How do you escape a cult when it is all around you?
Sent in by Layla
Like many others here I was raised in the way that Christianity wasn't presented to you as a choice; it was a lifestyle. It just... was. Even if you didn't go to church. It wasn't that you weren't a Christian, you were just a backslid Christian, in need of a little prodding, belittling, but all in the name of God's good works, you see. We weren't really church goers, my sister, brothers and myself might go every now and then but that was mostly just to hang out with the other kids. I never "felt" what I was "supposed" to. If anything I was always a little weirded out by church, everything about it vaguely resembled a sideshow if that makes sense. Old ladies in their best flowery dresses, a loud round man shouting from the stage about hellfire and damnation. People shouting left and right agreeing with everything the pastor says. I felt sick inside sometimes, I still do when I think of it. Still even with every nagging doubt in me , I never let myself question that Jesus was my savior and he alone could deliver me from damnation. Saying that now is so laughable to me, yet sad at the same time...
How long has it been since I lost the faith? Hard to tell, I image it was a lot longer ago then I let myself know. Maybe I never had any faith to begin with. I now know no religion, but I can't help feeling like the connections I made in this life are tied to something, something greater I don't know about, could never hope to know about. Then again, maybe that is a way of making myself feel important, feel good about death. I do not know, and I will never know, and I'm okay with that now.
Now that I feel I am deprogrammed, I fear the worst part is the years ahead. It is not acceptable to think as I think and believe as I believe. I find solace in my immediate family, we have all opened our eyes around the same time. But the fact remains I live in a Christian society through and through. How do you escape a cult when it is all around you? There is no escaping my Christian past. Only holding my head up in the Christian world as high as I can, while deflecting the zombies constantly trying to "save me". My boyfriend and I feel as thought we are dedicated to one another the same as marriage, and do not feel a ceremony under someone else's God and written in ink by the State is necessary to seal this. We have a beautiful little girl. Also we have deeply religious in-laws. They love their granddaughter but every time I see them I can see the contempt for me- the scarlet harlot that has stolen their baby boy away from the ways of God and coerced into having a bastard-child.
So thats my story. I don't even mind the years of life wasted fearing a "loving" God. I feel proud that I was strong enough to explore my doubts, examine the evidence and make a decision on my own despite being indoctrinated from birth. My greatest sadness is the years ahead for me, and possibly for my baby girl should she choose any belief other than Christianity. It doesn't matter that I give my baby all the love a mother could, or that I am devoted to my partner in every way, or that I am eternally loyal to my family and friends. I am and always will be, in the eyes of the people around me, a sinner worthy of pity and contempt. I am going to hell. So how do I escape what is everywhere? Well, I'll let you in on a little secret. If not being judgmental, self serving, and pious is sending me there, then Hell I embrace you with open arms.
Like many others here I was raised in the way that Christianity wasn't presented to you as a choice; it was a lifestyle. It just... was. Even if you didn't go to church. It wasn't that you weren't a Christian, you were just a backslid Christian, in need of a little prodding, belittling, but all in the name of God's good works, you see. We weren't really church goers, my sister, brothers and myself might go every now and then but that was mostly just to hang out with the other kids. I never "felt" what I was "supposed" to. If anything I was always a little weirded out by church, everything about it vaguely resembled a sideshow if that makes sense. Old ladies in their best flowery dresses, a loud round man shouting from the stage about hellfire and damnation. People shouting left and right agreeing with everything the pastor says. I felt sick inside sometimes, I still do when I think of it. Still even with every nagging doubt in me , I never let myself question that Jesus was my savior and he alone could deliver me from damnation. Saying that now is so laughable to me, yet sad at the same time...
How long has it been since I lost the faith? Hard to tell, I image it was a lot longer ago then I let myself know. Maybe I never had any faith to begin with. I now know no religion, but I can't help feeling like the connections I made in this life are tied to something, something greater I don't know about, could never hope to know about. Then again, maybe that is a way of making myself feel important, feel good about death. I do not know, and I will never know, and I'm okay with that now.
Now that I feel I am deprogrammed, I fear the worst part is the years ahead. It is not acceptable to think as I think and believe as I believe. I find solace in my immediate family, we have all opened our eyes around the same time. But the fact remains I live in a Christian society through and through. How do you escape a cult when it is all around you? There is no escaping my Christian past. Only holding my head up in the Christian world as high as I can, while deflecting the zombies constantly trying to "save me". My boyfriend and I feel as thought we are dedicated to one another the same as marriage, and do not feel a ceremony under someone else's God and written in ink by the State is necessary to seal this. We have a beautiful little girl. Also we have deeply religious in-laws. They love their granddaughter but every time I see them I can see the contempt for me- the scarlet harlot that has stolen their baby boy away from the ways of God and coerced into having a bastard-child.
So thats my story. I don't even mind the years of life wasted fearing a "loving" God. I feel proud that I was strong enough to explore my doubts, examine the evidence and make a decision on my own despite being indoctrinated from birth. My greatest sadness is the years ahead for me, and possibly for my baby girl should she choose any belief other than Christianity. It doesn't matter that I give my baby all the love a mother could, or that I am devoted to my partner in every way, or that I am eternally loyal to my family and friends. I am and always will be, in the eyes of the people around me, a sinner worthy of pity and contempt. I am going to hell. So how do I escape what is everywhere? Well, I'll let you in on a little secret. If not being judgmental, self serving, and pious is sending me there, then Hell I embrace you with open arms.
Comments
Thank you for your comment. Despite the fact that I am an anti-christian and disagree with everything you say, I am very glad that people like you come to this website to express your opinions. It makes for great dialogue.
This person “Jesus” never really existed. Jesus is a myth that was created by the apostle Paul and the author of the Gospel According to Mark.
The earliest writings of the New Testament were the Pauline epistles, around 50 A.D. Paul wrote of a spiritual Christ whose death and resurrection (a concept keeping with the Greek gods) provided the key for gentiles to have access to the Jewish god. Paul never mentioned anything about the "historical" events that happened in the gospels (the Sermon on the Mount, the miraculous healings, the conversations with the pharisees, Pontius Pilate, etc.)- because neither Paul nor his fellow Christians had ever heard of them ... because they never happened! Mark was the one who introduced all of these events in his gospel (around 80 A.D.) - apparantly to provide a “history” of the leader of the Cult of Jesus to his followers.
What is more, Paul and Mark were charlatans, probably much like the Jimmy Swaggarts and Ted Haggards of today, who intentionally duped their followers (and now duping you) with outright lies.
For example,
1) Paul said that Jesus the Christ came “in accordance to the scriptures.” Bible scholars for two thousand years have been searching for those scriptures and still can’t find them. Paul lied.
