Open Forums for ExChristian.Net [Powered by Invision Power Board]

Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format

Open Forums for ExChristian.Net > Debating with Christians > Which would make more sense?

Posted by: Warren Dec 8 2004, 06:29 AM

I was a fundamentalist Christian for nearly half my life which totals about 20 years of being "saved" and another 15 or so being groomed to be saved. You see, I was born in the Christian saturated Caribbean (thanks to the British), deep in the country regions of St. Kitts (was actually born in St.Thomas) where 30+ years ago, superstitions ran deep. Before I took my first dump, my grandmother was already reading a Bible to me and "setting the foundation" (as Christians love to say) for me to "come to Christ" later on so that in doing so, she was training a child "in the way he should go."

Well it worked because by 14 I was on a church pew asking Jesus to save me with much persuasion of course with bad breath folks all up in my ears imploring me to ask Jesus to come into my heart and all that penitent prayer bullshit!

Since I have a VERY curious mind and like to have perspective I naturally gravitated toward history. I just have to know why I do what I do, follow certain traditions, believe certain things so part of my Christian life was an obsession with religious history. By the time I was 20 and living in New York City, I had amassed a huge library of concordances, lexicons, cross reference bibles, bible dictionaries. books on end time prophecies and apologetics and others from well known Christian authors. I read/studied through the Bible 4 times, skipping NOTHING even down to the boring "begats" of I Chronicles. To this day you can cite a biblical verse and I can find it within seconds if I don't remember chapter and verse.

Now to get to the questions I posed. I noticed that there were a few times I implored other Christian friends to read through the Bible with me, as late as 10 years ago. It became clearly evident to me after going through 4 churches that many Christians HATE to read (well the general population in fact) their Bibles. I'm not trying to imply none of them read it, but the great majority of them on this side of the world prefer to read the New Testament OR the Psalms and that is about it and the rest crack it open only when the pastor says to do so. I've heard these excuses:

"I'm a Christian and the New Testament is for Christians."

"I can't read all that boring "begat stuff" in the Old Testament."

"The Old Testament was a different era under the law and I am NOT under the law."

So with this in mind, I asked "which makes more sense?" To read and study the entire Bible and THEN make a decision whether to or not to serve the god it presents OR accept the god it presents and then go back and read the Bible? I went ahead and pointed out that we all know it makes far more sense to read a contract before we sign it or to get a clear understanding of what it is we are signing away at, but that when it comes to the bible and biblegod, many accept biblegod first and then go back and try to read the bible. This them explains why so many ex-Christians like myself eventually reject the Christian faith only AFTER really reading the Bible, reading the nonsense, flirting with the doubts for weeks, months, years before coming to a point where we stop kidding ourselves and dropping it like a bad habit. If pastors told people to go home and read the books of Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua and Judges and NOTHING else and told them when they ae finished and ask them if they find a god in those books worthy of their attention, what do you think would happen?

Posted by: Warren Dec 8 2004, 07:14 AM

Oh, by the way, when I posted the questions on 3 websites, none of the Christians responded - well 2 did to be honest - but the great majority kept mum. What was interesting though is that a few of them wanted to switch the focus and analyze me. Their desire is not to answer the questions, but to find out why I gave up the Christian faith which I have stated time and time again. It is usually their tactic when they cannot deal with a question(s) or a topic they cannot discuss with any knowledge. In fact, I told them that it has been my observation that many ex-Christians know far more about the Bible and religious history than most believers will ever forget, YET it's those same Christians will look at the well equipped ex-Christian and try to tell him or her they don't know what they are talking about and try to speak with some authority, having NO clue or very little knowledge about the subject. This explains why many of them remain quiet for fear of being embarassed OR fearing coming face to face with a reality they are afraid to admit to. This might explain why one Christian girl sent me a private message telling me she is afraid to admit to the truth because she wants so bad to believe it is true. Nuff said!

Posted by: Diogenes Dec 8 2004, 07:22 AM

Very well put, Warren. Yup, I had no idea what I was getting into when I made that altar call all those years ago. I should have read the fine print, and ran as fast as I could in the other direction;

Posted by: SOIL-ITU Dec 8 2004, 07:34 AM

Howdy Mr. Warren

(Actually, my last name is also Warren - so I reckon that means I must reply - otherwise of course I would be much to embarrassed and you would never even know I existed! -Not!).

