The Death/Loss Of Religion In America (1 Viewer)

[Captain Cranks]

How does this work in your life? Do you have something analogous where you are accepting and compassionate towards someone or a particular group even though you hold to a belief that what they did was wrong? Or do you require that you alter your judgments in order to accept them?

Interesting question. First thing that comes to mind is my son's inordinate amount of tattoos. I used to be judgmental about them, and wouldn't bother to ask what was behind the latest and greatest ink. While I still don't love it, I appreciate that it makes him happy and show an interest in the stuff he's had done. If he asked me to go to a tattoo parlor, I'd happily go.

Let me just add that I'm not comparing tattoos to being gay or trans. Just trying to relate the mental process like you asked.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Christains believe that every single person is broken and in need of salvation for an eternal life with God. The transgressions simply don't matter to God once you seek a relationship with him. This assignment of "degree" to sins is 1000000000% man made and not supported in any meaningful way in Biblical teaching.

This is true of course, but it's a hard teaching that relatively few people are willing to accept in practice. For example, Jesus tells us straight up that people who check out hot chicks when they walk by on the street are not morally "better" than a serial philanderer. The person who goes to church every Sunday and tithes regularly does not "deserve" salvation any more than somebody currently sitting on death row. Not all acts are equally harmful to others, but none of us is really a "good person" is the sense that we're talking about here.

One of my major complaints with modern religion is that it tends to lose sight of this idea, and I think that's bad because it's a useful corrective against pride and narcissism. I've sat through way too many sermons over the years of the "I'm okay, you're okay" variety. Not every sermon needs to be Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, but there's a happy medium there where you can challenge your congregation without terrorizing them or condescending to them.

 

[The Commish]

Here's the thing with this discussion. For a Christian, it should NOT matter a single bit. Why? Because if a Christian is being honest with one's self, they know that even if "homosexaul sex" isn't a sin, the person is still a sinner and that makes them just like the Christian from an eternal life perspective. Christains believe that every single person is broken and in need of salvation for an eternal life with God. The transgressions simply don't matter to God once you seek a relationship with him. This assignment of "degree" to sins is 1000000000% man made and not supported in any meaningful way in Biblical teaching. Perhaps this is what you're getting at with your final sentence GB, but it's absolutely maddening to a guy like me to watch Christians do this sort of thing. If it doesn't matter to God in terms of relationship with him, it doesn't matter to me.

I can appreciate that attitude. I think it still leaves Christians with the difficult position of whether acceptance is condoning the behavior. If it's not considered a sin, then there is no math that needs to be done.

In my view it's not difficult at all. Love the sinner not the sin. "I don't appreciate that you steal from me every chance that you get, but I still love you". The liberation from judgment that came with Jesus is one of the most underrated concepts of religion. It's not found anywhere else...not to that level anyway. If Christians are doing it right they look at every single person out there and say to themselves "they are broken, just like I am. I need to help/witness/come alongside them just as Jesus would."

 

[The Commish]

Christains believe that every single person is broken and in need of salvation for an eternal life with God. The transgressions simply don't matter to God once you seek a relationship with him. This assignment of "degree" to sins is 1000000000% man made and not supported in any meaningful way in Biblical teaching.

This is true of course, but it's a hard teaching that relatively few people are willing to accept in practice. For example, Jesus tells us straight up that people who check out hot chicks when they walk by on the street are not morally "better" than a serial philanderer. The person who goes to church every Sunday and tithes regularly does not "deserve" salvation any more than somebody currently sitting on death row. Not all acts are equally harmful to others, but none of us is really a "good person" is the sense that we're talking about here.

One of my major complaints with modern religion is that it tends to lose sight of this idea, and I think that's bad because it's a useful corrective against pride and narcissism. I've sat through way too many sermons over the years of the "I'm okay, you're okay" variety. Not every sermon needs to be Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, but there's a happy medium there where you can challenge your congregation without terrorizing them or condescending to them.

Yes....this is in terms of spiritual standard and what's required to enter the gates of heaven. It's required of us to be perfect...free from sin to enter God's kingdom. But a lot of people turn this into moral/immoral "truths" in terms of our daily life in a broken world. That is completely flawed IMO.

ETA: To the second part, I think you're speaking of the "prosperity gospel" types that only focus on bits of the message. First person that comes to mind when I hear this is that Joel Osteen dude. Agree a million times over that those types aren't doing favors to anyone but themselves and their pocketbooks.

 

[dgreen]

Christains believe that every single person is broken and in need of salvation for an eternal life with God. The transgressions simply don't matter to God once you seek a relationship with him. This assignment of "degree" to sins is 1000000000% man made and not supported in any meaningful way in Biblical teaching.

This is true of course, but it's a hard teaching that relatively few people are willing to accept in practice. For example, Jesus tells us straight up that people who check out hot chicks when they walk by on the street are not morally "better" than a serial philanderer. The person who goes to church every Sunday and tithes regularly does not "deserve" salvation any more than somebody currently sitting on death row. Not all acts are equally harmful to others, but none of us is really a "good person" is the sense that we're talking about here.

One of my major complaints with modern religion is that it tends to lose sight of this idea, and I think that's bad because it's a useful corrective against pride and narcissism. I've sat through way too many sermons over the years of the "I'm okay, you're okay" variety. Not every sermon needs to be Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, but there's a happy medium there where you can challenge your congregation without terrorizing them or condescending to them.

