Losing my atheism (my new spiritual journey)

[9-10ths_Penguin]

For example, If you were guaranteed that by living your life, according to the teachings of Jesus Christ, that you could know that there is a continuation to mortality, immortality, then wouldn't you go for it? You currently have that promise. God has made that promise to you, and everyone that lives today. Why wouldn't you at least try it, test him on what he has promised. It seem logical to me, therefore, when I am debating with those who refuse to at leasg try it, I feel Godly Sorrow for them, compassion, and yes, pity.That is not a negative, or even an insult, it is pure compassion and love for others.

So... you think that "live as if this is true until you die and then see what happens" is a good way to test an idea and you can't understand why everyone doesn't agree with you? Really?

 

[Serenity7855]

So... you think that "live as if this is true until you die and then see what happens" is a good way to test an idea and you can't understand why everyone doesn't agree with you? Really?

If you live as though it is true until you die and then see what happens, as you have said, your reward will be consistent with your efforts. You have to live knowing, as much as is possible, that it is true, How? If you sincerely try to find out if it is true, by living a Christian lifestyle, and following the admonition of James, then God promises that the Holy Ghost will testify to your soul that it is true. I know this because I have received the testimony of the Holy Ghost. There is no necessity for me to wait for death to convince me. If, when I die, it is not true, which is highly unlikely, then I will not care, l will be dead. If it is true, then I will be in seventh heaven. For the atheist, they have to be compassionately pitied, as they lose regardless, and all because they would not test God on what he promised. Now, that deserves sincere pity.

"Everyone doesn't agree with me?" Who is everyone, only no one has said that, but if they did, surely that would be a good thing, wouldn't it? You cannot debate when everyone agrees with each other.

 

[skl]

If you live as though it is true until you die and then see what happens, as you have said, your reward will be consistent with your efforts. You have to live knowing, as much as is possible, that it is true, How? If you sincerely try to find out if it is true, by living a Christian lifestyle, and following the admonition of James, then God promises that the Holy Ghost will testify to your soul that it is true. I know this because I have received the testimony of the Holy Ghost. There is no necessity for me to wait for death to convince me. If, when I die, it is not true, which is highly unlikely, then I will not care, l will be dead. If it is true, then I will be in seventh heaven. For the atheist, they have to be compassionately pitied, as they lose regardless, and all because they would not test God on what he promised. Now, that deserves sincere pity.

"Everyone doesn't agree with me?" Who is everyone, only no one has said that, but if they did, surely that would be a good thing, wouldn't it? You cannot debate when everyone agrees with each other.

Please tell me what happens when you receive the testimony of the Holy Ghost. Do you talk to it and how do you know it is real? Won't you also be disappointed when you die?.....doh I mean the chances of heaven and hell being true are negligible and you will have wasted so much time reading the bible, praying, worshiping and spreading the fallacy.

 

[Jumi]

I was not demonstrating compassion or pity for those who you quote me as saying "people who don't have their heads screwed on right enough to want to bet on an afterlife." I was asking a question, i was not making a statement. I actually said "Surely if you have your head screwed on you would at the very least try". You have misrepresented me by incorrectly quoting me.

My apologies if I have misrepresented you, but for me that still reads more like a statement. And no, I don't think trying is something that comes to mind first. Why not try some other religion to see if their claims are correct also or instead?

Consider, if you will, my position. I am a converted Christian. Whether you believe me ot not, I believe that I have something that I think would benefit every single person on this earth. My natural instinct encourages me to share it with everyone, even to shout it from the roof tops. I no longer do that as, for some reason, there are those who just do not want what I have, and I must respect that, however, I naturally pity, or, have compassion, for those who do not have, or want, the precious gift that I have.

Anyone who feels like they have discovered something useful for many people will likely feel as you do. You can advise people to have healthier lifestyle or views, but they won't. Either they don't believe you or they just want to continue as they have to the end. So that view is understandable, since you really believe what you say. But for people who don't want it, there's no use for pity and they will dislike you for it if you tell them you pity them.