2) Paul said that the Christians, in an appeal to the gentiles, were the “seed of Abraham” as a fulfilment of the promise to Abraham. Anybody who reads that scripture in the Old Testament knows that the promise was to Abraham, who was Jewish, and the gentiles don’t count in that. Paul lied again.
3) Mark said that Jesus taught in the synagogues in Galilee. There were no synagogues in Galilee during Jesus' time because the synagogues only came after the Diaspora (70 A.D.) Mark lied.
Actually, the entire Gospel according to Mark was contrived by him based on a few sayings from the Christian lore at the time. The other three gospels in the New Testament were written based on Mark’s gospel. None of the writers of the gospels were eye-witnesses to the events described in them.
Christianity is the second biggest hoax in the history of mankind (the first is Islam, they have more followers). I suggest you take a little time to study your Bible. It’s just one big myth. Passerby, you have been duped real big, but don’t be ashamed, you’re not alone.
What happened to Passerby's comment?
I have to agree with you that the marriage isn't made by a ceremony or piece of paper. I think you'll find this site and the people that post here a refreshing oasis from the desert of christian judgmentalism. Welcome.
I appreciate that Passerby's lunacy does much to reinforce the position that Christianity is lunacy, but trolls like this who post the same comment dozens and dozens of times on multiple pages are violating the TOS as explained HERE. Passerby's posts will no longer be tolerated, even though in some ways, his insanity is quite entertaining.
Thank you to all for understanding, and a big, fat, wet, sloppy smooch filled with blessings to Passerby!
LOL!
He can't come up with any new evidence to support this case for Christ, and you can tell that he is absolutely falling apart.
Too bad Jesus won't lend him a helping hand.
I really wish he would seek out some professional help for his mental illness.
Poor, weak, pathetic godling. Maybe Marc's prayers will help strengthen the waining strength of his impotent, invisible friend.
Oh, and Marc: Mary is a dead woman that probably never actually existed. Blessings to you, my son.
Hi Layla,
I can relate to your story in many ways. I am also surrounded by my christian family.
Being agnostic I still feel there is a greater purpose or higher power connected to us. However at the same time after my own personal dealings with christianity, and seeing that is does not work for most people, I finally decided that I could no longer subscribe to the christian beliefs any longer.
There were things that just did not add up about the christian belief system, and anytime I tried to apply scripture to my own personal life I found out really quick that in reality certain things that scripture teaches does not work in the real world. It basically came down to "Reality VS The Bible". Reality won every single time of course.
Anytime I questioned the christian belief, I got ridiculed by other christians who would tell me that I didn't have enough faith. Plus they would also come up with some lousy excuse for why God didn't do this or why he didn't do that. Christians are very good at giving cover stories, however they usually are not very convincing cover stories.
Congratulations on not having the fear to explore your doubts. I'm also happy to hear that your little girl has a mother who is a free thinker. I believe that will be one of the things that will make a lot of difference in the long run, and it will also teach children to learn how to accept others regardless of spiritual beliefs. You set the example and she will follow.
Unlike the popular "Doomsday Christian Message", I choose to remain optimistic, and believe that the day will come when people will one day wake up and realize that we have the power within ourselves to change and make the right choices, and that we don't need some God to do that for us.
I also choose to remain optimistic that the day will come when all people will be accepted regardless of beliefs, lifestyle, and color.
Many things we do have and impact on others. Mostly, we don't know what it is. But we influence how people think everytime we interact with them. We hope it is always positive. Even little things like complimenting a stranger, (or friend), has some kind of effect. It makes me try to stop and think before I do some things.
We all effect the collective consciousness.
Peace Gretna
"I think you'll find that Jesus actually did exist and it's a documented fact."
Ok Daveo, do you know the person who made this document, and how reliable is the person who created this document that you claim is "A Fact"?
Plus how reliable and authentic is this document, and what makes you so sure this is not more "Hear-Say" evidence just like the bible is?
Daveo Said:
"Unlike Scientology which has been completely made up, Christianity has origins from the beginning."
How do you know? Just because it's been around for centuries, and may seem to be the more popular among other religions, how do you know it has it's origins from the beginning? Did you live back during that time period, or are you just once again basing this on what you heard from someone else?
Before you answer my question, you cannot use the bible as your source since it has not been proven to be an authentic document that came from God either.
There may be some truth to the bible, and they may have found some chariot wheels on the bottom of the Red Sea, however that does not prove that the bible is 100 percent authentic, nor does it prove that God is a personal God.
The Pauline epistles contain 80,000 words about Jesus Christ but nothing about the events in the Gospels. Jesus' principle teachings were found in the Sermon on the Mount, the conversations with the pharisees, and the conversations with his disciples, but Paul mentions none of these. Christians today are quoting the Gospels left and right. Why not then?
Paul claimed that his knowledge about Jesus came from personal revelation, not from history (biography, lore, etc ...)
Paul knew James and Peter personally. Given that the Gospels had not yet been written (the first one was written about 80 A.D.), don't you think that James and Peter would have told Paul about something about the life of Jesus?
The Jewish historian Josephus, who was in Jerusalem at the alleged time of Christ, did include a paragraph mentioning Jesus, but it has been discredited by modern scholars for the following reasons:
1) The paragraph was too short and contained too little detail for such a major event. Josephus spent much more time describing trivial events.
2) The paragraph is out of context,i.e., it is not well connected to the paragraphs before and after.
3) The paragraph is not written in the same rhetorical style as the rest of Josephus' writings.
Jesus' contemporaries knew nothing of his life because it never happened. The single historical reference to Jesus by a contemporary has proven to be fraudulent - most likely added into the text by later Christians.
Daveo, I suggest you undertake a serious study of your Bible and your religion. Christianity has been a hoax from the beginning. You have a choice: you can remain in your world of an imaginary Jesus, created by charlatans and hucksters throughout the ages, or you can join the world of reason and clear thinking.
By the way, if you don't believe anything I say, you can look it up yourself.
That's okay, I'm open...
Daveo...I think you'll find that Jesus actually did exist and it's a documented fact.
Well, you thought wrong, ol' chap. In fact, if you'll stop typing for a minute and actually do some reading here, you will find that many people have found the opposite to be true---that we've found that "Jesus'" existence is unsubstantiated.
Daveo...Unlike Scientology which has been completely made up, Christianity has origins from the beginning.
The "beginning"? The beginning of whAT? In any event, the fallacy of your argument, of course, is in attempting to link credibility with duration. There are religious beliefs that pre-date Christianity, m'kay? Many of these, like Christianity, delineate a time-line that establishes "the beginning", or "a beginning". SO?
Furthermore, let's hypothesize that "Scientology" will be around another 2000 yrs. Okay, at that time, will that be a good reason to believe it as "truth"?...simply because it's been around for a long time?