I noticed you said something about how you like to look at the big picture and get a historical perspective about things. I agree. Actually there are several things in your posts which I agree with, including the average amount of energy spent by the average professing Christian (wait ... does such an average critter really exist?).

At any rate, I suspect one reason a pastor may not encourage folks to go read a few of the books out of the Old Testament before considering the claims that Christ makes - may be because many pastors probably also recognize the intellectual laziness factor (for basically a vast majority of the people in today's world). If the subject matter cannot be wrapped up and presented nicely in a half-hour TV (news? - oh yuck) program format (endured prior to the football game) - then who would even bother listening/watching (much less actually READing?) a presentation of "truth" that was centered primarily in Exodus, Numbers, etc... ???

So, I suspect many preachers (who still love those folks out there in the pews, anyway) may do their best to concentrate on the "high points", i.e., the ones that are most germane to where the majority of the congregation is "TODAY" - realizing that the people who lived in the historical time when Exodus, Numbers, etc... were written - needed to hear things with different emphasis - (in order for what they heard to be germane to where they were at, during that time in history). I have never heard any pastor tell me to stay away from those Old Testament books - but I do agree with you that they are not presented as being "mandatory reading" prior to when a person might want to consider what Jesus had to say about how the emphasis (regarding the relationship between God and humans) has changed as history has progressed.

Sorry - I gotta go for now, I keep getting interrupted by work <wink> - maybe I will continue in my response later.

-Dennis

Posted by: JasonLong Dec 8 2004, 07:54 AM

QUOTE (SOIL-ITU @ Dec 8 2004, 10:34 AM)

Well, yes, either that or the fact that it's utterly barbaric.

Posted by: LloydDobler Dec 8 2004, 09:20 AM

Warren, I gotta say you are exactly right. When I read the story of Samson for the first time as an adult I actually said to myself 'what the fuck?' The story is about an ignorant, whoring, violent, racist sociopath whose whole purpose in life was bloodthirsty revenge upon philistines. He was so stupid that even after Delilah tricked him repeatedly he still told her the secret to his strength. Then his crowning glory was to kill more philistines in his final act of godliness than he had throughout the rest of his empty life.

I was like 'this is the bible I believe in?' I felt that same emotion dozens of times, not only feeling like I was completely ignorant of my own religion, but that I had been lied to about it. Noah's ark, 2 of each animal? Try 2 pair of some and 7 pair of others. I can say that I read through the entire new testament and half of the old testament before I got too bored to continue, but still, I hadn't read it as an adult or as someone without the cloud of apologetics over me. I still argue with my sister about how they gloss over the violence in the OT with 'oh it was just a different time' or 'oh that nation deserved god's wrath'.

Welcome man, I think you'll be a great addition to the site.

Posted by: Zach Dec 8 2004, 10:08 AM

One of the bright points of Christianity is how closely correlated biblical literacy is to apostasy.

Posted by: Warren Dec 8 2004, 10:17 AM

QUOTE (LloydDobler @ Dec 8 2004, 12:20 PM)

Been here a while Lloyd, but forgot the username and password (was more interested in reading the many testimonies) so I am showing up as "new."

Anyway, I was deep in the shit they call Christianity. I mean REAL deep. I was well read in it. Knew ALL the apologetic answers and the nice, cute prepackaged answers to give to unbelievers. The irony to all of this is that the wheels started fallin goff the glory bound wagon when I read a pro-god, Christian book - Philip Yancey's Disappointment with God. The book's intention was to actually strengthen faith in God, but Philip also included the story of a Christian turned atheist by the name of "Richard." Richard's story is what got me thinking because strangely enough, Philip did not scandalize him for giving up on God. In fact, he admitted that Richard appeared well happy AFTER abandoning the Christian faith.

Richard saw a whole different view concerning the story of Job. All my life I had looked at the story or told to see the story as being how faithful God was to Job and vice versa NEVER realizing the begining of the story where God obliges satan to devastate Job. In other words, god made a bet with his alleged enemy and Job got his ass kicked as a result. What kind of fuckery is that?