This is yet another difference among the diverse Christian community. I almost never hear an "I'm okay, you're okay" sermon. What I've heard much more of is the "you're not good enough" sermon. That's because of my faith tradition's hyper focus on salvation and our inability to save ourselves. I'm becoming more and more appreciative of messages focused on mission rather than just a salvation void of a mission. We were created good, we choose to divert from that path, and we are repeatedly invited back on that path. Not just some path to another dimension after I die, but a here-and-now path of doing good and loving others.

 

[zoonation]

Just that ultimately, one can’t reconcile religious belief with science. It’s one or the other.

That’s my belief. I don’t expect religious people to share it.

This is assuming that one must take a fundamentalist view of scripture...which of course is an absurd assumption.

ETA: I'm not religious

I disagree. It is certainly true from a theistic approach (reconciling faith and science) but I would also argue it is is true from a purely deistic approach as well. Any claim for the supernatural is antithetical to science.

 

[dgreen]

How does this work in your life? Do you have something analogous where you are accepting and compassionate towards someone or a particular group even though you hold to a belief that what they did was wrong? Or do you require that you alter your judgments in order to accept them?

Interesting question. First thing that comes to mind is my son's inordinate amount of tattoos. I used to be judgmental about them, and wouldn't bother to ask what was behind the latest and greatest ink. While I still don't love it, I appreciate that it makes him happy and show an interest in the stuff he's had done. If he asked me to go to a tattoo parlor, I'd happily go.

Let me just add that I'm not comparing tattoos to being gay or trans. Just trying to relate the mental process like you asked.

Thanks. I appreciate that story.

 

[TripItUp]

I disagree. It is certainly true from a theistic approach (reconciling faith and science) but I would also argue it is is true from a purely deistic approach as well. Any claim for the supernatural is antithetical to science.

Why does religion have to be "supernatural?"

Perhaps religion is a part of science that isn't explained by our current scientific understanding.

ETA: I'm not religious and have several science degrees...so I do understand what science is and isn't.

 

[TripItUp]

Here's a question for those who feel the demise of religion is a bad thing.

FTR, there is good and bad IMHO.

Let's say there was no such demise over the last 30 or so years and our society was just as patriarchal and anti-gay as it was in the 1990s. Do you feel this is an improvement relative to today?

I am on the side that believes that it is not an improvement. I am "pro gay" and at the same time can also see the positive impacts religion has had on societies and cultures despite their flaws which include the anti-gay rhetoric/scripture etc.

If not, what is your solution to unequal treatment of women and the LGBTQ community?

I think we are slowly improving. The best solution is to work with organized religions on how to approach the topic differently...it will probably not happen in our lifetime, but if religions today want to exist they will eventually need to address it IMHO...it is one of several reasons religions are declining in popularity.

I believe it's in everybody's best interests to support, at a minimum, the positive aspects of religions.

 

[TripItUp]

the idea that anyone thinks they get to be the one to condone love between two adults is astoundingly hypocritical take that to the bank brohans

Not if you are a fundamentalist Christian. We at least need to understand why some Christians believe that. The scripture is very clear as written(IMHO) and many people believe the scripture is sacred.

ETA: I'm not religious and am pro-gay

 

[Captain Cranks]

I believe it's in everybody's best interests to support, at a minimum, the positive aspects of religions.

Agreed. I'm not one who thinks organized religion is all bad. Ideally the religions practiced today will be replaced with philosophies that maintain a sense of hope, positivity, and community building but get rid of the dogma and judgmentalism.

 

[massraider]

Perhaps religion is a part of science that isn't explained by our current scientific understanding.

Or a part of a 'science' created to explain things not explained by previous scientific understanding.

 

[jwb]

Here's the thing with this discussion. For a Christian, it should NOT matter a single bit. Why? Because if a Christian is being honest with one's self, they know that even if "homosexaul sex" isn't a sin, the person is still a sinner and that makes them just like the Christian from an eternal life perspective. Christains believe that every single person is broken and in need of salvation for an eternal life with God. The transgressions simply don't matter to God once you seek a relationship with him. This assignment of "degree" to sins is 1000000000% man made and not supported in any meaningful way in Biblical teaching. Perhaps this is what you're getting at with your final sentence GB, but it's absolutely maddening to a guy like me to watch Christians do this sort of thing. If it doesn't matter to God in terms of relationship with him, it doesn't matter to me.

I can appreciate that attitude. I think it still leaves Christians with the difficult position of whether acceptance is condoning the behavior. If it's not considered a sin, then there is no math that needs to be done.

In my view it's not difficult at all. Love the sinner not the sin. "I don't appreciate that you steal from me every chance that you get, but I still love you". The liberation from judgment that came with Jesus is one of the most underrated concepts of religion. It's not found anywhere else...not to that level anyway. If Christians are doing it right they look at every single person out there and say to themselves "they are broken, just like I am. I need to help/witness/come alongside them just as Jesus would."

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are. It's a little different than stealing.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

 

[jwb]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

I dunno, I see a difference in saying stealing is a sin, and being gay is a sin. You think it's the same?