Daveo...They've found remanders of chariots and horse bones etc under the Red Sea.
They've "found" the Great Pyramids, too. Is that indicative that Amon Ra was zipping around the heavens in a cosmic chariot?... or that Osiris was the Lord of the Underworld?
Daveo...[They've]Found the remainings of building under the Dead Sea.
Really? Have they found the skeletal remains of a snake or donkey that indicates that such animals at one time had vocal cords? Has NASA found that dome thingy?.. the, uh, "firmament" that holds up the sky? How about the remains of a "giant"? Keep us posted.
Daveo...[They]Found an alter which paintings of calf's at the bottom of a mountain in Saudi Arabia claimed to be Mt Sinai
They found cylinder seals with crude drawings of god-like figures "claimed to be" Marduk and Ninki. SO?
Daveo...You know Paul probably didn't talk about the miracles performed by Jesus because he didn't need to.
How convenient.
Daveo...The main point he'd make was about the resurrection of the dead
Right, right, "zombie" sightings were evidently very common back then. I wonder why such sightings are so "rare" in this day and age?..i.e..non-existent. Hmmm....
Daveo...The are over 300 scriptures that were fulfilled throughout the life of Jesus Born of a virgin (Isa. 7:14), Would do miracles (Isa. 35.5-6), Rides in Jerusalem on donkey (Zech. 9:9), "Into Thy hand I commit my spirit" (Ps. 31:5) and that's just a few of them. Jesus came for the Jews but they rejected him so he gave it to the gentiles.
Honestly now, do these sound like the 'predictions' of an allegedly "perfect" being?..one who can presumably "think" a universe into existence? Not in my view; in my view, it sounds like imperfect men, simply shoe-horning events to fit their theology. Seriously, why would a "perfect being" predict the future, figuratively?
All-in-all, the same unconvincing weak arguments we've heard a gazillion times.
Bye now.
While I'm sorely tempted to follow Cousin Ricky's lead, I'll briefly respond to several things you said.
daveo "I think you'll find that Jesus actually did exist and it's a documented fact."
On the contrary, I've researched this extensively and that is NOT what I found. What is you assertion based on? I hope you are reading more than Christian apologetics.
daveo: "...Christianity has origins from the beginning."
As opposed to the variety that happens at the end. Got it.
daveo: "They've found remanders of chariots and horse bones etc under the Red Sea..."
I'll wager that you've not researched any of this, nor questioned the significance. If I'm wrong about that, simply list the sources that you've used, and we can go from there.
daveo: "The[re] are over 300 scriptures that were fulfilled throughout the life of Jesus..."
Do you claim that these "300 scriptures" were messianic prophecies? Have you read them in their original contexts? If not, please do that little exercise before resuming this discussion. Thanks.
Here are books you should check out:
Unmarried to Each other
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/102-4262372-2199318?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Unmarried+to+each+other&x=13&y=18
Ten biggest legal mistakes every woman can avoid
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/102-2585339-8309715?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=ten+legal+mistakes&x=0&y=0
The second book deals more with women who are married, but covers topics you should consider anyway. The first book is pure GOLD, as it helped me realize options I didn't really know I had.
take care, I think your daughter is so luck to have free thinker parents. wish I did.
Isaiah was written before the Gospels and its contents, I presume, were known to anyone who could comprehend the Tanakh.
If someone wanted to make the claim that their candidate for Messiahdom was the real deal, all they had to do was have that individual ride into Jerusalem on a donkey.
Or, if crafting a work of speculative religious fiction about a pretend Messiah, have that character ride into Jerusalem on a donkey.
Voila! Self-fulfilling prophesy.
Oh, and according to the Gospels, the 'ride' was stolen, too.
When I look at the Christian I see a strong need in some to see a miracle. There is this strong need to have something physical to hold onto and a struggle to keep from leaving the metaphysical (faith) to view the physical (Science and hard discovery). “Jesus was seen in a tortilla.” But hey, I believe in the metaphysical, miracles, and the unexplained(just spend some time working in a hospital or for that matter, with children). I would look at something like a tortilla "miracle" and say it doesn't fit with my beliefs. I would expect a God who created all could do anything but what possible reason would there be God to dabble in tortillas? Things like this lead me to believe humans are never satisfied--they want to have something to hold, see--grasp as a tangible. This is the plight of the Christian and it may be difficult for them especially when trying to explain their faith.
When I look at the non-Christian (should I say non-believer in a God? but I don't want to "split hairs” etc..) I see a lot difficulty as well. There is this quantity of faith in science and facts. The non-believer is forced to believe regardless of their assertions and so in this they have many commonalities with the Christian. It sounds at odds but if honesty is important it is difficult to assert some science without indirectly asserting some faith.
Why do I site faith as part of the composition of a non-believer? I propose this because you would have a hard time proving that an experiment or a conclusion was infallible. Was the machine calibrated? To what standard? Was the study funded and tainted by some self-interest (I worked in medical research and saw this all the time)? Was the foundational evidence correct and applicable?* Certainly, science is “all human” which gives birth to an unfair game.
When you make contributions to this site keep in mind that the Christian and the Non Christian both can play an unfair game. It is this commonality of faith that is the issue not the fact of faith. The Christian has their need for a physical based proof while the Non-Christian has a necessary faith in science. The composition of the two are not at odds because of proof (chariot wheels, the great bang, NASA and the Christian conversion from the study on the shroud, evolution and the fossil record etc..) it is the dialogue that occurs when people forget to have respect for the other human.
* For example: Do you really believe chocolate is good for your heart?
When I look at the Christian I see a strong need in some to see a miracle. There is this strong need to have something physical to hold onto and a struggle to keep from leaving the metaphysical (faith) to view the physical (Science and hard discovery). Jesus was seen in a tortilla. But hey, I believe in the metaphysical, miracles, and the unexplained(just spend some time working in a hospital or with for that matter with children). I would look at something like a tortilla "miracle" and say it doesn't fit with my beliefs. I would expect a God who created all could do anything but what possible reason would there be God to dabble in tortillas? Things like this lead me to believe humans are never satisfied and want to have something to hold on to they can see and grasp as a tangable. This is the plight of the Christian and it may be difficult for them especially when trying to explain their faith.
When I look at the non-Christian ( should I say non-believer in a God? but I don't want to "split hairs etc..) I see a lot difficulty as well. There is thisquantity of faith in science and facts. The Non believer is forced to believe regardless of their assertions and so in this they have many commonalities with the Christian. It sounds at odds but if honesty is important it is difficult to assert some science without indirectly asserting some faith.