For example, If you were guaranteed that by living your life, according to the teachings of Jesus Christ, that you could know that there is a continuation to mortality, immortality, then wouldn't you go for it? You currently have that promise. God has made that promise to you, and everyone that lives today. Why wouldn't you at least try it, test him on what he has promised. It seem logical to me, therefore, when I am debating with those who refuse to at leasg try it,

Then I would have to believe that the teachings of Jesus were in the Bible or if the Gnostics were right instead of the early Christian and the later Catholics and Orthodox?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If you live as though it is true until you die and then see what happens, as you have said, your reward will be consistent with your efforts. You have to live knowing, as much as is possible, that it is true, How? If you sincerely try to find out if it is true, by living a Christian lifestyle, and following the admonition of James, then God promises that the Holy Ghost will testify to your soul that it is true. I know this because I have received the testimony of the Holy Ghost. There is no necessity for me to wait for death to convince me.

I suspect that when you talk about "the Holy Ghost testifying to your soul that it is true", you're really just talking about a gut feeling. How would I go about telling whether it's meaningful?

Consider your approach in another context: what if I told you that I had a new super-diet: give up all the food you eat and replace them with my special, nutritionally-balanced pills. I guarantee that they'll double your lifespan. I can't give you any studies or objective evidence to back this up, but if you stop eating food and only take my super-diet pills, you'll feel healthier, so you'll know they really will double your life. Are you in?

If, when I die, it is not true, which is highly unlikely, then I will not care, l will be dead. If it is true, then I will be in seventh heaven. For the atheist, they have to be compassionately pitied, as they lose regardless, and all because they would not test God on what he promised. Now, that deserves sincere pity.

If you're wrong, and if "living a Christian lifestyle" means a meaningful difference from not being Christian, then you'll have wasted the only life you'll ever have. Every time there was a difference between the "Christian" thing to do and what you would have thought was the right thing to do if you weren't Christian, you would have made the wrong decision. Do you care about the possibility of a lifetime of wrong decisions? I would.

"Everyone doesn't agree with me?" Who is everyone, only no one has said that, but if they did, surely that would be a good thing, wouldn't it? You cannot debate when everyone agrees with each other.

You seemed puzzled by the fact that people don't see what you're proposing as as good an idea as you do. That's what I'm getting at.

 

[Muffled]

I believe it is not just the mathematical but also the laws of science. Different sizes of atomic structure mean diffrent elements and those element combine in rational ways. Then there is DNA which is such an intricate relationship of elements. Lastly is a mystery to me and that is the coipying of one cell into the production of a new cell. Does a cell come with a plan to copy itself?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe it is not just the mathematical but also the laws of science. Different sizes of atomic structure mean diffrent elements and those element combine in rational ways. Then there is DNA which is such an intricate relationship of elements. Lastly is a mystery to me and that is the coipying of one cell into the production of a new cell. Does a cell come with a plan to copy itself?

Surely a being who is intricate, complex, and precise enough to shape subatomic particles and "program" DNA could not exist without being designed.

 

[Serenity7855]

I suspect that when you talk about "the Holy Ghost testifying to your soul that it is true", you're really just talking about a gut feeling. How would I go about telling whether it's meaningful?

To anybody, who has not been blessed with the Holy Ghost, I can understand how they might think that, but, no, it cannot be mistaken with any kind of human emotion. It is a separate and distinct force that enters the body, engulfing every cell therein, and communicating with it. If our spirits are to be found intertwined with the fabric of our being, which is my belief, it is as though the spirit of God is communicating with another spirit, our spirit, at such a speed that it defies any kind of communication known to man. It is instant and conceptual, filled with an inexplicable rational emotion, but I am not sure how to describe it, other then a pure knowledge and Intellegence, flowing through your body, giving you information, in an instant, that was not before known to you, and I do not mean what the cure to cancer is, but what is our purpose here, why have I lost my job and does my wife truly love me. One thing it is not, for me at least, is a voice in the head, or a whispering in the ear. Such a physical communication would be deemed as archaic once you have experienced the influence of the Holy Ghost. When it leaves you then you know that your body is no longer in communication with it, you get a kind of stupor of thought and that which it wants you to know stands out in your mind like embossed lettering. I once asked the Holy Ghost, in a prayer of fasting, if I should return to university to take a Chemistry degree. The revelation lasted but for a few second, yet took me over a half an hour to verbalise it, even longer to write it down. There can be no mistaking a communication with the Holy Ghost.

Consider your approach in another context: what if I told you that I had a new super-diet: give up all the food you eat and replace them with my special, nutritionally-balanced pills. I guarantee that they'll double your lifespan. I can't give you any studies or objective evidence to back this up, but if you stop eating food and only take my super-diet pills, you'll feel healthier, so you'll know they really will double your life. Are you in?

