Assuming others are Christians

[Albion]

Here's a thought that may or may not help. A lot of what you've recounted there seems to be similar to what most of us go through or have gone through, especially for people who have had higher education and been exposed to logic and a range of other cultures, etc.

It seems to be part of the maturation process. Even some of the great minds in Western Civilization, including ones known especially for their moral or religious views wandered between different philosophies and churches before finding their niche.

It may be entirely normal to develop in this way and it may be all for the good if, in the end, most people wind up feeling satisfied with their conclusions.

 

[cloudyday2]

Here's a thought that may or may not help. A lot of what you've recounted there seems to be similar to what most of us go through or have gone through, especially for people who have had higher education and been exposed to logic and a range of other cultures, etc.

It seems to be part of the maturation process. Even some of the great minds in Western Civilization, including ones known especially for their moral or religious views wandered between different philosophies and churches before finding their niche.

It may be entirely normal to develop in this way and it may be all for the good if, in the end, most people wind up feeling satisfied with their conclusions.

That's true. It does seem to be very common.

 

[Stormy]

In truth being a Christian means to follow Christ. Jesus had no problem associating with everyone. Although some loved him and others hated him, he kept true to himself.

I am who I am (I think that's a Popeye guote) love me or hate me... you will know by my love, more so than contant words and preaching, that I am Christian.

 

[oi_antz]

Faith is another one of those words that means so many different things, so I would need to know your understanding of rote faith vs. real faith to be able to answer. Without knowing for sure what you mean, I can say that as a child I assumed Christianity was true, and as I grew-up I developed questions and suspicions. I felt I needed some personal evidence, so I tried going to a charismatic church in college. Sometime just before or after graduating, I began to consider myself an atheist, but I still left the door open for God if he decided to visit me. I had psychological problems a few years ago that caused me to consider myself a Christian briefly. As I got better psychologically, I became confused and suspicious and gradually more doubtful. Today I am atheist with respect to Christianity, agnostic with respect to something more like Hinduism, and generally burned-out on religion.

Actually I was thinking about starting a thread for brainstorming the intricacies of these issues like faith, belief, choices, etc. - not in hopes of defining a universally accepted vocabulary, but for highlighting the intricacies and the potential for confusion in discussions.

I didn't mean to make it confusing or complicated, all I meant is that when you were a Christian as you recall now, do you think your Christian faith was one you had learned and understood from having it explained and demonstrated to you, or was it something that you learned from experience, responding to God's activity in your life? I like this word that is not very common, because it appears in one place in the NLT. It might help you to understand what I mean:

And so the Lord says, “These people say they are mine. They honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. And their worship of me is nothing but man-made rules learned by rote.

Isaiah 29:13

As a side note, about faith, St Paul gave an extremely concise and full definition of it:

- confident of what we hope for
- assured about what we do not see

Analyse each of those, and you will recognise faith, that these are qualities of those who have faith, that are necessary for faith.

There was a question in #35 that I was quite keen to know. I wondered why you were uncomfortable with the views of the believers that were making you uncomfortable. I wondered whether those views were condescending towards people who do not share the faith that those people have. I hope it is ok to ask, thanks.

 

[TheBarrd]

I didn't mean to make it confusing or complicated, all I meant is that when you were a Christian as you recall now, do you think your Christian faith was one you had learned and understood from having it explained and demonstrated to you, or was it something that you learned from experience, responding to God's activity in your life? I like this word that is not very common, because it appears in one place in the NLT. It might help you to understand what I mean:



As a side note, about faith, St Paul gave an extremely concise and full definition of it:

- confident of what we hope for
- assured about what we do not see

Analyse each of those, and you will recognise faith, that these are qualities of those who have faith, that are necessary for faith.

There was a question in #35 that I was quite keen to know. I wondered why you were uncomfortable with the views of the believers that were making you uncomfortable. I wondered whether those views were condescending towards people who do not share the faith that those people have. I hope it is ok to ask, thanks.

I don't think folks who have actually experienced their faith ever leave it.

