Why I am not a Christian

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
???

His screen name is connorkimbro, probably before your time.

He was initially a Christian going to A Christian university. Then he started to think really hard about the whole thing and have doubts. The debates on Poly around the topic helped him to move to atheism/agnosticism in some positive fashion. He dropped out of school, went to the army, became a linguist specialising in Korean, then got stationed to Korea for a couple of years.

He used to visit now and then. Last I heard he was going to Iraq.

[Last Conformist]

Sounds great, er? Listen to 'Poly atheists and you might end up in some sandy hellhole for the greater glory of Bush!

[Elok]

You know my stock response: There is no "scientific argument for God," or against. Let us say evolution is completely true, and somehow proven to all. Speciation is the result of natural pressures from competition. But how then do you argue that the competition is not at God's behest? How do you know that the interplay of parts is not the passing amusement of a divine will, like children setting up tinkertoys to watch the parts turn? Perhaps causality itself, as we know it, is an echo of God. I'll match UR's phrase about arguing in terms of stupid hypotheticals, and raise him twenty, to apply it to the whole subject. It's not something you can "prove" in that way.

The moral arguments of that essay make no sense to me. Logically speaking there must be an antecedent and blah blah blah. They argue about good and evil like the chicken and the egg, like they're somehow physical objects and not abstract ideas. Very strange.

"The Christian vs. the Jewish concept of Hell," is not very well defined, as some might think. Different sects have very different ideas about heaven and hell. The aforementioned story with the demons and the pigs might actually illustrate the idea of Hell as a voluntary choice of the damned. The demons begged Jesus to let them go into the pigs instead of being cast into the abyss; demons, like men, have a certain measure of free will. Jesus knows it's a stupid idea, but it's what they want and it doesn't hurt any humans so he decides to allow it. Sure enough, no sooner do the stupid things take over the pigs than they decide it would be fun to make them kill themselves, and the pigs rush into the water and drown. With their current host dead, where do the demons go from there? Probably straight to Hell, where they were bound anyway. And they probably knew it. But it's what they chose anyway, for reasons nobody can understand. It's not like evil makes any real sense. See also "The Great Divorce," etc.

Nor is Hell necessarily a byproduct of sadism. Every parent starts teaching a child good behavior by threatening punishment as consequences for misbehavior. And it's not because parents really want to watch their kids cry, and laugh malevolently. It's just that it takes a while for children to respond to complex moral arguments. A toddler just doesn't understand, or care to learn, about the golden rule, so punishment is a necessary first step. But after a while the threat of punishment stops being the main compulsion, though the penalty remains.

In my church, at least, Hell is almost never mentioned. Certainly not for adults. Our adult education is focused on stuff like noetic hesychia-the desired inner stillness of the soul in the midst of a noisy and bitter world. And that can be attained. Only for very short intervals, before distraction tears it away, and it's very hard, but it's worth it. And almost every religion I've encountered, from Buddhism to my own, has a core teaching on stillness, on reunion of the self with the divine. I don't think, as some do, that the universality of this belief invalidates the meaning of any one religion. To me it only makes the principle itself more worthy of investigation, regardless of who you give the credit to. A long time before Newton, people had the general idea that stuff you let go of tends to fall down. If there is a way to peace, it shouldn't be surprising that many people, all over the world, began to discover it even before it was given explicitly.

I go with Orthodox Christianity because it has the most clear and complete description of these things, at least to my eyes. But a muslim, a jew, a hindu, a daoist, or anything, anything at all, is better than a complacent atheist, who sits smugly in a world full of gossip, lies, hatred and cruelty, and knows with confidence in his heart that Human Reason Will Prevail, though there is evidence all around him that such a thing as human reason doesn't even exist. Religion is at least in part the quest to scourge the infection of inhumanity out of our souls. Kuci is the only atheist I can think of, that I have met, who seems to even realize or acknowledge that the infection itself exists.

End of rant. Okay, deeeeeep breath....

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
Sounds great, er? Listen to 'Poly atheists and you might end up in some sandy hellhole for the greater glory of Bush!

[Snowflake]

Originally posted by Elok
I go with Orthodox Christianity because it has the most clear and complete description of these things, at least to my eyes. But a muslim, a jew, a hindu, a daoist, or anything, anything at all, is better than a complacent atheist, who sits smugly in a world full of gossip, lies, hatred and cruelty, and knows with confidence in his heart that Human Reason Will Prevail, though there is evidence all around him that such a thing as human reason doesn't even exist. Religion is at least in part the quest to scourge the infection of inhumanity out of our souls. Kuci is the only atheist I can think of, that I have met, who seems to even realize or acknowledge that the infection itself exists.