Oh, I really do not like straw men arguments, as they never quite match the original concept. Like, no such pill would be allowed without stringent testing, there would need to be reems of test results. Sadly, many people would have a go. Those who are familiar with the processes to produce such a pill would not. But I failed to see the argument that you portray. Testing God can produce no nasty physical side affects, however, taking untested pills can.

If you're wrong, and if "living a Christian lifestyle" means a meaningful difference from not being Christian, then you'll have wasted the only life you'll ever have. Every time there was a difference between the "Christian" thing to do and what you would have thought was the right thing to do if you weren't Christian, you would have made the wrong decision. Do you care about the possibility of a lifetime of wrong decisions? I would.

Why do you make a distinction between what a christian would do and what a non-christian would do? Shouldn't they be synonymous. Objective morality exists outside of any and all religions. It is universal and not confined to just religion. We should all be living a moralisticly based lifestyle anyway. What is taught in scriptures is the way in which all of society should live their lives. That they do not necessitates religion to guide and direct us. How can that process be a waste of anybodies time? There will be no Catholics in Heaven, no Born Again's or Mormons. We will all stand or fall on our own choices. If you take a man in the Methodist Church who has lived his life striving to keep the principles of the Gospel, and then take an atheist, who is equally as righteous, would you expect the Methodist to gain entry into the Kingdom of God and the atheist to be locked outside of the pearly gates? I would be interested in your reply, baring in mind, that Christianity is a lifestyle. We do not enter the kingdom of God in congregations, we enter it alone, have attain that level by our own merits. God judges the individuals, one by one, not the congregations for being a Mormon or a Presbyterian.

You seemed puzzled by the fact that people don't see what you're proposing as as good an idea as you do. That's what I'm getting at

Of course I don't. If you were standing in my shoes, in possession of what I possess, wouldn't you be puzzled to?

 

[Serenity7855]

Please tell me what happens when you receive the testimony of the Holy Ghost. Do you talk to it and how do you know it is real? Won't you also be disappointed when you die?.....doh I mean the chances of heaven and hell being true are negligible and you will have wasted so much time reading the bible, praying, worshiping and spreading the fallacy.

To anybody, who has not been blessed with the Holy Ghost, I can understand how they might think that, but, no, it cannot be mistaken with any kind of human emotion. It is a separate and distinct force that enters the body, engulfing every cell therein, and communicating with it. If our spirits are to be found intertwined with the fabric of our being, which is my belief, it is as though the spirit of God is communicating with another spirit, our spirit, at such a speed that it defies any kind of communication known to man. It is instant and conceptual, filled with an inexplicable rational emotion, but I am not sure how to describe it, other then a pure knowledge and Intellegence flowing through your body, giving you information, in an instant, that was not before known to you, and I do not mean what the cure to cancer is, but what is our purpose here, why have I lost my job and does my wife truly love me. One thing it is not, for me at least, is a voice in the head, or a whispering in the ear. Such a physical communication would be deemed as archaic once you have experienced the influence of the Holy Ghost. When it leaves you then you know that your body is no longer in communication with it, you get a kind of stupor of thought and that which it wants you to know stands out in your mind like embossed lettering. I once asked the Holy Ghost, in a prayer of fasting, if I should return to university to take a Chemistry degree. The revelation lasted but for a few second, yet took me over a half an hour to verbalise it, even longer to write it down. There can be no mistaking a communication with the Holy Ghost.

 

[brokensymmetry]

What I find interesting about this thread, as I have had a lot of time to contemplate this issue, is how emotionally invested people get in whether or not someone agrees with them about the question of God's existence. It goes far beyond whether or not we have amusing and interesting discussions. Why is it so emotionally gratifying to think someone is joining our side (particularly if we have been talking with them directly)? Why is there a sense of betrayal if someone leave our side? If you consider, 'side' here means whether or not someone is an atheist or theist, a factual question, it seems peculiar.

 

[Serenity7855]

My apologies if I have misrepresented you, but for me that still reads more like a statement. And no, I don't think trying is something that comes to mind first. Why not try some other religion to see if their claims are correct also or instead?

Oh, I am certain that it was not done with malice.

Well, the claims of other religions might be true, I do not know that. Christianity is a lifestyle choice. By living that lifestyle one conditions themselves to live a morally bound existence. Who are we to say that the Hindu does not attain that same level of morality that will give him access into Heaven. I think it is pretty naive to believe that heaven will only contain Christians, but don't read anything into that, I am speculating. I have no evidence to substantiate my speculation, it just seems logical to me.