 

[cloudyday2]

I agree with you btw. But if the people you are with believe that you are comfortable with their views then you can only blame yourself for their misunderstanding. If they know the truth and are they are uncomfortable with the truth, you can blame them for that. But you may prefer to sacrifice your own comfort for their sake. I see that everyone here sympathises with your preference in your situation. But why are you uncomfortable with the content of their views? Does it condescend who you really are?

It's hard to answer, because I feel differently depending on who is talking and what they say to me.

My mother is always asking me to remember somebody in my prayers or various syrupy remarks about how Jesus loves us or whatnot. These remarks are annoying but basically harmless. What bothers me more is her belief that she is sometimes under spiritual attack at night, the Christian TV preachers, etc. Those ideas are harmful to her, but I don't see a solution.

One friend is a part-time pastor. He is very talkative and sometimes religion becomes a topic. I see how much money and time he invests in Christianity, and I often want to help him become an atheist. Unfortunately, his wife is even more religious, so this would probably create marital problems. Also my mother would become aware that I am an atheist, and that would upset her. So I listen politely.

Sometimes I just feel exasperated that my personal circumstances and good manners require me to quietly tolerate Christian beliefs no matter how ridiculous or harmful. Of course some Christian beliefs are good and other Christians beliefs are good for some people and bad for other people. I am not claiming that all Christian beliefs are ridiculous and harmful.

 

[cloudyday2]

In truth being a Christian means to follow Christ. Jesus had no problem associating with everyone. Although some loved him and others hated him, he kept true to himself.

I am who I am (I think that's a Popeye guote) love me or hate me... you will know by my love, more so than contant words and preaching, that I am Christian.

That's a good point. Theoretically Christians should be able to keep their beliefs private and promote Christianity through their love, etc.

 

[cloudyday2]

I didn't mean to make it confusing or complicated, all I meant is that when you were a Christian as you recall now, do you think your Christian faith was one you had learned and understood from having it explained and demonstrated to you, or was it something that you learned from experience, responding to God's activity in your life? I like this word that is not very common, because it appears in one place in the NLT. It might help you to understand what I mean:



As a side note, about faith, St Paul gave an extremely concise and full definition of it:

- confident of what we hope for
- assured about what we do not see

Analyse each of those, and you will recognise faith, that these are qualities of those who have faith, that are necessary for faith.

There was a question in #35 that I was quite keen to know. I wondered why you were uncomfortable with the views of the believers that were making you uncomfortable. I wondered whether those views were condescending towards people who do not share the faith that those people have. I hope it is ok to ask, thanks.

On the question in #35, see my answer in #46.

On the faith question, I would say it was trial and error. For example, I might see a vision, hear a voice, experience butterflies in my stomach, or even see a pattern in a pile of litter on the sidewalk. Then I would try to figure out what it meant. Should I give away all my money to charity? Should I become a heretic? Perhaps Satan is actually God in disguise, and this is all a test? ... I was trying to listen to God and do what he asked, but I was having psychological problems at the time.

When I tried to seek God while I was more stable psychologically, he seemed to be very indifferent and unhelpful.

It is hard to answer these questions in general, because I'm in my late 40's and I have had different issues and different solutions that I have tried throughout my life. It feels good to be putting Christianity behind me, because it has been a nagging issue all my life.

 

[cloudyday2]

I don't think folks who have actually experienced their faith ever leave it.

That is what I would expect if faith is a real thing that changes a person from carnal to spiritual or whatever. Of course there are many ex-Christians who were once very certain that their faith was real.

 

[oi_antz]

On the question in #35, see my answer in #46.

On the faith question, I would say it was trial and error. For example, I might see a vision, hear a voice, experience butterflies in my stomach, or even see a pattern in a pile of litter on the sidewalk. Then I would try to figure out what it meant. Should I give away all my money to charity? Should I become a heretic? Perhaps Satan is actually God in disguise, and this is all a test? ... I was trying to listen to God and do what he asked, but I was having psychological problems at the time.

When I tried to seek God while I was more stable psychologically, he seemed to be very indifferent and unhelpful.

