After a while, the stench from that burning pot finally caught my attention and I had to attend to it. I tried annihilationism and then Christian universalism, and finally realized I no longer held the beliefs that would have defined me as Christian. So I didn't really "choose" to leave the faith at all. I simply discovered that I no longer believed it. I suspect that most people do the same thing. The issues that they don't believe they just ignore and say they "believe" and that God will make things clear when they die and get to heave.

And I also agree that the Bible is far from being "void of Truth!" On the contrary, it is an exceedingly rich book with much truth on many levels. It's just not the "inerrant and infallible Word of God." And thre is a world of difference between the two.

I really appreciate your participation in this thread (and on the forum).

Richard

PS: One thing for believers to consider - what if Christianity is true but the Bible is not the "Word of God?" There was no New Testament when Christ walked the earth or even for decades afterwards, yet there were Christians. So who told you that you were supposed to believe that the collection of books called the "Bible" is the "Word of God?" Why did you believe them? How do you know if it has the right books? Or that it's not missing some books its supposed to have? Or that there are not errors in some of the books? Upon what do you base your faith in the Bible?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi John, :yo:

That is what is so wonderful about the freedom I now have...it allows me to hold onto the truths that the Bible contains while letting go of all the errors...:sBo_reflection2:

Rose
Well stated, my dear. When you have no presuppositions about the Bible, you are able to judge righteously what it says, for good or for ill. When I heldp it to be the Word of God my judgment was skewed by the prejudice [pre-judgment] that everything it said was "true" despite how wrong it might appear.

[jce]

Hey there John,

I agree completely.

Why bless your soul Richard. If you would have simply stated that the first time I wrote in this forum, it would have saved a lot of typing.lol


PS: One thing for believers to consider - what if Christianity is true but the Bible is not the "Word of God?" There was no New Testament when Christ walked the earth or even for decades afterwards, yet there were Christians. So who told you that you were supposed to believe that the collection of books called the "Bible" is the "Word of God?" Why did you believe them? How do you know if it has the right books? Or that it's not missing some books its supposed to have? Or that there are not errors in some of the books? Upon what do you base your faith in the Bible?

Fascinating that you should make that statement. I have been thinking a lot about that lately. You see, for me the Bible is not merely a history book, or even just an account of God's plan for mankind, or "humankind" to be politically correct. The Bible has revealed things to me about myself, that I thought only I knew. It judges me rightly every time I read it. In that sense, it is a very discouraging message, yet it is Truth, plain and simple... And might I add necessary for myself.

As far as I am concerned, the book could be filled with the errors of fallible man, but God would still be infallible. And His words to me Truth. So that's where I am and by His Grace, I hope never to be moved from that safe haven.

Now, regarding the doctrine of hell. There seems to be no consensus in the Christian world regarding it's definition and it would not trip me up. After all, if there is a God, and He is Righteous, would He do wrong? Of course not. So I am very comfortable with that. The real motive to be emphasized is the hope of Eternal Life. This is the positive message of the scriptures, that man can live forever!!! Now that's what I'm talking about.

Thanks Richard for your kind words. You really have become "The Friendly Administrator", and you proved it again by reminding me that you agree with me completely.

Best to you!

John

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Why bless your soul Richard. If you would have simply stated that the first time I wrote in this forum, it would have saved a lot of typing.lol

But then we'd have nothing to talk about!

:hysterical:



Fascinating that you should make that statement. I have been thinking a lot about that lately. You see, for me the Bible is not merely a history book, or even just an account of God's plan for mankind, or "humankind" to be politically correct. The Bible has revealed things to me about myself, that I thought only I knew. It judges me rightly every time I read it. In that sense, it is a very discouraging message, yet it is Truth, plain and simple... And might I add necessary for myself.

As far as I am concerned, the book could be filled with the errors of fallible man, but God would still be infallible. And His words to me Truth. So that's where I am and by His Grace, I hope never to be moved from that safe haven.

I know what you mean. I felt convicted by the Bible many times in my walk. I also felt convicted by my vitligo on the back of my hand. Vitiligo is a skin disease that causes white spots where the pigmentation cells died. It's harmless (except you need to be careful in the sun) but it can make people very self-conscious since it is an obvious imperfection that looks bad. But I interpreted it as having the same meaning as "leprosy" in the Bible, and that God afflicted me with it so I would know my sin "like the back of my own hand." All this to show how relious folk like you and me are prone to being "convicted" by just about anything. I now think I took that Bible stuff a little too seriously. My vitiligo was not a judgment from God, and I doubt that the ugly "truths" about yourself that you saw in the Bible were no special revelation, but rather common to all people.

This touches upon the central error of Christianity - it focuses on SIN SIN SIN. But when I look at myself and others, I see that sin plays eseentially no meaningful role in our lives. It did when I was younger - when I had "parental figures" still ruling in my mind, but as I've matured I see that it is a mostly useless category.

I do good for goodness sake, not becasue I fear punishment from a god who hates my sin.



Now, regarding the doctrine of hell. There seems to be no consensus in the Christian world regarding it's definition and it would not trip me up. After all, if there is a God, and He is Righteous, would He do wrong? Of course not. So I am very comfortable with that. The real motive to be emphasized is the hope of Eternal Life. This is the positive message of the scriptures, that man can live forever!!! Now that's what I'm talking about.

Thanks Richard for your kind words. You really have become "The Friendly Administrator", and you proved it again by reminding me that you agree with me completely.

Best to you!

John
As soon as you say begin with a premise like "God is righteous, he can do no wrong" and then use that as a basis for making deductions, I feel free to throw out all religion and the Bible because there is so much in them that does not fit with that presumption.

Great chatting!

Richard