From there I went back to read the Bible all over again and it was really amazing to me how much I missed when my mind was ALREADY fashioned to see things one way. This time I read it objectively, yanked my head out of Christain apologetic books, began reading objective writings concerning the bible and Jewish and Christian history and I was like

Then came the end of the charade. Got off the merry-go-round, shook off the dizziness and said hello to my long lost brain.

Imagine that, a Christian book helped to set me free from Christianity. Life works in mysterious ways I tell ya.

Posted by: Saviourmachine Dec 8 2004, 10:35 AM

QUOTE

From there I went back to read the Bible all over again and it was really amazing to me how much I missed when my mind was ALREADY fashioned to see things one way...
Life works in mysterious ways I tell ya.

Yes, amazing. And it's a little bit scary it can still be like that. Time to enjoy life, that's never a waste! Welcome on board.

Posted by: SmallStone Dec 8 2004, 11:11 AM

I read the bible cover to cover the first time during the summer before I started 7th grade at a Lutheran (Missouri Synod) school.

Within 3 weeks of school starting I had received 2 written warnings that I was not to bring up any questions regarding the old testament in our daily religion class (which focused on the easy-to-sell stuff). This despite the fact that each class ended with a 5 or 10 minute open question period. A third warning would have meant expulsion.

Posted by: JeffW Dec 8 2004, 02:52 PM

Another Christian answering. Good question, Warren.

I can honestly say that I've never read the entire bible from cover to cover. I've read the majority, a lot of it several times, and surveyed the rest for my Bible Survey class this semester at bible college.

I used to have the excuses you mentioned. "Only the New Testament is relevant" and all that crap. Truth is, I'm lazy. Leviticus is where I draw the line, every time I try to read through in order, and that's even if I get through Exodus. It's just plain boring, and typically written in language that doesn't help me get through it (though I've considered buying The Message paraphrase for easier reading).

Growing up, I've had a mixed family: my mom was a Christian, but my dad wasn't. Regardless, I was raised in the church, and I believed it because that was the culture I lived in. I took the Bible for granted, and never knew the truth of the stories: most of them are horrible tales of more violence than any other book.

When I walked away from Christianity, it wasn't the Bible that made me disbelieve. Honestly, I think I'd believe in God if I'd never read the Bible, because it's all that makes sense to me, logically (I'll argue that another time). What brought me back into Christianity wasn't the Bible either, though I'm much more read in it now.

I believe because of my experience. The Bible more clearly defines God, especially in the person of Jesus, and there's a LOT of wisdom to be gleaned from it. It alone isn't enough to cause me to believe or disbelieve, however. Without God working in my life, without remembering my experience with Him, I wouldn't believe in Him either.

Jeff

Posted by: Warren Dec 8 2004, 03:39 PM

QUOTE (JeffW @ Dec 8 2004, 05:52 PM)

Well thank you Jeff for your reply. If Christianity is working for you, more power to you. I do know that if you focus on some positive elements of it, it is beneficial. For me, it is just not something I really need to follow. Have always had a good heart toward people and live by a simple principle of treating others with respect as I would expect them to do to me. Don't need Christianity to do that per se.

Posted by: spidermonkey Dec 8 2004, 03:59 PM

QUOTE (Zach @ Dec 8 2004, 01:08 PM)

One of the bright points of Christianity is how closely correlated biblical literacy is to apostasy.

Why does this not surprise me in the least?

Posted by: ChefRanden Dec 8 2004, 05:36 PM

QUOTE (JeffW @ Dec 8 2004, 04:52 PM)

I read it twice a year for 20 years that didn't include studing for sermons and bible studies either.

Is it any wonder that I'm an athiest?

Most folks here took only one reading. I've never been the sharpest tool in the shed.

Posted by: Zoe Grace Dec 8 2004, 08:23 PM

QUOTE (Zach @ Dec 8 2004, 10:08 AM)

One of the bright points of Christianity is how closely correlated biblical literacy is to apostasy.

hehe zach!

Posted by: Zoe Grace Dec 8 2004, 08:29 PM

QUOTE (JeffW @ Dec 8 2004, 02:52 PM)

QUOTE

What? You are in bible college and you haven't yet read the entire bible? I thought you were studying for something seminary related. How can that be if you don't even know the totality of what you are getting yourself into?