It is hard to answer these questions in general, because I'm in my late 40's and I have had different issues and different solutions that I have tried throughout my life. It feels good to be putting Christianity behind me, because it has been a nagging issue all my life.

What is this thing "Christianity" that you are putting behind you? Is it something you have believed you should try to be but don't really want to be?

 

[oi_antz]

I don't think folks who have actually experienced their faith ever leave it.

Yes actually they can, and sometimes do. When they choose to sell their inheritance for a bowl of soup. Consider the prodigal son. What is evident there is the father never abandoned the son.

 

[cloudyday2]

What is this thing "Christianity" that you are putting behind you? Is it something you have believed you should try to be but don't really want to be?

Another hard question, hmmmm.

By leaving behind Christianity, I don't mean I'm giving up trying to be a certain type of person.

I'm just giving up any hopes or worries associated with Christianity. I'm afraid that going into too much detail about my current opinions could violate the forum's rules. I believe I'm not supposed to "X isn't true" (where X is Christianity or some core Christian belief). I don't know if saying "X isn't true IMO" gets around the problem. So I err on the side of caution.

The other thing I'm leaving behind is the paranoid worries that were left from being mentally ill. Sometimes I think of those as part of Christianity, but of course they are not.

 

[oi_antz]

Another hard question, hmmmm.

By leaving behind Christianity, I don't mean I'm giving up trying to be a certain type of person.

I'm just giving up any hopes or worries associated with Christianity. I'm afraid that going into too much detail about my current opinions could violate the forum's rules. I believe I'm not supposed to "X isn't true" (where X is Christianity or some core Christian belief). I don't know if saying "X isn't true IMO" gets around the problem. So I err on the side of caution.

The other thing I'm leaving behind is the paranoid worries that were left from being mentally ill. Sometimes I think of those as part of Christianity, but of course they are not.

Ok. It's just that you don't strike me as the sort of person who would be against Christianity, so I am assuming that what you think Christianity is, is not really what it is. The question was meant to lead you to consider this, as it had a strong implication. But I don't know this for sure, I am only guessing based on what seems likely. This is also why I asked rather than declared. I am still interested to know, and as you know already, to promote a true view of Christianity.

 

[cloudyday2]

Ok. It's just that you don't strike me as the sort of person who would be against Christianity, so I am assuming that what you think Christianity is, is not really what it is. The question was meant to lead you to consider this, as it had a strong implication. But I don't know this for sure, I am only guessing based on what seems likely. This is also why I asked rather than declared. I am still interested to know, and as you know already, to promote a true view of Christianity.

Of course there are many different ideas of Christianity.
- the Catholic idea (unity with a visible institution - the Catholic Church)
- the Eastern Orthodox idea (kind of like Catholic but not as black and white)
- the Protestant idea (trying to recreate and follow the original Church by reading the Bible, listening to God, etc. and ignoring later traditions)
- ... and all kinds of combinations and variations

I used to think that there might be some Christians who were actually listening and following God and that I might be missing out on the purpose of life by being an atheist - maybe even dooming myself to hell. I recognized that God seemed to ignore me, but I thought there was a 50% chance that God might be somewhat like the God described in the Bible and consider some form of Christianity to be the right religion.

Now the probability I assign is so small that these are no longer concerns. I think the way we live our lives is like a child drawing with crayons. God is the parent who hangs our masterpiece on the refrigerator with a magnet and pats us on the head when we die. Or maybe there is no God at all. Either way, we must find our own way through life.

 

[Albion]

I used to think that there might be some Christians who were actually listening and following God and that I might be missing out on the purpose of life by being an atheist - maybe even dooming myself to hell. I recognized that God seemed to ignore me, but I thought there was a 50% chance that God might be somewhat like the God described in the Bible and consider some form of Christianity to be the right religion.

Now the probability I assign is so small that these are no longer concerns. I think the way we live our lives is like a child drawing with crayons. God is the parent who hangs our masterpiece on the refrigerator with a magnet and pats us on the head when we die. Or maybe there is no God at all. Either way, we must find our own way through life.