To me, seeing being gay as a sin is wrong. Period.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

I dunno, I see a difference in saying stealing is a sin, and being gay is a sin. You think it's the same?

To me, seeing being gay as a sin is wrong. Period.

Stealing is bad of course, but the real issue is "being the kind of person who steals."

Christianity strongly directs people toward heterosexual marriage. "Being the kind of person who rebels against heterosexual marriage" is comparable in Christianity to "being the kind of person who steals." It's fundamentally about who you are, not what you do. That's why people don't like the passage where Jesus says that you're an adulterer if you so much as think about adultery. We intuitively prefer to be given lists that say "Do This" and "Don't Do That" and that's just not what Christianity is about. Collectively, the OT and NT totally reject the idea that you can be good just by following a set of rules. That's why Christians call it the "new covenant."

I understand that non-Christians will tend to not get this, because honestly a lot of Christians don't. I don't blame anyone outside our community for this.

 

[SWC]

and for a big period of time you could have said christianity strongly directs people towards being ok with the slavery of blacks or engaging in antisemitism against the jews so i guess think what you want but history tends to show the folly of such arguments take that to the bank brohans

 

[SWC]

its ok to admit that christianity has gotten it wrong a huge amount when it comes to actually living in gods image and frankly i think the more supposed christians would pick up on what god wants from us and what the bible is really about you know love instead of always trying to find lines of division and trying to condemn others so as to achieve power the better off we would be take that to the bank brohans

 

[The Gator]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

I dunno, I see a difference in saying stealing is a sin, and being gay is a sin. You think it's the same?

To me, seeing being gay as a sin is wrong. Period.

Stealing is bad of course, but the real issue is "being the kind of person who steals."

Wait, are you saying people are born stealers the same way they’re born gay?

That is preposterous if so, imo. Sorry if I misunderstood your post

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Wait, are you saying people are born stealers the same way they’re born gay?

That is preposterous if so, imo. Sorry if I misunderstood your post

Pretty much, yeah. Sorry if you that's preposterous.

Everybody likes to focus on the big-ticket "sins" that they personally don't commit. I've never murdered anybody, stolen anything, or committed adultery, and I imagine most people can say the same. Hooray for us, and how nice to not be like "those people" who are out there doing all those sins.

Then you keep reading a little further and you get to the part about not coveting and not chasing after material things, and we all start to get a lot less comfortable. Then you stop and think about whether you actually think of women like you would think of your sister, and you see a lot of guys shifting in their pews all of the sudden. This is more about who we are and how we think and less about what we do. (Not that "what we do" is irrelevant or anything).

Edit: I'm happy to talk about this idea in a non-LGBT context. I'm not interested in debating that one particular issue again.

 

[zoonation]

I disagree. It is certainly true from a theistic approach (reconciling faith and science) but I would also argue it is is true from a purely deistic approach as well. Any claim for the supernatural is antithetical to science.

Why does religion have to be "supernatural?"

Perhaps religion is a part of science that isn't explained by our current scientific understanding.

ETA: I'm not religious and have several science degrees...so I do understand what science is and isn't.

Sorry. Not following this at all.

 

[The Commish]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

I dunno, I see a difference in saying stealing is a sin, and being gay is a sin. You think it's the same?

To me, seeing being gay as a sin is wrong. Period.

I get this. I hear it all the time actually, but the reality is "degree of sin" isn't a thing with God when it comes to our relationship with him. What God expects is significantly different than what the broken world expects.

 

[pecorino]

I don't really know how to approach a topic like this, as much as I sometimes think I should weigh in, as somebody who used to fly my atheist flag high and proud around here and have come to discover in recent years that I was WRONG. And I am regretful, and humble about that, and I generally avoid the topic now because I know I don't have the words for much. And I try to stay humble, and grateful to God, above all.

I do think, tim, that true faith and reason can easily coexist, while dogma and reason usually can not.

At the end of the day it's humanity that is deeply flawed, yours truly included, and that is reflected in churches, religions, governments, and everywhere else.

How did you find your your atheist views were wrong?

There’s no way to say it without sounding loopy to a nonbeliever and with my history I totally get that. I had a spiritual awakening, not to mention a couple of supernatural experiences, that’s really the best I can offer here in response.

Thanks for answering this. I had the same thought / question as Mr Xylem. I can't speak for that poster, but in my opinion, I would love to see a new thread started with the details of your experience. If, of course, you would be comfortable sharing.

 

[Terminalxylem]

I don't really know how to approach a topic like this, as much as I sometimes think I should weigh in, as somebody who used to fly my atheist flag high and proud around here and have come to discover in recent years that I was WRONG. And I am regretful, and humble about that, and I generally avoid the topic now because I know I don't have the words for much. And I try to stay humble, and grateful to God, above all.

I do think, tim, that true faith and reason can easily coexist, while dogma and reason usually can not.

At the end of the day it's humanity that is deeply flawed, yours truly included, and that is reflected in churches, religions, governments, and everywhere else.

How did you find your your atheist views were wrong?

There’s no way to say it without sounding loopy to a nonbeliever and with my history I totally get that. I had a spiritual awakening, not to mention a couple of supernatural experiences, that’s really the best I can offer here in response.

Thanks for answering this. I had the same thought / question as Mr Xylem. I can't speak for that poster, but in my opinion, I would love to see a new thread started with the details of your experience. If, of course, you would be comfortable sharing.