QUOTE

I used to have the excuses you mentioned. "Only the New Testament is relevant" and all that crap. Truth is, I'm lazy. Leviticus is where I draw the line, every time I try to read through in order, and that's even if I get through Exodus. It's just plain boring, and typically written in language that doesn't help me get through it (though I've considered buying The Message paraphrase for easier reading).

The main reason I had a problem with those books was the just plain morally reprehensible crap in it. Everytime I tried to read the bible growing up I got a knot in my stomach from the cruelty and debauchery ordered by biblegod.

Are you sure that's not the problem you are running into? Maybe saying it's boring is easier.

If you deconverted it couldn't have been for logical reasons. Once a mind has been expanded, it can't ever go back to it's original shape.

Stick with us, you'll be re-deconverted inside of a year.

What?

Posted by: Lanakila Dec 8 2004, 08:32 PM

QUOTE (Zach @ Dec 8 2004, 12:08 PM)

One of the bright points of Christianity is how closely correlated biblical literacy is to apostasy.

Makes you wonder how many Pastors, Missionaries, and their spouses actually do deconvert. I met one former missionary on here because he had deconverted. I am a former Pastor/Chaplain wife with lots of Bible training and knowledge.

Posted by: Reach Dec 9 2004, 05:53 AM

QUOTE (ChefRanden @ Dec 8 2004, 05:36 PM)

I read it twice a year for 20 years that didn't include studing for sermons and bible studies either.

Is it any wonder that I'm an athiest?

Most folks here took only one reading. I've never been the sharpest tool in the shed.

You may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, Chef, but you are one of the finest.

Reach

Posted by: Reach Dec 9 2004, 05:56 AM

QUOTE (Zach @ Dec 8 2004, 10:08 AM)

One of the bright points of Christianity is how closely correlated biblical literacy is to apostasy.

Erudition is costly. I think many Christians avoid personal study of the Bible because they somehow realize (instinctively?) that learning more could cost them their faith. "What I don't know won't hurt me." It cost me mine and, as Lana mentioned concerning herself, I came straight out of ministry as well.

Posted by: ChefRanden Dec 9 2004, 09:57 AM

QUOTE (Reach @ Dec 9 2004, 07:53 AM)

QUOTE (ChefRanden @ Dec 8 2004, 05:36 PM)

I read it twice a year for 20 years that didn't include studing for sermons and bible studies either.

Is it any wonder that I'm an athiest?

Most folks here took only one reading. I've never been the sharpest tool in the shed.

You may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, Chef, but you are one of the finest.

Reach

Ah, shucks, M'am.

Posted by: Lokmer Dec 9 2004, 08:35 PM

QUOTE (Reach @ Dec 9 2004, 05:56 AM)

QUOTE (Zach @ Dec 8 2004, 10:08 AM)

One of the bright points of Christianity is how closely correlated biblical literacy is to apostasy.

I'm another apostate because of Biblical fideism. Read the Bible many times, loved it (particularly parts of the OT) passionately and was always striving to understand it better. Bought that it was inspired - early on I bought innerrency, but I was disabused of that early enough (age 12) that it didn't break my faith.

But it did crack it.

Taking seriously that it was God's book was eventually my downfall as a Christian. I worked out every test of truth I could, to understand it better. I had an EXTREMELY biblical, christ-centered worldview: it permeated everything I did, down to a subconscious level. Every choice I made was examined to motivations, it raised in me a level of consciousness about the workings of my own mind and emotions that I probably would not have otherwise acquired. It was, quite plainly, the scaffolding upon which my world was built.

But I took that too seriously to NOT continue to investigate, search, think, pray, read, listen, and study. And, eventually, I realized that the scenarios I was inventing to make it all work together (i.e. everything in the Bible) were getting further and further into the realm of the ludicrous, until I admitted that the Bible was only reflections on God by primitive people, not any sort of revelation. From there, it was 35 days before I admitted that I did not believe.

The doctrine of innerency is absolutely ludicrous. It's also fairly recent - early church fathers felt free to rewrite scripture (either hermeneutically or literally) as they saw fit. But when rationalism entered the picture, the Bible became (quite clearly) utterly ludicrous by all human standards of knowledge and evaluation. So, the defense of the Bible gradually turned into a blind assertion in the VERBAL inspiration and innerency, which, of course, cannot be defended at all in the long run.

Inerrency, truly, is the mother of much apostasy.
-Lokmer