I keep thinking that you are writing off a cause, truth, ideal, or something like that ONLY because other people who have or appear to have given it a whirl are not doing a good job of it. If that's so, I shouldn't try my hand at oil paining because there are some awful artists out there; I shouldn't be patriotic because some people who wave the flag are phonies; I shouldn't give to charity because some charities are known to be rip-offs; I shouldn't vote because some other voters don't make good choices, etc. But what of the pastime or cause itself?

 

[oi_antz]

Of course there are many different ideas of Christianity.
- the Catholic idea (unity with a visible institution - the Catholic Church)
- the Eastern Orthodox idea (kind of like Catholic but not as black and white)
- the Protestant idea (trying to recreate and follow the original Church by reading the Bible, listening to God, etc. and ignoring later traditions)
- ... and all kinds of combinations and variations

I used to think that there might be some Christians who were actually listening and following God and that I might be missing out on the purpose of life by being an atheist - maybe even dooming myself to hell. I recognized that God seemed to ignore me, but I thought there was a 50% chance that God might be somewhat like the God described in the Bible and consider some form of Christianity to be the right religion.

Now the probability I assign is so small that these are no longer concerns. I think the way we live our lives is like a child drawing with crayons. God is the parent who hangs our masterpiece on the refrigerator with a magnet and pats us on the head when we die. Or maybe there is no God at all. Either way, we must find our own way through life.

I like the image of Him hanging the masterpiece on the fridge. When I think about that it is interesting.

I think you have looked at the detail of Christianity and been overwhelmed and also that you have been impacted by Christians who have imposed their view of Christianity on you, and the way it has impacted you is not comfortable. Eventually you have found and accepted that it is more comfortable to reduce the impact of that "Christianity" on you. Assuming that is accurate, and I find it to be understandable, I am concerned that you have also chosen to discard the basic truths of Christianity when you don't need to, and that in doing so and believing that it is right to do so, you might be depriving yourself of something beneficial and even possibly harming yourself or setting yourself up to potentially harm someone else's ability to appreciate the basic truths of Christianity. Those basic truths that I am thinking of are:

- Love God
- Love the people around you
- God wants to give everlasting life to those who look after others
- God wants to get rid of those who do not look after others

I think whatever else is packed around those principles is done because life has a diverse range of concerns, situations, and people like to understand things so they feel comfortable that they are safe. And it is OK when people find their comfort by understanding things differently (sometimes it might not, eg when their understanding is not true).

But the problems that the detail of Christianity brings happen when people don't really understand for themselves what they believe, but they have chosen to believe for some other reason. For example, lots of Christians believe what they have learned about Christianity because they have assumed it is necessary to believe it otherwise there is a risk they might suffer endlessly. They have a very right desire to not be subjected to that, but they have made a mistake (and been encouraged to do so probably by someone who made the same mistake), by choosing to make that assumption when it is possible to make other assumptions instead.

Another way people can choose to believe things without having formed through understanding, is maybe they feel accepted if they do, and part of something they admire. Just as a gang prospector admires the gang they are pursuing, a Christian might admire the church they are pursuing. Then when they discover the criteria for being accepted as a member of that church is to believe what the church teaches, the teaching of the church becomes what they teach others. That is a rote faith. But in contrast, you might find some Christians out there (albeit comparatively few) who have formed their beliefs, and indeed continue to form their beliefs, by solving the problems through fair and reasonable thought. Never just accepting what someone teaches on the basis of what personal desires it appeals to, but looking to see how to make sense of the available information.

I am presently engaged in this process as I question the validity and origin of substitutionaty atonement doctrines, and finding that scriptures given in support of those doctrines do not require the acceptance of that doctrine and do not necessarily support the doctrine. The doctrines themselves appear at this stage to be unnecessary and I have known for quite some time that they can be harmful to Jesus Christ's cause (which is to mediate man to God so we can approach Him in freedom and confidence, that we can know Him, love Him, and do what He requires of us).