Absolutely. It’s an anonymous message board, so I wouldn’t worry about being judged,

More importantly, as a converted non-believer I’d think he would want to share his experiences, to potentially help other atheists see the light.

 

[Galileo]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

I dunno, I see a difference in saying stealing is a sin, and being gay is a sin. You think it's the same?

To me, seeing being gay as a sin is wrong. Period.

I get this. I hear it all the time actually, but the reality is "degree of sin" isn't a thing with God when it comes to our relationship with him. What God expects is significantly different than what the broken world expects.

Venial vs Mortal (Cardinal) sin??

ETA...no, I am not saying stealing or being gay is an example of venial vs mortal. I am simply pointing out that degree of sin is a thing.

 

[AAABatteries]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

I dunno, I see a difference in saying stealing is a sin, and being gay is a sin. You think it's the same?

To me, seeing being gay as a sin is wrong. Period.

I get this. I hear it all the time actually, but the reality is "degree of sin" isn't a thing with God when it comes to our relationship with him. What God expects is significantly different than what the broken world expects.

Yeah, a god that sees child molesters sin the same as someone who tells a lie isn’t worth my time.

 

[plinko]

I don't really know how to approach a topic like this, as much as I sometimes think I should weigh in, as somebody who used to fly my atheist flag high and proud around here and have come to discover in recent years that I was WRONG. And I am regretful, and humble about that, and I generally avoid the topic now because I know I don't have the words for much. And I try to stay humble, and grateful to God, above all.

I do think, tim, that true faith and reason can easily coexist, while dogma and reason usually can not.

At the end of the day it's humanity that is deeply flawed, yours truly included, and that is reflected in churches, religions, governments, and everywhere else.

How did you find your your atheist views were wrong?

There’s no way to say it without sounding loopy to a nonbeliever and with my history I totally get that. I had a spiritual awakening, not to mention a couple of supernatural experiences, that’s really the best I can offer here in response.

Thanks for answering this. I had the same thought / question as Mr Xylem. I can't speak for that poster, but in my opinion, I would love to see a new thread started with the details of your experience. If, of course, you would be comfortable sharing.

Absolutely. It’s an anonymous message board, so I wouldn’t worry about being judged,

More importantly, as a converted non-believer I’d think he would want to share his experiences, to potentially help other atheists see the light.

First off, it's not completely anonymous and there are people here who know who I am. I was once the Cornhole King around these parts...

I don't think "my story" - presented as such - would do or has done me a lick of good, and would probably get me brushed off and/or mocked, I'm not saying anything about how any particular one of you would respond, as I don't know you, but it's just like telling a weird ghost story or something... at the end of it all people are going to say, "Hmm, whatever dude, anyway....."

I only brought it up because I wanted to say as a former full-on atheist, and self-proclaimed "thinker", I think the assertion that faith and reason can't coexist is completely ludicrous. It's like saying you like cake so you must hate ice cream.

Many years ago I once complained to a friend, sort of jokingly but only sort of, that I couldn't find anything I wanted to read anymore, like I had it all figured out or something, life, science, space, etc. Now that I have faith I will never run out of things to read.

Starting with scripture and accepting it as truth - even early Genesis, call it metaphor or whatever you want to - it really does add up as a lead-in to our world society today. If you wanted to talk Bible, or what some of us believers have come to know about God, I would be glad to participate in a discussion like that. But I'm not starting a thread about me, no way.

What happened to me in a nutshell is this, I ****ed around and ran into the devil.

 

[plinko]

As for the original topic, I'm completely ambivalent about "religion in America" and I don't even care. At the end of the day it's always going to be people stuff, good vs. evil, all of that. I do not think this country was ever meant to be or should be a theocracy. Religion is a personal matter, and can't be forced.

 

[Terminalxylem]

I don't really know how to approach a topic like this, as much as I sometimes think I should weigh in, as somebody who used to fly my atheist flag high and proud around here and have come to discover in recent years that I was WRONG. And I am regretful, and humble about that, and I generally avoid the topic now because I know I don't have the words for much. And I try to stay humble, and grateful to God, above all.

I do think, tim, that true faith and reason can easily coexist, while dogma and reason usually can not.

At the end of the day it's humanity that is deeply flawed, yours truly included, and that is reflected in churches, religions, governments, and everywhere else.

How did you find your your atheist views were wrong?

There’s no way to say it without sounding loopy to a nonbeliever and with my history I totally get that. I had a spiritual awakening, not to mention a couple of supernatural experiences, that’s really the best I can offer here in response.

Thanks for answering this. I had the same thought / question as Mr Xylem. I can't speak for that poster, but in my opinion, I would love to see a new thread started with the details of your experience. If, of course, you would be comfortable sharing.

Absolutely. It’s an anonymous message board, so I wouldn’t worry about being judged,

More importantly, as a converted non-believer I’d think he would want to share his experiences, to potentially help other atheists see the light.

First off, it's not completely anonymous and there are people here who know who I am. I was once the Cornhole King around these parts...

I don't think "my story" - presented as such - would do or has done me a lick of good, and would probably get me brushed off and/or mocked, I'm not saying anything about how any particular one of you would respond, as I don't know you, but it's just like telling a weird ghost story or something... at the end of it all people are going to say, "Hmm, whatever dude, anyway....."