Anyone who feels like they have discovered something useful for many people will likely feel as you do. You can advise people to have healthier lifestyle or views, but they won't. Either they don't believe you or they just want to continue as they have to the end. So that view is understandable, since you really believe what you say. But for people who don't want it, there's no use for pity and they will dislike you for it if you tell them you pity them.

I totally agree, however, I do not recall ever telling someone that I pity them. Pity is an emotion that most of us cannot help feeling whenever you feel that someone has lost out on something, been treated unfairly, or have been dealt bad hands in life. There may well be a few who do not feel it, however, it is something that just happens for most people.

Then I would have to believe that the teachings of Jesus were in the Bible

Well, yes, they are.

.....or if the Gnostics were right instead of the early Christian and the later Catholics and Orthodox?

Me to. When the last disciple died he took with him the keys of the priesthood, after the order of the son of God. We then entered the dark ages of christianity, where nobody had the authority to act in the name of God. The early church was corrupt and blasphemous.

I think that their is some truth in the gnostic belief, however, their is a lot missing and far too many assumptions.

 

[Serenity7855]

What I find interesting about this thread, as I have had a lot of time to contemplate this issue, is how emotionally invested people get in whether or not someone agrees with them about the question of God's existence. It goes far beyond whether or not we have amusing and interesting discussions. Why is it so emotionally gratifying to think someone is joining our side (particularly if we have been talking with them directly)? Why is there a sense of betrayal if someone leave our side? If you consider, 'side' here means whether or not someone is an atheist or theist, a factual question, it seems peculiar.

Oh, I think that is reasonably simple to explain. I do not yearn to have people on my side, however, I would be lying if I said that I did not welcome it with open arms. When you sincerely believe that you have something that is good, the first thing you want to do is share it with friends, family and the world. You want them on side because you want them to be as happy as you feel. That is what is emotionally gratifying, that you have made someone happy,just like a comedian loves to make people laugh. If you lose that, it is not a sense of betrayal, it is a feeling of failure, disappointment or pity. I have six children. All brought up as christians. Three of them remained christians and three are atheists. I do not feel betrayed by them, it is what they want, however, I do feel sad and hope and pray that they will come back, on their terms, not mine, one day.

 

[JustWondering]

What is your sample size? That is, what is the relationship between the area we can observe, and the area "all of reality" which god claims and counter claims are being made about? Until you know your sample size, you have no idea how relevant our observations are to reality as a whole.

A key problem for many (not all) atheist ideologues is that they are so intent on rejecting god proposals that they can't be bothered to understand the proposal they are intent on rejecting.

God ideas are typically proposals about the fundamental nature of all reality. Usually they claim that all of reality arises from and is governed by some form of hyper-intelligence.

I completely agree that such God claims are totally unproven, but also claim that our ability to debunk such claims is also totally unproven.

But none of this matters to committed ideologues on either side. Issues like sample size don't interest them at all, even the science worshiping ideologues. They will keep on arguing for even more centuries, despite any evidence that such a debate accomplishes anything at all, because conflict is the goal they seek, and arguing is embraced for it's own sake.

Whether the universe as we know it came about by natural means or was created by an intelligent being of great power is a moot point. My sample area is Earth. When was the last time you saw gods mucking about in human affairs? If theists cannot produce evidence (or even a reasonable argument) to back their claims then I don't have to take them seriously.

 

[Serenity7855]

Whether the universe as we know it came about by natural means or was created by an intelligent being of great power is a moot point. My sample area is Earth. When was the last time you saw gods mucking about in human affairs? If theists cannot produce evidence (or even a reasonable argument) to back their claims then I don't have to take them seriously.

Very true. If I were you I wouldn't hang around a place where they might ask you to take them seriously

 

[JoStories]

I was not demonstrating compassion or pity for those who you quote me as saying "people who don't have their heads screwed on right enough to want to bet on an afterlife." I was asking a question, i was not making a statement. I actually said "Surely if you have your head screwed on you would at the very least try". You have misrepresented me by incorrectly quoting me.