Why do I site faith as part of the composition of a A non-believer? I propose this because you would have a hard time proving that a experiment or a conclusion was infallible. Was the machine calibrated? To what standard? Was the study funded and tainted by some self interest (I worked in medical research and saw this all the time). Was the foundational evidence correct and applicable? For example: DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE CHOCOLATE IS GOOD FOR YOUR HEART?
When you make contributions to this site keep in mind that the Christian and the Non Christian both can play a good game. It is this the commonality of faith that is the issue not the fact of faith.
I really can't accept your thesis that Christians and non-christians both depend on faith.
You equated seeing Jesus in a tortilla with adjusting instruments in scientific research!?!
What kind of bullshit is this!?!
You, of all people, coming from the field of medical research, should know better than to make a statement like that.
How much has the medical industry produced in terms of medicine and general medical knowledge by making careful, painstaking measurements in their research? How much has faith in a religion produced?
I was a science major in university, and we had to do experiment after experiment, every time calibrating our instruments to finest tolerance possible. And if the experiment didn't work right, we had to do it until we got it right.
Also, the scientific method is self-correcting. Scientists are supposed to be careful about their research, trying to weed out the mistakes. If new information comes along, scientists much change their hypothesis.
Is a religious belief self-correcting? Is religion developing new theologies and miracles all the time?
How can you compare such an arduous truth finding process with seeing Jesus in a tortilla?
Atheists/skeptics are usually people who study and highly value knowledge based on scientific and scholarly research. How do Christians get their knowledge? From listening to other Christians? From praying? From blind faith?
You said that Christians need to have miracles to support their faith while non-believers need to have facts to support their "faith." I see no comparison here. Non-believers don't want to believe, they want to know. Trusting in facts is not faith, it is knowledge. And if we later find out that the facts were wrong, then we will change our knowledge.
Do religious people do this? No, they don't. You can show them fact after fact that their religion is wrong, and they will still believe it.
Atheists/skeptics avoid faith like the plague. Christians embrace it.
Your entire approach is asinine!!!
I never equated these. I made an example of the absurd (to me) tortilla as proof to myself that the Christian does indeed seek something non-metaphysical as evidence of something metaphysical. I believe this to be a normal human reaction to want to hold something in their hands. This is the believer acting like a non-believer. As for adjusting instruments I have seen where a calibration was dependant upon a standard latter found to be inaccurate.
You, of all people, coming from the field of medical research, should know better than to make a statement like that.
You see, I have seen a patient pulled from a bed to make her a candidate for a study. The study could be double blind but if the subjects are subjected to stress so that they will fit within the parametrics of the study then the study is bogus. I have seen the resultant side effects of drugs not accounted for in the study. The side effects are often found too late and show up on the FDA.GOV webpage. You must understand, garbage in means garbage out—and there is a lot of garbage.
My favorite example of “garbage” science is the moon dust. The scientists had falsely reported the age of the moon. With the faith NASA had in science they designed a lunar lander which had long legs to keep from sinking deep into the expected 40 foot of moon dust. Did the craft need such long legs? No, the moon was not as old as thought. The faith in science was misplaced. Geologic science requires so much faith it is absurd.
Even more absurd is going against the scientific principles we learned in 3rd grade science such as the scientific method. Yet, here we are spending large amounts of money and time to find life on other planets. Where is the evidence we need to conduct such a ludicrous study? I guess there is great faith we will find something out there. No, it is worse than that. I have to say this sarcastically, “We already know what we will find.”
How much has the medical industry produced in terms of medicine and general medical knowledge by making careful, painstaking measurements in their research? How much has faith in a religion produced?
The medical industry has given us just as many disasters and killed just as many people as religion or religious wars (though religious wars are cultural wars as well).
Yes, I am mindful that some dumb Pope set his subjects out in the crusades but science is a demigod just as much as an “infallible” pope was in the dark ages. Now, my pointing this out is not a call to end scientific work it is merely and explanation that science is very comparable to religion. There is no insult there no matter how much indignity follows in retort. There is no reason to believe that comparing science to religion is a criticism.
Is a religious belief self-correcting? Is religion developing new theologies and miracles all the time?
Religion need not correct science but many scientists, doctors, engineers are religious. Though there is history of inhibiting some discovery, the believing masses were ripe full of knowledgeable scientists and teachers of science.
Religion is supposed to benefit the masses just as science is supposed to benefit the masses. Science can indeed be used to teach the benefit of belief and religion can definitely taught the benefit of science—there is no question.
-believers don't want to believe, they want to know. Trusting in facts is not faith, it is knowledge.
Wanting and trying doesn’t make a success. Saying something is “fact” is useless because this is a philosophical statement.
Your approach is asinine!!!
Why insult? I could just as easily say “you just don’t understand” as say “your confusion is asinine.”
Your entire post is asinine.
Moon dust? Where the fuck do you get your information, Cracker Jacks? Did you even do the slightest bit of research on any of the topics you touched, or are you just parroting garbage you've been fed from some pulpit?
Don't be so brain-lazy. Read, dim-wit: The Myth of the Missing Moon Dust
Besides, I would not be so quick to criticize my writing and then recommend this kind of nonsense:
Basically, scientists need to be sure that their
sources are correct and so are motivated to root out error in their
own and in other scientists' work.
What? Are you kidding me?? They are motivated by fame and money as much as anything else. How much salt should you have in a restricted diet? What is the recommended amount and why is it recommended? The limitation was made up and then the misinformation was propagated through the faith filled scientists who were just so eager to accept(while the originator got his fame). Hoaxes occur and conclusions abound promoted by demigods who are self serving as much as any human.
On the other hand, creationists just want very convincing-sounding
claims and arguments and so they borrow from each other such claims
that they are not motivated to verify - effectively, they end up
swapping urban legends.
There is the “mad scientist” and then there is the “mad religious.” What about this surprises anyone? Who has the heavier burden in this scientist or the religious? Careful, answer that and it will divulge the depth of your conviction—your adherence to the principle of being honest.
The burden is on science as much as it is on religion--the scientists screw up all the time. This is still a valid statement. I don’t need to prove any one of my statements—you are just looking for an argument; I just fail see what your point is here. If you are saying scientists have no faith in the unknown you are ignorant to the world and need to grow up instead of pointing to some web page(asinine indeed).
Let's suppose for the sake of argument, your argument, the argument you came on this site to start, that science is fucked.
Science is way off. Is fallible. Is irrelevant.
Fine. Science is no longer a player in this discussion.
Now, how does religion with its magical stories of invisible, immaterial, non-physical, incomprehensible, uncreated, eternal entities somehow default to being real?
Science is a human endeavor to ferret out knowledge. It frequently admits error in its discoveries. It is fallible. Issac Newton tried for years to turn create gold through alchemy. Obviously, Newton, for all his genius, was not infallible.