I only brought it up because I wanted to say as a former full-on atheist, and self-proclaimed "thinker", I think the assertion that faith and reason can't coexist is completely ludicrous. It's like saying you like cake so you must hate ice cream.

Many years ago I once complained to a friend, sort of jokingly but only sort of, that I couldn't find anything I wanted to read anymore, like I had it all figured out or something, life, science, space, etc. Now that I have faith I will never run out of things to read.

Starting with scripture and accepting it as truth - even early Genesis, call it metaphor or whatever you want to - it really does add up as a lead-in to our world society today. If you wanted to talk Bible, or what some of us believers have come to know about God, I would be glad to participate in a discussion like that. But I'm not starting a thread about me, no way.

What happened to me in a nutshell is this, I ****ed around and ran into the devil.

Sorry to pressure you. Even if partially anonymous, I‘m still having a hard time understanding why you’d not want to share.

Just trying to put myself in your shoes. As an atheist, the only thing that would make me believe in a higher power is an encounter with god herself, or something else pretty miraculous. Either way, it would be nearly impossible not sharing something so earth shattering.

It’s one reason I never get irritated being proselytized by true believers. Anyone you remotely care about, and perhaps even those you don’t, should have a chance at eternal life. Who cares if people disbelieve, get irritated, or even make fun of you? It’s a small price to pay for such a potentially huge reward.

While the Bible is definitely fascinating, I’ve learned a decent amount about it already, by virtue of living in a Christian society. And I’m far too ignorant to run out of other books to read.

Testimonials of converted atheists, especially those with a scientific background, is a lot more interesting to me anyway.

As for faith and reason, I don’t think the dessert analogy applies. This sounds like it was created by AI, but lays out some of the common arguments - the bolded applies here:

Faith and reason are two concepts that have been widely discussed and debated throughout history. While some argue that faith and reason are diametrically opposed, others believe that they are complementary and can coexist. So, what is the relationship between faith and reason? Let’s explore.

Faith is often described as a belief in something that cannot be proven through empirical evidence. It is a personal, subjective experience that is often rooted in religion or spirituality. Reason, on the other hand, is the use of logic and critical thinking to arrive at a conclusion. It is objective and based on empirical evidence.

At first glance, it may seem like faith and reason are completely at odds with each other. After all, faith often requires a leap of belief, while reason demands evidence and proof. However, many philosophers argue that faith and reason are not mutually exclusive, and in fact, they can work together.

One way that faith and reason can coexist is through the concept of philosophical theology. This is the idea that God can be studied using reason and philosophical argumentation. Philosophical theologians use reason and logic to study religious concepts and try to understand them in a rational way.

Another way that faith and reason can work together is through personal experience. While faith may not be able to be proven through empirical evidence, it can still be a valid source of knowledge. Personal experiences, such as feeling the presence of God, can be powerful and transformative. These experiences may not be able to be explained or proven through reason, but they can still be valuable.

Faith and reason can also work together through the concept of moral reasoning. Many religious traditions have their own ethical codes and moral principles. Reason can be used to analyze and understand these codes, while faith can provide the motivation to follow them. In this way, faith and reason can work together to guide moral decision-making.

However, it is important to note that faith and reason can also come into conflict. When religious beliefs contradict empirical evidence, it can be challenging to reconcile the two. Additionally, there are times when reason may call into question religious beliefs or practices. These conflicts can be difficult to navigate, and may require careful consideration and thought.

In conclusion, the relationship between faith and reason is complex and multifaceted. While some may see faith and reason as opposing forces, others argue that they can coexist and even complement each other. Through philosophical theology, personal experience, and moral reasoning, faith and reason can work together to provide a deeper understanding of religious beliefs and principles.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Sorry to pressure you. Even if partially anonymous, I‘m still having a hard time understanding why you’d not want to share.

He was clear in his first post in the thread when he said, "There’s no way to say it without sounding loopy to a nonbeliever and with my history I totally get that. I had a spiritual awakening, not to mention a couple of supernatural experiences, that’s really the best I can offer here in response."

And he's since added a good bit more. When someone says that much and that they're not comfortable with more, I find it's usually best to believe them.

 

[Joe Bryant]

As for the original topic, I'm completely ambivalent about "religion in America" and I don't even care. At the end of the day it's always going to be people stuff, good vs. evil, all of that. I do not think this country was ever meant to be or should be a theocracy. Religion is a personal matter, and can't be forced.

Agreed. I often don't understand the focus on "religion in America" and the score keeping with polls is interesting. By both "sides". As mentioned earlier, Jesus seemed pretty ambivalent about it too with the render to Caesar what is Caesar's thing.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Sorry to pressure you. Even if partially anonymous, I‘m still having a hard time understanding why you’d not want to share.

He was clear in his first post in the thread when he said, "There’s no way to say it without sounding loopy to a nonbeliever and with my history I totally get that. I had a spiritual awakening, not to mention a couple of supernatural experiences, that’s really the best I can offer here in response."

And he's since added a good bit more. When someone says that much and that they're not comfortable with more, I find it's usually best to believe them.

I believe him, and not expecting any clarifying response. Just elaborating why I find that stance surprising.