 

[cloudyday2]

I keep thinking that you are writing off a cause, truth, ideal, or something like that ONLY because other people who have or appear to have given it a whirl are not doing a good job of it. If that's so, I shouldn't try my hand at oil paining because there are some awful artists out there; I shouldn't be patriotic because some people who wave the flag are phonies; I shouldn't give to charity because some charities are known to be rip-offs; I shouldn't vote because some other voters don't make good choices, etc. But what of the pastime or cause itself?

It's a bit different.

I was a cradle Christian (Episcopalian) who assumed Christianity was based on historical events - including most of the Bible (such as Genesis). I am a gullible person, so it never occurred to me to doubt. As a teenager, I read the Bible several times, and began to notice problems. In college, I had a few religious discussions with friends, and I began to doubt more. I was totally ignorant of the various arguments for atheism, but making friends with non-Christians immigrants made me realize that most Christians inherited Christianity from their parents or Western culture. If Christianity was so wonderful, then why didn't God make it dominant worldwide?

So in college I felt that I needed some evidence. I thought I needed to experience the gifts of the Holy Spirit. I thought maybe being baptized as an infant was not sufficient, and I needed to be born-again as an adult. I went with friends to a charismatic mega church and was eventually re-baptized. I was disappointed and actually a little disgusted with the baptism coordinator, because he told us to babble after being baptized and made each of us try babbling beforehand. I said some gibberish, and he said "that's good". It was very disappointing.

Every 5 years or so, I would try to go to church, pray, etc. in hopes that God might meet me halfway, but I was disappointed over and over again for the next 20 years. I would think that either God doesn't exist or he doesn't like me.

Now I'm happy, because I no longer wonder if Christians are in touch with God. IMO Christians are all deluded. If Jesus stood before me and shook my hand, I would still not believe in Christianity. I would go to a psychiatrist instead of a priest. I've thought and read about Christianity, so I now see it as impossible. Convincing me that Christianity is true would be like convincing me that Santa Claus is true.

 

[cloudyday2]

I like the image of Him hanging the masterpiece on the fridge. When I think about that it is interesting.

I think you have looked at the detail of Christianity and been overwhelmed and also that you have been impacted by Christians who have imposed their view of Christianity on you, and the way it has impacted you is not comfortable. Eventually you have found and accepted that it is more comfortable to reduce the impact of that "Christianity" on you. Assuming that is accurate, and I find it to be understandable, I am concerned that you have also chosen to discard the basic truths of Christianity when you don't need to, and that in doing so and believing that it is right to do so, you might be depriving yourself of something beneficial and even possibly harming yourself or setting yourself up to potentially harm someone else's ability to appreciate the basic truths of Christianity. Those basic truths that I am thinking of are:

- Love God
- Love the people around you
- God wants to give everlasting life to those who look after others
- God wants to get rid of those who do not look after others

I think whatever else is packed around those principles is done because life has a diverse range of concerns, situations, and people like to understand things so they feel comfortable that they are safe. And it is OK when people find their comfort by understanding things differently (sometimes it might not, eg when their understanding is not true).

But the problems that the detail of Christianity brings happen when people don't really understand for themselves what they believe, but they have chosen to believe for some other reason. For example, lots of Christians believe what they have learned about Christianity because they have assumed it is necessary to believe it otherwise there is a risk they might suffer endlessly. They have a very right desire to not be subjected to that, but they have made a mistake (and been encouraged to do so probably by someone who made the same mistake), by choosing to make that assumption when it is possible to make other assumptions instead.

Another way people can choose to believe things without having formed through understanding, is maybe they feel accepted if they do, and part of something they admire. Just as a gang prospector admires the gang they are pursuing, a Christian might admire the church they are pursuing. Then when they discover the criteria for being accepted as a member of that church is to believe what the church teaches, the teaching of the church becomes what they teach others. That is a rote faith. But in contrast, you might find some Christians out there (albeit comparatively few) who have formed their beliefs, and indeed continue to form their beliefs, by solving the problems through fair and reasonable thought. Never just accepting what someone teaches on the basis of what personal desires it appeals to, but looking to see how to make sense of the available information.