Religion, conversely, claims dogmatic knowledge which is really nothing more than dressed up ignorance. Creationists say, "GOD DID IT!" But creationists cannot define god, explain god, or even provide evidence of a god. Creationists cannot delineate the methods this god uses to do the things it is purported to do. Everything with this god is shrouded in mystery and must be accepted on faith. And if the faith is not given, threats of horrific torment for the faithless is thrown about.
No one is threatened with magical everlasting torture for being skeptical of some scientific pronouncement.
Science is not the other side of religion. Science, though fallible, has made the average person's quality of life incomparably superior to that of thousands of years of past generations. Christianity's historical trophy is the Dark Ages.
I'll take fallible science any day over superstitious fear.
Oh, and Freddy... the reason I aimed you at a website was because most Christians who post here are too lazy to go beyond parroting the pulpit. In the future, I won't bother babysitting your ignorance. If you want to remain ignorantly superstitious, that is certainly your right. But I fail to see why you want to come here where people are recovering from the deleterious effects of a cruel and mind-twisting cult to preach your religion. There are hundreds of thousands of Christian websites that would welcome your "Polly want a cracker" rhetoric. Why pick a fight?
You came here -- you are the one itching for a fight. I did not come looking for you.
Good day!
I went to the bathroom last night, looked at the turd that didn't flush, and the image of Jesus was looking at me. I couldn't believe it! I shit for Jesus! It looked just like Jesus. How do I sell my "shit for Jesus" on ebay? How do I preserve my shit for Jesus?
Cheers
Passerby (the original, not Marc, the nutcase who stole my pseudonym, because he's unoriginal just like his god)
Let's back up a bit...
How did we come to find out that too much sodium is bad for us in the first place? In fact, if you believe that the scientific method is merely a 'counterpart' to religious "faith", then take this short quiz:
1) What is more reliable for controlling devastating diseases, for example, such as leprosy:
a) Smearing dove's blood on the patient
b) Multidrug therapy (MDT)[dapsone, rifampin, and clofazimine]
What is most reliable for correcting certain diseases of the human eye(which shouldn't need repair anyway, because it is presumably "perfect"):
a) Rub spittle on the patient's eyes
b) Laser, or refractive surgery.
What is a more reliable measure for birth control:
a) Pretend that we're not horny, and that sex is disgusting
b) Contraception
What is more reliable for preventing STD's among teens:
a) Pray that they won't have sex/tell them to abstain
b) Condoms
You're on a jet and you have a heart attack in mid-air. If you could choose one as a passenger seated next to you, who would choose as more reliable to resuscitate you:
a) a Priest/Rabbi
b) a medical doctor/nurse.
*Note: "most reliable" does not imply or suggest absolute success, nor certainty. It simply means just what it says--more reliable..i.e..higher success rate, better "track-record", etc.
Hello Layla, your question is one that many of us have had to ponder on, as we turned away from the bandwagon of Christian belief.
I lived most of my life in the southeastern U.S., but have also lived in CA, TX, HI, etc. I have found many states to be much different in terms of culture and acceptance.
In SC, and in the south in general, churches are found on almost every city block. Where I grew up, there is still much civil unrest in many parts. The small town I lived in, prior to joining the military, still had "rail-road" tracks in it.
The kind of "rail-road" tracks, where African Americans lived on one side of the town, and the whites on the other, and you don't want to get caught on the wrong side of the tracks kind of thing.
As well, the southern states are typically poor states, with little industry. Low wage earnings, don't attract quality applicants in the areas of teaching, etc., in these states.
So, what we have are states with low incomes, and no incentive to draw quality teachers to educate children. This is a recipe, for mass ignorance, and fertile ground for the religious to plant their seeds.
Many feel trapped, because their living standards depend on the cooperation of the community, which is controlled in many ways by religious leaders, even if "shared" among many different leaders. So, many feel compelled to conform, or to be outcasts facing the possibility of being left outside the resource circle.
In a 2004 poll, on quality of state education, here are the rankings.
-New Mexico - Last
-Nevada - 49th
-Arizona - 48th
-Mississippi - 47th
-Louisiana - 46th
-SC - 32d
http://www.morganquitno.com/edrank04.htm
While there will be exceptions, the general rule of thumb is; no money for quality, then poor quality. If someone is working more, than their pay should bring in quality; then, that worker will soon find themselves in "conflict" with the rest of their fellow workers for - bringing up the standard without equal compensation for anyone.
I bring all this up, to say, the only way to escape a cult, is to - leave. The goal, in most of our lives is to expand our span of control, for ourselves and our families.
Here are a few ways to gain some control, so that you have options; to move, and seek a life that is suitable to you and your family.
1-Educational degree. A degree from any university opens up job opportunities all over the country, and even internationally. Drawback, it takes at least four years to achieve an undergraduate degree.
2-Federal service. Some jobs require degrees, if you want to talk about this in depth, let me know. Some jobs don't require degrees, but special skills. Some jobs don't require degrees or skills for the most part, but, it will be expected that training will be provided on the job. Drawbacks, family separation for some jobs, as the gov't attempts to "draw down" the size of the gov't, fewer jobs will be available. Without a sponsor, or people network, many lines of work may not be accessible as the jobs are open first to those who are already in the system.
3-Relatives, goes without saying.
4-Marriage, goes without saying.
I ended up with option two, at the age of 17, and never looked back. While I still have relatives in that part of the U.S., I go and see them on "shared" terms, not theirs alone.
I transitioned from option two, to option one for a while, and after receiving a degree, went back to option two - and am required to continue option one as I work.
There are many others, who have likely found a way to achieve some control in their lives, but this was how I escaped. Quite honestly, where I lived, I would have rather been shot than to spend another minute being controlled by family, local culture, and cults.
However, we find ourselves away from a "cult", there is one common "factor" that is likely a unifying thread among them - education. Education is not only limited to a degree, it is also the knowledge you may have that allows you to make the best choices available to you, and that requires research and networking with other people with common interest.
Of all the states I lived; I believe HI and CA were the most liberal, no one seemed ready to hoist a burning cross in either of those states for the most part.
While there were still religious people and religions, there was enough "diversity" to keep everything kind of sane. On one corner in CA, one may find a Buddhist and on another a JW, the diversity kept any one religious center from becoming "dominant" and taking "control" of the environment.
I don't ascribe to "any" religion, because that requires me to freely give up "control" of my life/mind; I tend to see that as sacrificing myself "to them" and "for" the religious leader, willingly, in order to seek some benefit.
Most religions I have been involved in; believe they are more "qualified" to "lead" their followers, than the actual followers.
This requires followers to remain uneducated, and subservient. However, larger religions need to attract money, and so, have opened universities so their followers can receive degrees and make money for them, interesting how that works.