On the other hand, he directly called my opinion ludicrous, yet I’m somehow out-of-line here?

 

[Joe Bryant]

On the other hand, he directly called my opinion ludicrous, yet I’m somehow out-of-line here?

Nobody said you were "out of line". I said when someone is pressured to say more than they feel comfortable with and say that they'd rather not, I usually believe them and respect that from them.

 

[plinko]

Yeah I don’t mean to start any drama here. I totally respect where you’re coming from, terminal, and appreciate how you are laying it out.

I don’t think that my personal reversion story is very easy to express and I have honestly decided I’m best off keeping it to myself. It doesn’t bother me if that bothers anyone else, or affects my credibility. For me it’s very heavy and personal. For most of you guys it would come off as whackadoodle and I don’t like putting myself in that position.

Again I didn’t come into this thread to proselytize or make it about me, I just wanted to present my side as a long time card carrying atheist who is now a 100% believer. I haven’t changed my mind about anything scientific or reason-based that I thought before, other than now I know there is a Creator and for me that has tied a lot together, and made me appreciate the gift of life a whole lot more.

As for politics my opinions haven’t changed either, but at the same time I’m wayyyy over arguing about it.

 

[Terminalxylem]

On the other hand, he directly called my opinion ludicrous, yet I’m somehow out-of-line here?

Nobody said you were "out of line". I said when someone is pressured to say more than they feel comfortable with and say that they'd rather not, I usually believe them and respect that from them.

You didn’t say it directly, but it sure sounds like you‘re telling me to drop it.

That’s what I’ll do, but any other converted atheists, please feel free to share what led to the change.

 

[The Commish]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

I dunno, I see a difference in saying stealing is a sin, and being gay is a sin. You think it's the same?

To me, seeing being gay as a sin is wrong. Period.

I get this. I hear it all the time actually, but the reality is "degree of sin" isn't a thing with God when it comes to our relationship with him. What God expects is significantly different than what the broken world expects.

Venial vs Mortal (Cardinal) sin??

ETA...no, I am not saying stealing or being gay is an example of venial vs mortal. I am simply pointing out that degree of sin is a thing.

This is all human construct. Nothing Biblical about this. Being a liar renders you lacking just like being a murderer does in God's eyes. Please notice that I am talking specifically about relationship with God and the spiritual life.

 

[plinko]

TS Eliot’s conversion story is a more reasonable and conventionally laid out read (or watch - decent movie came out recently)

At my age and conviction in my flawed opinions, I was shocked into believing, and that’s what it took for me, and even saying as much as I have on that matter makes me feel weird and self-conscious but it’s a fact. I am extremely remorseful and embarrassed for the way I used to pile on Christians around here.

 

[Captain Cranks]

That’s what I’ll do, but any other converted atheists, please feel free to share what led to the change.

I've never needed a god and have noticed a pattern where those who did need one to escape a rut tell me I need one too. I understand the motivation. When I've been introduced to something that makes my life better, I'm excited to tell others about it too. However, not everyone has the same experience or the same needs. As the saying goes, "not all who wander are lost."

ETA - I'm not suggesting that's plinko's story. Just my own experience with converts.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I understand the motivation. When I've been introduced to something that makes my life better, I'm excited to tell others about it too.

It certainly isn't always this way, but I think when Christians (and anyone) are being the best version of themselves, that's the motivation.

Penn Gillette of Penn and Teller is an Atheist and had a similar perspective several years back, https://youtu.be/6md638smQd8?si=9D9_47s5tbVZ75qe

 

[Joe Bryant]

I'll say again what I said earlier - thank you for folks being kind and thoughtful as we discuss a topic that often isn't discussed that way. Thank y'all.

 

[dgreen]

Many years ago I once complained to a friend, sort of jokingly but only sort of, that I couldn't find anything I wanted to read anymore, like I had it all figured out or something, life, science, space, etc. Now that I have faith I will never run out of things to read.

What are some of the things you are reading?

 

[dgreen]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

I dunno, I see a difference in saying stealing is a sin, and being gay is a sin. You think it's the same?

To me, seeing being gay as a sin is wrong. Period.

I get this. I hear it all the time actually, but the reality is "degree of sin" isn't a thing with God when it comes to our relationship with him. What God expects is significantly different than what the broken world expects.

Yeah, a god that sees child molesters sin the same as someone who tells a lie isn’t worth my time.

I think this theology gets misapplied at times. The idea of separation sometimes leads to the idea that God must hate each sin the same or see them all as equally damaging. I'm not sure that's true.

Hebrew has different words for doing something wrong. A helpful image is a path. Sin is stepping off the path. Iniquity is distorting the path. Transgression is abandoning the path, Another word (often translated "guilt") is neglecting the path. And evil/wickedness is destroying the path and disrupting shalom. I'm not sure God sees destruction of the path the same as stepping off the path. Why use different words with different imagery if they are all the same?

Now, I absolutely believe that God allows all people back on the path if they so choose. That's repentance, a return to where you belong. And I can understand if that's something that also leads you to not think a god like that is worth your time. Because that says a child molester has the same opportunity as someone who tells a lie to repent and get back on the path doing the work of God. And I think that's something that is so incredibly radical about God and makes even the most faithful squirm a bit.