Actually, pity may well be there, however, it is in the form of an expression of compassion. Consider, if you will, my position. I am a converted Christian. Whether you believe me ot not, I believe that I have something that I think would benefit every single person on this earth. My natural instinct encourages me to share it with everyone, even to shout it from the roof tops. I no longer do that as, for some reason, there are those who just do not want what I have, and I must respect that, however, I naturally pity, or, have compassion, for those who do not have, or want, the precious gift that I have. For example, If you were guaranteed that by living your life, according to the teachings of Jesus Christ, that you could know that there is a continuation to mortality, immortality, then wouldn't you go for it? You currently have that promise. God has made that promise to you, and everyone that lives today. Why wouldn't you at least try it, test him on what he has promised. It seem logical to me, therefore, when I am debating with those who refuse to at leasg try it, I feel Godly Sorrow for them, compassion, and yes, pity.That is not a negative, or even an insult, it is pure compassion and love for others.

you state that you know there is more to life after death. However, there are plenty who believe that and don't follow your faith. For example, many eastern fsiths believe in reincarnation or something similar and don't need the conditions of your faith. I am one of those. I could ask you why you don't wish to consider a Buddhist path when you say that people should 'try your faith'. But I suspect you would at the very least dismiss me if not scoff. Can you not see this?

 

[JoStories]

Very true. If I were you I wouldn't hang around a place where they might ask you to take them seriously

Why would I not take justwondering seriously? Why would I not take any of the posters here seriously? You see see how dismissive that kind of statement is to others?

 

[Serenity7855]

you state that you know there is more to life after death.

Yes, I do.

However, there are plenty who believe that and don't follow your faith.

That is very true

For example, many eastern fsiths believe in reincarnation or something similar and don't need the conditions of your faith. I am one of those.

And I am very happy for you.

I could ask you why you don't wish to consider a Buddhist path when you say that people should 'try your faith'.

You could ask me, and I would have to do some introspective analysis. I suppose that the answer is geography. If I was in the right place at the right time I may have become a Buddhist.

But I suspect you would at the very least dismiss me if not scoff. Can you not see this?

You judge me incorrectly. Christianity is a lifestyle. By keeping to its precepts and principles one can attain a level of existence that would allow for entry into heaven. My personal opinion is that the level necessary can be reached whether as a Christian, Buddhist or Muslim. I believe that heaven, whatever that may be, will be filled with individuals from all religious beliefs. The importance lies within the level of righteousness attained. But that is my belief. It is not Christian doctrine. If we believe that God is a fair and just God, it can be no other way.

 

[Serenity7855]

Why would I not take justwondering seriously?

No reason. If he is saying what you want to hear.

Why would I not take any of the posters here seriously?

Again No reason. If he is saying what you want to hear.

You see see how dismissive that kind of statement is to others?

"JustWondering was asking If theists cannot produce evidence (or even a reasonable argument) to back their claims then I don't have to take them seriously. He is right. He doesn't have to take them seriously, therefore, if he didn't want to take them seriously then perhaps this is not the best place for him to be

 

[JoStories]

No reason. If he is saying what you want to hear.



Again No reason. If he is saying what you want to hear.



"JustWondering was asking If theists cannot produce evidence (or even a reasonable argument) to back their claims then I don't have to take them seriously. He is right. He doesn't have to take them seriously, therefore, if he didn't want to take them seriously then perhaps this is not the best place for him to be

This is a forum for anyone, and that includes atheists. Did it occur to you that it might interest him, for whatever his or her reasons might be. That is why I said all peoples should be respected. It's one of the things about Buddhism that I love, respect and compassion for everyone, or iow, the sanctity of life. What makes you think this is a forum for just theists? It is not. It is for everyone with an interest, and if you cannot respect that, perhaps it would be best if you just put him or her on ignore?

 

[JoStories]

Yes, I do.



That is very true



And I am very happy for you.



You could ask me, and I would have to do some introspective analysis. I suppose that the answer is geography. If I was in the right place at the right time I may have become a Buddhist.



You judge me incorrectly. Christianity is a lifestyle. By keeping to its precepts and principles one can attain a level of existence that would allow for entry into heaven. My personal opinion is that the level necessary can be reached whether as a Christian, Buddhist or Muslim. I believe that heaven, whatever that may be, will be filled with individuals from all religious beliefs. The importance lies within the level of righteousness attained. But that is my belief. It is not Christian doctrine. If we believe that God is a fair and just God, it can be no other way.

I can respect that but I don't believe in 'heaven'. Most Buddhists believe in first a place called the Bardo state and then reincarnation. Not all mind, but many. I can only hope that everyone would respect that and understand that religious views are as varied as there are people.