Religious universities do not tend to "undermine" their religious foundations. For instance, there was not a philosophy department, at the religious college I attended; they hired a professor to teach an introductory course and ensured there were no "compare" and "contrast" drills happening, between religious theology and philosophy.
To end, we have to find our ability to become "independent", and in control of our lives, that is how we escape cults; both mentally and physically.
Thanks for you post, and good luck with future endeavors.
Your comment that scientific research is not infallible because of human error does not discount the validity of the scientific method. All that it shows is that humans can fuck up a good idea, which has been true for any and all human institutions throughout history. Also, the gullibility of people who believe in false findings does not make science false.
Despite the fact that humans can fuck up a good thing, the scientific method holds true because any findings must be reproducible by others before they are considered facts. In fact, many principles that we know to be empirical laws today had to go through many years of trial and error before they could weed out the human errors.
Johannes Kepler, because of his religious convictions, believed that the planets moved according to a structure based on concentric Pythagorean solids. He wasted many years trying to prove this, and it wasn't until he was introduced to the measurements taken by Tycho Brahe (with his instruments calibrated to the finest tolerance) that he formed his three empirical laws of planetary motion, which are still used to describe the motions of the planets today.
Isaac Newton, in addition to developing calculus and the laws of gravitation, founded the school of modern optics as well. His famous book "Optiks" is a classic among physicists today. Despite the fact that most of his conclusions were wrong, he founded the school of modern optics by simply asking the right questions (e.g., Is light made of particles or waves?). His experiments were hampered by not having the modern equipment that it takes to measure such small physical phenomena (electrons, photons, etc ...) These phenomena were finally understood in the 20th century with the advent of quantum electrodynamics (see Richard Feynman, QED, a book that directly answers Newton's questions).
You see, Fred, science assigns varying degrees of certainty to what we know. A theory is a theory until it's proven over and over again by experiment (unlike your moondust theory, which was only for the gullible).
Fred, you need to do some soul searching. What is your motivation for making your claims? Are you trying to validate religion by saying that science is no more reliable than religion is? Are you choosing religious faith over what you called scientific "faith"?
Fred, if this is true, then you are cheating yourself out of life. You are making a fool of your own thoughts. You need to step back and think about these things for a while.
By the way, we here on this site are not very kind to religious people, Christians in particular. How kind should rape victims be to rapists? How kind should Jews be to Nazis? How kind should Afro-americans be to the KKK?
Layla, I gave you my situation, and what I did growing up, and how "I" was able to escape a Christian family, culture, and cult that surrounded me. This site is to support each other, and I was extending my experience, not as a "directive" that you "must" follow.
Dave8: "There are many others, who have likely found a way to achieve some control in their lives, but this was how I escaped."
That's called supporting one another, with personal experience.
Layla: "How do you escape a cult when it is all around you"- more of a rhetorical question really."
Well, in that sense, it would now appear as if I were answering a question, that you already have an answer for... Now, that does make my response seem, as if I were suggesting you didn't have an answer.
Layla: "I do not have a lack of education, although , I agree my testimonial was throw together hastily and in a sort of emotional rage."
I really did enjoy it, and I did understand it.
Layla: "I am a webmaster and my fiance will inherit a family business one day, so we have the means to move if we wished."
:-) Great, that means you have options. I have been blogging for years, and there are many people who we have engaged on this site, who don't have the flexibility to move, you're one step up - that's awesome.
Layla: "I have family here who would like to see my baby grow up, I will not be chased away from my home by bible-thumping quacks. I can understand what you are saying, but I do not like the negative vibe I'm getting from your "advice"."
Layla, I am a blogger who gave you their life experience, that's it. I could not possibly know your exact situation in detail, and even then, it would be insulting for me to "tell" you what to do. You have a life, just like everyone else on this planet, and are having to make decisions that are best for you in your specific situation. As stated, in my experience, I left, but I was single without a child or a fiance, that's why I gave that detail.
Layla: "I'm not a dirt poor country bumpkin' with no fancy book learnin'."
Out of all of the interpretations that could have been taken from my post; you have chosen to interpret it in the negative.
Again, my post was about my experiences, and how I escaped the cult, as a poor and uneducated (17 year old out of high-school) person.
Layla: "I'm going to have to go with my sister on this one-"
Seems like you both have similar ways of thinking.
Layla: "you are obviously a smart guy, but also a douchebag."
Layla, the words and manner in which we speak; provide great insight into how we think, the environment we live in, and who we are. The words displayed world-wide, say much more than I ever could.
No problem, I don't mind conflict or insults. I expect insults but no, I don't feel at home here as is to be expected. Any indignation is just my way to make a challenge.
Passerby,
Was your "image" floating in the bowl?? If it wasn't floating you might not be getting enough fiber:)
Seriously, if you saw something that challenged a personal belief wouldn't you work to make sense out of it? That is, do you automatically work to understand or do you discount at hand inflexibly and move on? Now, I don't see Jesus in a tortilla--I don't look for such images. I look into peoples eyes and I see God there because I have not been able to hold science accountable for what I see there. I don't look for miracles--I don't personally need them.
Boomslang:
You might be surprised I happily question everything and play devils advocate to learn how others think. From your prospective there certainly is something wrong with my thinking--I get that. Someone proposes something warm and friendly and you think they want something from you.
Most the time people want something from you and that is a conflict. Personally, I think most learning is through a conflict. The "Prophets (bible thumpers)" say something warm and friendly and they expect something back. Good for you, you don't deliver--that conflict you create is interesting.
Pekingjohn:
Conflict aside there are still broad general commonalities. Someone like me tries to point out commonalities; that doesn't mean you have to accept anything I say. No problem, I believe you might be happier to understand faith whether religious or faith in something else. You believe me a fool and think I would be happier dropping faith and "using my mind."
Clearly, I am using my mind and I acknowledge your point about being persecuted. When I came to this website it was by accident. In fact, I remember I was doing a Google search and ended up on another website where I wrote a letter to some ridiculous reformation website. They had placed a link and I disagreed with their method--it was insulting--and I am Catholic and I have some of the same basic beliefs.
I wrote a note to them about this link. It was nuts. They have some purpose to try to convert people and that comes from being appealing not repulsive. You click on this link which poses a question(I know you have heard this),"[abridged]...do you accept Jesus’ gift?? No? then click hear." So, being the devils advocate (as I stated I am earlier) I clicked. "POW", this drawing would give a kid nightmares--fire and gross figures walking on coal.
Naturally, I was mad for a second and then I realized how dumb that someone would have such disrespect. I wrote a letter to the place. I never received a response--my feeling is they don't think I am worth their time.