I don't quite understand the repect toward other religions from a person who has a firm belief toward a religion himself. For an agnosticist, respect and tolerance can come from the understanding that since we don't know for sure, any one of them regligions could be right. But if you firmly believe that you are right and only the ones share the same belief with you would go to heaven, doesn't that mean you also believe the other people who believe in other religions are cheated by gossips and lies and are doomed into hell?

[Elok]

It depends on the religion. I don't believe in Heaven as a mob protection scheme. I don't think salvation comes from halfheartedly paying dues to an idea. God wouldn't want a bunch of posers and yes-men in heaven, would he? I don't think so.

Since religions are a list of things you should do, in addition to things you shouldn't, if a faith has the right general idea but poor theology that's better than nothing. If you're lost in the desert, even a map sketched by a five-year-old with only a little knowledge of geography is of some use, right?

[Snowflake]

I'm not sure of the five-year-old map thing. If the child does not know the right direction of the destination, his map can only confuse you more. The key of the issue is not how well the theology each religion has, it is whether a religion leads to the final right destination.

The little I know about Christian, for example, says that it doesn't matter even if you do all the right/good things a Christian believes, as long as you don't believe in Jesus, you are not going to be saved. Is it not true?

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Elok
But a muslim, a jew, a hindu, a daoist, or anything, anything at all, is better than a complacent atheist, who sits smugly in a world full of gossip, lies, hatred and cruelty, and knows with confidence in his heart that Human Reason Will Prevail, though there is evidence all around him that such a thing as human reason doesn't even exist.

Does this go also for your post? Rumours are not all atheists are "complacent", while on the other hand that description might fit for some religious people as well..... Oh yeah, I forgot, you mentioned teh Kuci

[C0ckney]

The first time I read Russell was when I was about 10 or 11, after just becoming atheist and he confirmed it in my mind, and I've certainly heard of cases where people understand the arguments and convinced by them, whereupon when it comes to logic, the atheistic position is greatly stronger in my view.

you read philosphy and though about God at the age of 10?! surely you were too busy playing football, tig, 40-40, manhunt etc.

[Whaleboy]

The Pharisees and the Romans would have made the apostles instant celebrities if they would just admit they made the whole thing up. Was it merely narcissism that lead to the violent death of every one except John? Would Paul have given up his status and freedom, and suffered all he did for a lie?

A good question . I think you're best answering that with history rather than resorting to it as an induction for faith. Why do suicide bombers blow themselves up for something meaningless, fallacious and stupid? That's how I look at it.

You know my stock response: There is no "scientific argument for God," or against.

I dislike that. While I accept there are limits to human reason, I do not think that conception or refutation of God as far as WE are concerned is outside of those limits.

Sounds great, er? Listen to 'Poly atheists and you might end up in some sandy hellhole for the greater glory of Bush!

Snowflake:

[Whaleboy]

you read philosphy and though about God at the age of 10?! surely you were too busy playing football, tig, 40-40, manhunt etc.

It was either philosophy or get battered (very rough school and Ben the football-hating readalot wasn't exactly mr. popularity). Wasn't a tough choice.

[C0ckney]

ah i see, i kinda assumed that everyone's childhood was like mine

[bayraven]

Originally posted by Whaleboy


Why do suicide bombers blow themselves up for something meaningless, fallacious and stupid? That's how I look at it.

I've spent time on that. To me there is a difference between extremists willing to die in the process of killing others whom they hate (albeit in the name of God), and the actions of the first generation post-Christ.

The apostles were not about conversion by the sword. The horror of the Crusades was perhaps the same sort of distortion currently distracting the Mohammedans (that's Muslims, you know)

[Whaleboy]

I've spent time on that. To me there is a difference between extremists willing to die in the process of killing others whom they hate (albeit in the name of God), and the actions of the first generation post-Christ.

No no no you've missed the point. For people like this, those of some extreme faith, a reason to live = a reason to die, the manner of death is irrelevant, be it to cause destruction or be martyred etc. Faith blinds.

[bayraven]

I’ll grant that.
I can't respond the way i want to without doubting the faith of the terrorists. In other words, hatred of an enemy can motivate extremism sans Dieo.
The monks that torched themselves in Vietnam still make your point.

I need to work on this. Currently the kids in my youth group are willing to believe and all I have to do is teach OT and NT history then reference the change in my world since conversion. Sooner or later I know I will encounter reasoned agnostics and atheists who tag along to appease a friend or show up to challenge the perceived misconception that we Christians hold.
To hear the Ag/Ath side sharpens my understanding , but I could sure use some plain-speak help from Christians.