This isn't an easy topic and it is worth questioning and discussing. My views on this have changed over time and I expect they will continue to change.

 

[plinko]

Many years ago I once complained to a friend, sort of jokingly but only sort of, that I couldn't find anything I wanted to read anymore, like I had it all figured out or something, life, science, space, etc. Now that I have faith I will never run out of things to read.

What are some of the things you are reading?

Right now I’m reading a book about the theology of St. Ignacious. Somewhat challenging. For something a little less Catholic, Michael S Heiser (RIP) has written some pretty eye opening stuff about spiritual warfare such as The Unseen Realm. Watchman Nee is also becoming a favorite of mine, I’ve always appreciated takes on spirituality coming from that part of the world.

 

[dgreen]

Many years ago I once complained to a friend, sort of jokingly but only sort of, that I couldn't find anything I wanted to read anymore, like I had it all figured out or something, life, science, space, etc. Now that I have faith I will never run out of things to read.

What are some of the things you are reading?

Right now I’m reading a book about the theology of St. Ignacious. Somewhat challenging. For something a little less Catholic, Michael S Heiser (RIP) has written some pretty eye opening stuff about spiritual warfare such as The Unseen Realm. Watchman Nee is also becoming a favorite of mine, I’ve always appreciated takes on spirituality coming from that part of the world.

I've heard great things about The Unseen Realm. I've listened to a few episodes of The Naked Bible Podcast and enjoyed what I've heard from Heiser.

 

[plinko]

Many years ago I once complained to a friend, sort of jokingly but only sort of, that I couldn't find anything I wanted to read anymore, like I had it all figured out or something, life, science, space, etc. Now that I have faith I will never run out of things to read.

What are some of the things you are reading?

Right now I’m reading a book about the theology of St. Ignacious. Somewhat challenging. For something a little less Catholic, Michael S Heiser (RIP) has written some pretty eye opening stuff about spiritual warfare such as The Unseen Realm. Watchman Nee is also becoming a favorite of mine, I’ve always appreciated takes on spirituality coming from that part of the world.

I've heard great things about The Unseen Realm. I've listened to a few episodes of The Naked Bible Podcast and enjoyed what I've heard from Heiser.

Yeah he could go on and on but some seriously stuff sometimes.

Again catholic but Fulton Sheen’s autobiography was pretty moving to me

 

[IvanKaramazov]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

I dunno, I see a difference in saying stealing is a sin, and being gay is a sin. You think it's the same?

To me, seeing being gay as a sin is wrong. Period.

I get this. I hear it all the time actually, but the reality is "degree of sin" isn't a thing with God when it comes to our relationship with him. What God expects is significantly different than what the broken world expects.

Yeah, a god that sees child molesters sin the same as someone who tells a lie isn’t worth my time.

I think this theology gets misapplied at times. The idea of separation sometimes leads to the idea that God must hate each sin the same or see them all as equally damaging. I'm not sure that's true.

Hebrew has different words for doing something wrong. A helpful image is a path. Sin is stepping off the path. Iniquity is distorting the path. Transgression is abandoning the path, Another word (often translated "guilt") is neglecting the path. And evil/wickedness is destroying the path and disrupting shalom. I'm not sure God sees destruction of the path the same as stepping off the path. Why use different words with different imagery if they are all the same?

Now, I absolutely believe that God allows all people back on the path if they so choose. That's repentance, a return to where you belong. And I can understand if that's something that also leads you to not think a god like that is worth your time. Because that says a child molester has the same opportunity as someone who tells a lie to repent and get back on the path doing the work of God. And I think that's something that is so incredibly radical about God and makes even the most faithful squirm a bit.

This isn't an easy topic and it is worth questioning and discussing. My views on this have changed over time and I expect they will continue to change.

This is also one of those things that can be framed a couple of different ways depending on what the speaker wants to emphasize.

One way to put it is that God sees a child molester's sin as being the same as yours. That sounds awfully harsh. I mean, sure, I probably shouldn't have flipped off that guy in traffic the other day, but that's not the same thing as child molestation. Come on now. And of course there's a totally valid point here about how different types of transgressions have different levels of harm. If I had to choose between somebody flipping me off on the highway vs. somebody punching me in the face, obviously I'd opt for the bird and so would everyone else. But the point remains that flipping off another driver is a bad, and when I flipped that guy off, I was face-punching him in my heart, etc. This is an important point that people don't want to hear: just because you don't molest kids or rob elderly people on the street doesn't mean you are a good person. The bar is much higher than that. Impossibly high, actually.

Another way to put it is that if God is interested in the spiritual well-being of child molesters, then my problems are probably fixable too. I like that way of framing it much better. Plus, if you can really take this lesson to heart, it has the side effect of making you more compassionate toward people who are incarcerated for whatever reason. Don't get me wrong, I'm not under any illusions about the spiritual status of the median maximum security inmate, and I think society should properly segregate criminals from everyone else. Prisons exist for a reason, and some people absolutely belong there. But when you start seeing those people as folks whose life has not ended and as people who still have a shot at redemption sitting there right in front of them, it changes one's outlook a bit.

 

[Captain Cranks]

This is an important point that people don't want to hear: just because you don't molest kids or rob elderly people on the street doesn't mean you are a good person.