You see, it is this type of disrespect that is so ignorant. This is no way to present someone’s faith. This is more of what you describe-- a persecution. This is akin to what I experienced in college around the Grand Canyon college campus when I visited my friend there 20 years ago. I could not believe the way these people acted. I remember one fellow who pointed at my glasses and said I wore them "because I did not have enough faith". What?? Now that is funny but only sad upon examination.
I still remain Catholic and I go to church each week but note I don't have to be careful to remind myself I am no better than a non-religious person. I know I am not better than anyone. I consider myself ordinary in many ways but I have a “gift” nonetheless. I can understand things from a broad prospective very quickly. I have trouble with details yes, but that is not to discount what I have said earlier. We all rely on faith as much as we do iron. You will be no better than that reformation website if you don't find a commonality somewhere with your "enemy." Now, having said all this anyone who replies with “kiss kiss kiss” is in real trouble.
Okay.
F.F.: From your prospective there certainly is something wrong with my thinking--I get that.
You "get that". BUT?
f.f.: Someone proposes something warm and friendly and you think they want something from you.
Okay, now you've lost me. Feel free to clarify, or if not, that's fine too. From what I can tell, your underlying premise is that the scientific method is merely a counterpart to "religious faith". I disagree(d), and I offered a short quiz to illustrate a point.
But let me state it another way: While science doesn't deal in absolutes - nor does the medical field have 100% success - those facts don't reduce the scientific method to a "faith".
That's why it was a miracle. I tried to flush my Jesus shit-face over and over again, but Jesus wouldn't allow it. It just wouldn't flush. I know Jesus works in mysterious ways---I know it was Jesus working his miracle. Jesus was working his miracle through that piece of turd. I thought it was odd that my Jesus-shit-face wouldn't flush...it was God talking to me in strange ways:-)
Fred Freid: "Seriously, if you saw something that challenged a personal belief wouldn't you work to make sense out of it?"
You mean like Pastors, Priets, and Holy rollers who molest kids, steal from the naive congregation, and commit other criminal acts, while professing to have the Holy Spirit in them? Yeah, it challenged my belief. The Catholic Church is basically a criminal organization for covering up the Priest scandal...and covering it up for decades. They conspired at all levels within their ranks. And it's not just the Catholic Church, it seems it occurs in every religion.
Fred Freid: "That is, do you automatically work to understand or do you discount at hand inflexibly and move on?"
That's why I'm here. I "worked to understand" the history of Christianity, and lo and behold, the religious cards just started to crumble...there was no foundation, but there was a lot of borrowing from the primeval beliefs of other religions.
Fred Freid: "I look into peoples eyes and I see God there because I have not been able to hold science accountable for what I see there."
What do you mean by God? please define? Do you see God when you look at the eyes of inmates in a high security prison for the mentally unstable? Some of these inmates are so unstable they would kill you just for pleasure, and not feel one bit of remorse or guilt? I wonder what science says about this.
Cheers
Passerby (the original, not the brainwashed nutcase, named Marc, who is unoriginal just like his Jealous God)
it was God talking to me in strange ways:-)
I hope you don't die while typing this stuff. Everything you worked to accomplish in life will be forgotten. All anyone will remember is this weird note about "Jesus" and "flushing." If you are found dead pray your head hits the keyboard and types over that!
Passerby said:
The Catholic Church is basically a criminal organization for covering up the Priest scandal...and covering it up for decades. They conspired at all levels within their ranks. And it's not just the Catholic Church, it seems it occurs in every religion.
I see corruption everywhere and those of authority who commit serious offences are more accountable simply because they are held up as an authority. I don't think you can call the Catholic church a criminal organization--but maybe you can-- you are only half right though.
I know it is easier to stamp something but there are many people doing charity work that should not be lumped in and stamped because of a few despicable creeps.
Additionally, the church has taken a strong stance to protect others from abuse in recent years. Call to protect programs came too late and the church followed a systematic practice for too long but there have been major changes.
I think your statement is only half correct but I admit it is good practice to lean toward the cautious side and it also tempting to leave your statement stand. It is only concern to me that the nature of your statement may be that all Catholics who participate in a celebration of their faith and those who give of their time (not just to preach but to help others) are criminal.
Passerby said:
What do you mean by God? please define? Do you see God when you look at the eyes of inmates in a high security prison for the mentally unstable
It is a goal for me to see the potential. If you are a parent you understand having to have faith in your kids and their ability. There is evidence that a parent’s faith in their kids enables their children to be more "successful." When I stated “I see God in someone’s eyes” I forgot it was a platitude and difficult to practice. Now, don't be offended but this is a religious statement way of answering but..... What it really means to me is that God has no limitations he can work his will even through the unwilling ( it would be stupid for me to call someone of limited ability God).
What? You suggest that a human life, no matter what great accomplishments and triumphs it may have had, isn't as important as one silly comment on a message board because it's the last thing he's done?
So if a man just happened to find the cure for cancer, bring peace to the world, and end starvation for millions...then gives one last blurb on a message board, everyone will forget the rest.
Ummm. No. Even if a mans life wasn't so grand as that, it would still be worth more than that, if to no one else but his friends and family.
Why quote me; that was just a joke. But....I still hope passerby doesn't die half way through his posting. I am not so anxious to see how far this tongue in cheek will go but I am more afraid for him to be discovered body at 65 degrees hands on the keyboard with those words lingering on the screen.
You won't believe it. The turd with Jesus' face on it was still in the toilet, so I put a stick through it, similar to a corn dog, and now I have a Jesus shit-face on a stick. What should I do with it, fred freid? Should I worship it, sell it on ebay...please help me out?
French Fry said: "I hope you don't die while typing this stuff. Everything you worked to accomplish in life will be forgotten."
additionally, he said,
"I still hope passerby doesn't die half way through his posting."
fred freid, why would I die while typing on the keyboard? Are you hoping for such a thing? That's not nice. Well, you are a religious person and using history as a guide, we know religious people have a propensity to commit heinous acts in the name of their God.
If Jesus is real, may he strike me down righ t n
I saw this earlier, but I think it's still funny. Sorry webmaster for the wasted space and childish acts, but we are talking about religion, which is inherently childish. I'll stop now.
fred freid: "I don't think you can call the Catholic church a criminal organization--but maybe you can-- you are only half right though."
I think the Church is a criminal organization. Priests, Bishops, Cardinals, even Monsignor Bernard Prince, who worked at the Vatican for a decade and was close to Pope John Paul II, were involved in pedophilia acts. Pretty much all ranks within this hierarchical structure. At least you recognize that the Catholic Church is at least partially a criminal organization. Our resident troll, Marc, a Catholic poster boy, would wholeheartedly disagree with you.
fred freid: "Additionally, the church has taken a strong stance to protect others from abuse in recent years."