I am presently engaged in this process as I question the validity and origin of substitutionaty atonement doctrines, and finding that scriptures given in support of those doctrines do not require the acceptance of that doctrine and do not necessarily support the doctrine. The doctrines themselves appear at this stage to be unnecessary and I have known for quite some time that they can be harmful to Jesus Christ's cause (which is to mediate man to God so we can approach Him in freedom and confidence, that we can know Him, love Him, and do what He requires of us).

o.k. that's interesting and true what you said about Christians fearing to disbelieve. I was certainly that way in college. It is interesting that you have jumped that hurdle of fear, yet you continue to have some faith in a form of Christianity. The fear is a real problem. I think I had some small degree of fear and worry up until very recently, and I jumped the first hurdle of fear in college 25 years ago.

Of course I don't mean to encourage people to disbelieve. But it is good to lose the fear you describe.

 

[MissVeronica]

Do you guys see this as a problem? If so, how do you deal with the problem?

(1) Many churches teach that non-believers go to hell.
(2) Many non-believers used to believe and later lost faith.
(3) Many non-believers are married to believers, children of believers, coworkers of believers, etc.
(4) Non-believers often prefer to keep their views private for a variety of reasons. Maybe they don't want loved ones to worry about them spending eternity in hell. Maybe they don't want to jeopardize friendships, marriages, etc.

I know as a former believer, that it is hard to imagine that others do not believe. Often others used to believe, so it is natural to assume that they continue to believe. For this reason, the believer might casually makes comments where the non-believer must either keep silent or share his/her private views of Christianity.

This is a growing problem in the US, because we are transitioning from majority Christian to minority Christian.

Do you think Christians should be more sensitive that spouses, children, friends may no longer believe and therefore keep their own beliefs more private?
Do you think non-believers should be more outspoken?

Remember there are true convert and fake convert. True proverbs ...The dog goes back to its vomit. Pig go back to the wallowing in the mire. Not because its dirty but to Cool his flesh. That happens to false converts. The modern gospel don't use the law as jesus did, because sinners are not crucified with Christ. The law gospel,drives us to a new life in Christ. It is Only a matter of time. That the false convert is drawn back to the filth of the world to cool his sinful flesh. Sin is still alive in his hearts. That is why we have Mushroom converts they Spring up from nowhere then disapear. Not saying a genuine convert never sins,
Every christian battle with the world and flesh and the devil and sometime they falls into sin, But he falls.....the hypocrite false converts dives into sin. The christian sins against his will, the hypocrite convert makes provision for the flesh. You making provision for the flesh, you need to examine yourself.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Do you guys see this as a problem? If so, how do you deal with the problem?

(1) Many churches teach that non-believers go to hell.
(2) Many non-believers used to believe and later lost faith.
(3) Many non-believers are married to believers, children of believers, coworkers of believers, etc.
(4) Non-believers often prefer to keep their views private for a variety of reasons. Maybe they don't want loved ones to worry about them spending eternity in hell. Maybe they don't want to jeopardize friendships, marriages, etc.

I know as a former believer, that it is hard to imagine that others do not believe. Often others used to believe, so it is natural to assume that they continue to believe. For this reason, the believer might casually makes comments where the non-believer must either keep silent or share his/her private views of Christianity.

This is a growing problem in the US, because we are transitioning from majority Christian to minority Christian.

Do you think Christians should be more sensitive that spouses, children, friends may no longer believe and therefore keep their own beliefs more private?
Do you think non-believers should be more outspoken?

It seems to me that everyone would be better of if we could ALL (i.e. Christian or non-Christian) learn to be respectful to one another and learn to overcome our compulsions that drive us to push each other for affirmation.

Additionally, if we do get into 'disputes,' we all need to learn when to stop so that our confrontations don't become socially unproductive or inappropriately enforced. And all of us need to throw out 'Revolutionary' Thinking and other political forms of pushiness.......and find ways that are conducive to living in peace even while we may disagree.

Peace
2PhiloVoid