It's not about not wanting to hear it. It's just not a philosophy I want any part of.

 

[Joe Bryant]

This is also one of those things that can be framed a couple of different ways depending on what the speaker wants to emphasize.

One way to put it is that God sees a child molester's sin as being the same as yours. That sounds awfully harsh. I mean, sure, I probably shouldn't have flipped off that guy in traffic the other day, but that's not the same thing as child molestation. Come on now. And of course there's a totally valid point here about how different types of transgressions have different levels of harm. If I had to choose between somebody flipping me off on the highway vs. somebody punching me in the face, obviously I'd opt for the bird and so would everyone else. But the point remains that flipping off another driver is a bad, and when I flipped that guy off, I was face-punching him in my heart, etc. This is an important point that people don't want to hear: just because you don't molest kids or rob elderly people on the street doesn't mean you are a good person. The bar is much higher than that. Impossibly high, actually.

Another way to put it is that if God is interested in the spiritual well-being of child molesters, then my problems are probably fixable too. I like that way of framing it much better. Plus, if you can really take this lesson to heart, it has the side effect of making you more compassionate toward people who are incarcerated for whatever reason. Don't get me wrong, I'm not under any illusions about the spiritual status of the median maximum security inmate, and I think society should properly segregate criminals from everyone else. Prisons exist for a reason, and some people absolutely belong there. But when you start seeing those people as folks whose life has not ended and as people who still have a shot at redemption sitting there right in front of them, it changes one's outlook a bit.

I always took this more from the other direction. Not so much that everything bad is the same. More from the other side that for a Christian, outside of Jesus, it doesn't matter how "good" you think you are. We've all fallen short of the standard.

Jesus used this angle a good bit confronting the pious religious leaders of the day.

That can also get into an interesting different area of faith vs works. Which is fascinating I think.

 

[dgreen]

But in this case, the "sin" is how someone was born, and who they are.

It's like that in every case.

I dunno, I see a difference in saying stealing is a sin, and being gay is a sin. You think it's the same?

To me, seeing being gay as a sin is wrong. Period.

I get this. I hear it all the time actually, but the reality is "degree of sin" isn't a thing with God when it comes to our relationship with him. What God expects is significantly different than what the broken world expects.

Yeah, a god that sees child molesters sin the same as someone who tells a lie isn’t worth my time.

I think this theology gets misapplied at times. The idea of separation sometimes leads to the idea that God must hate each sin the same or see them all as equally damaging. I'm not sure that's true.

Hebrew has different words for doing something wrong. A helpful image is a path. Sin is stepping off the path. Iniquity is distorting the path. Transgression is abandoning the path, Another word (often translated "guilt") is neglecting the path. And evil/wickedness is destroying the path and disrupting shalom. I'm not sure God sees destruction of the path the same as stepping off the path. Why use different words with different imagery if they are all the same?

Now, I absolutely believe that God allows all people back on the path if they so choose. That's repentance, a return to where you belong. And I can understand if that's something that also leads you to not think a god like that is worth your time. Because that says a child molester has the same opportunity as someone who tells a lie to repent and get back on the path doing the work of God. And I think that's something that is so incredibly radical about God and makes even the most faithful squirm a bit.

This isn't an easy topic and it is worth questioning and discussing. My views on this have changed over time and I expect they will continue to change.

This is also one of those things that can be framed a couple of different ways depending on what the speaker wants to emphasize.

One way to put it is that God sees a child molester's sin as being the same as yours. That sounds awfully harsh. I mean, sure, I probably shouldn't have flipped off that guy in traffic the other day, but that's not the same thing as child molestation. Come on now. And of course there's a totally valid point here about how different types of transgressions have different levels of harm. If I had to choose between somebody flipping me off on the highway vs. somebody punching me in the face, obviously I'd opt for the bird and so would everyone else. But the point remains that flipping off another driver is a bad, and when I flipped that guy off, I was face-punching him in my heart, etc. This is an important point that people don't want to hear: just because you don't molest kids or rob elderly people on the street doesn't mean you are a good person. The bar is much higher than that. Impossibly high, actually.

Another way to put it is that if God is interested in the spiritual well-being of child molesters, then my problems are probably fixable too. I like that way of framing it much better. Plus, if you can really take this lesson to heart, it has the side effect of making you more compassionate toward people who are incarcerated for whatever reason. Don't get me wrong, I'm not under any illusions about the spiritual status of the median maximum security inmate, and I think society should properly segregate criminals from everyone else. Prisons exist for a reason, and some people absolutely belong there. But when you start seeing those people as folks whose life has not ended and as people who still have a shot at redemption sitting there right in front of them, it changes one's outlook a bit.

I love the focus on becoming more compassionate. It's that horrible, good-for-nothing Samaritan who showed compassion for the nearly dead man. Compassion is important to turning things around.

 

[dgreen]

This is an important point that people don't want to hear: just because you don't molest kids or rob elderly people on the street doesn't mean you are a good person.

It's not about not wanting to hear it. It's just not a philosophy I want any part of.

I get that. I wrestle with the common Christian focus that we aren't good. I think Genesis 1 is telling us we are good. We have the capacity to do good and be good. At the same time, I agree with what's being discussed about the dangers of comparing ourselves to others and considering ourselves better than others. That's a dangerous game.