Whoa, wait a minute. The Church didn't take the impetus to initiate these changes, they were forced to take a strong stance against clergy abuse due to public outcry...after decades of criminal activity. The scandal was getting out of control and the Catholic Church couldn't contain it...they acted just like a common criminal, they got caught. Again, it's not just the RCC that I'm singling out, but many other religious institutions.
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases#List_of_Roman_Catholic_priests_accused_of_sex_offenses
"aside from the incidents of child sexual abuse themselves, was the active institutional cover-up by the Roman Catholic Church's most senior Church leaders for failing to report these felonies to the police"
fred freid, watch this film this weekend, instead of wishing me death with your voodoo doll.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deliver_Us_from_Evil_%282006_film%29
fred freid: "It is only concern to me that the nature of your statement may be that all Catholics who participate in a celebration of their faith and those who give of their time (not just to preach but to help others) are criminal."
I didn't say all. BTW, why doesn't Jesus and/or God help these children who were sexual/criminally abused by their religious leaders?...oh yeah, that's right, he's imaginary.
fred freid: "What it really means to me is that God has no limitations he can work his will even through the unwilling)."
What God? Allah, Zeus, Horus, Ra? What do you mean by God? You can't even define god?
Please don't be offended if I call you out on this, but, your God is totally imaginary, and he lives only in your imagination. You have ZERO evidence for YOUR God. All Gods are created in man's image, all based on superstition and mythology.
fred freid, you can worship whatever you like, whether it be a rock, a snake, a cow, or even jesus. We're skeptics here, if you want to show us your god is real, then we need more than wishful thinking, and blind faith in the imaginary.
Cheers
Passerby (the original, not Marc, the brainwashed RCC poster boy who stole my identity, because he's unoriginal, just like his Jealous God).
Please take note I have never tried to prove God exists(at least not directly). I never could find this debate useful. I think there is a funny aspect of trying to debate anything religious. You will find that the existence of God is important to most people when someone is sick or in some trouble as if God were on a shuttle bus to save people. It is the rare person who can be eloquent and set aside emotion to accept scrutiny of their belief (religious and atheist alike). It is an exceedingly difficult task that is presented here. Why would someone who is happy and believes they have wrapped everything up want to start back up at the beginning and examine everything that grounds them. This for the mere sake of convincing someone through a contest of debate?
Belief is not something conveyed by debate; it is something best conveyed by the respect you show for others and how you live your life. For example, I would like to see more from people. I don’t need visitors at my doorstep uninvited trying to convert me to another sect. I expect community support rather than divisiveness. You might say I have a reserve of resentment for poor execution. This is not necessarily pointed at the people who put a LOT of effort to convert but converting should not support isolation. It should never be the purpose of any church to support isolation.
Also, It is definitely wrong for a relative to berate you about your not believing in God--heck that makes me mad! If these relatives I read about on this site are so great tell them to prove it by treating you with respect. Tell them to show you how they accept the challenge their God gives them. Tell them to put their money where their mouth is; you will be helping them and maybe they might (if they are worth it) give you the respect you deserve.
By the way, I don't consider you a threat so I would not want you to be harmed. I am not bothered by ideas or other beliefs or expression--at least most of the time but...if I thought posters here were stupid I would not bother. From what I get in feedback here most atheists think religious people might be ignorant and stupid and I find that confusing—how can you ever get “out from underneath the cult” if you believe everyone else is just stupid or ignorant?
I don't feel the same about an atheist because I know how the masses sell religion so as it is not appealing(always). It is not so much we are hypocrites--that is why we attend services(forgiveness, admission of guilt etc..). It is more that we can be superior in attitude—it is not hard to admit this attitude exists. I would like to see more from people than to have them visit me at my home uninvited trying to convert someone to another sect. I expect community support rather than divisiveness. Nonbelievers, on the other hand, might not hate religion or find it such a threat to your way of life if you felt there was mutual respect. The difficult part, is this MUTUAL RESPECT-- it is very hard to have when BOTH parties have little respect. As an atheist, in order to get out from “under the cult”, you may need to be the first one to make that MUTUAL RESPECT a reality. As a Christian we also have an obvious need to respect other beliefs even when the belief is in science and not religion.
Note: I am too shallow to provide any strong points or make some earth shattering blog entry here (I know my place). I also find this exceedingly time consuming and I would rather keep my job at this point. I’ve become addicted to this blog stuff and it has to stop so don’t think I have abandoned you (I know you are concerned). You are not alone—you should see the website “Iheartfarms.com” she is still talking about my postings and all I ever did was ask her questions (you know that Devils advocate thing) about organics. She never even took the time to participate very thoughtfully. After my experience there I am glad to finally visit a website where there is some useful dialogue. Good luck
fred freid: "You will find that the existence of God is important to most people when someone is sick or in some trouble as if God were on a shuttle bus to save people."
And some people use the word God to fly planes into Buildings, and commit other criminal acts.
fred freid: "It is the rare person who can be eloquent and set aside emotion to accept scrutiny of their belief (religious and atheist alike).
Um, Atheism is not a belief. It is a lack of belief. The word atheist comes from the Greeks, a = "without," and theos = "a god." Atheist = without a god.
fred freid: "Why would someone who is happy and believes they have wrapped everything up want to start back up at the beginning and examine everything that grounds them."
It's personal growth and development through education. Never stop learning my friend. Would you make that statement to followers of the late Marshall Applewhite, leader of the doomsday cult called Heaven's Gate? These people were happy with their lives and they thought everything was "wrapped up," that is, wrapped up in purple clothes waiting for that spaceship to heaven. The list of doomsday cults is large---more on cults later since you are confused by its meaning.
fred freid: "Also, It is definitely wrong for a relative to berate you about your not believing in God....Tell them to show you how they accept the challenge their God gives them. Tell them to put their money where their mouth is"
Maybe they're just following the words of their God? What did the sadistic blood thirsty Biblical God say about this in Luke 19:27?
fred freid: "From what I get in feedback here most atheists think religious people might be ignorant and stupid and I find that confusing—how can you ever get “out from underneath the cult” if you believe everyone else is just stupid or ignorant?"
Atheism is not a cult. Your religious cult has told you that atheism is a cult...you're just parroting what your preacher/pastor told you. Calling atheism a cult is similar to calling people who don't believe in flying pink elephants are in a cult.
Oh, by the way, what do you call someone who believes that animals and vegetation can have a conversation with humans?
fred freid: "As an atheist, in order to get out from “under the cult.”
Again, if I read you correctly, Atheism is not a cult.
fred freid: "As a Christian we also have an obvious need to respect other beliefs even when the belief is in science and not religion."
You obviously don't comprehend very well, fred. This was already addressed above by a few posters, and just like the typical religious person, the denial is just too great to overcome. Look up cognitive dissonance, fred.
Cheers