• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Deconversion

SithDoughnut

The Agnostic, Ignostic, Apatheistic Atheist
Jan 2, 2010
9,118
306
The Death Starbucks
✟33,474.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I guess this argument rests on premise #2 i.e. the existence of an objective moral law. So is there any evidence that there is a universal, objective prescription that is binding on all human beings?

Don't forget that the existence of an objective moral law giver does not in any way imply a god. It could be argued that we naturally gravitate towards a society in which we agree upon certain morals, making objective moral law a human creation based upon natural circumstances.

Personally, I find the phrase "objective morality" to be oxymoronic anyway. Objectivity (as I understand it) implies that morals can exist without any mind to think of them, including God's.
 
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
Don't forget that the existence of an objective moral law giver does not in any way imply a god. It could be argued that we naturally gravitate towards a society in which we agree upon certain morals, making objective moral law a human creation based upon natural circumstances.

Personally, I find the phrase "objective morality" to be oxymoronic anyway. Objectivity (as I understand it) implies that morals can exist without any mind to think of them, including God's.

"Objective" has become such a misused word as to pretty devoid of meaning.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 23, 2011
3,307
35
✟26,231.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
My post was not my entire life. I consider myself to have fit all those requirements, and that's all that matters. No one here is required to prove themselves to you.



I'm not. I've disagreed with Christians here but I've never been purposefully antagonistic, and I apologise if you have found my posts to be that way. Is that why you have chosen to be so antagonistic yourself (manipulating what I've said in this thread, patronising me, and proceeding to demand respect while giving me none and acting like I have no idea about my beliefs)?

You get what you give, and what you've given leaves little room for surprise if you've found people to be antagonistic to you.

My only concern is to ensure that biblical truth is promoted on these threads, yes that draws fire from various quarters, but it has, and is my experience very evident that there is a clear increase of attacks on true Christians on these threads. I am also sorry if I have mixed you up with others.

However, when someone (no matter who) tells me that they are, or have been a Christian, the only bench mark I have concerning authentic Christianity is the Holy Bible, for which I make no apologies.

Maybe we should start again :wave:
 
Upvote 0

mathetes123

Newbie
Dec 26, 2011
2,469
54
✟18,144.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
SithDoughnut said:
Don't forget that the existence of an objective moral law giver does not in any way imply a god. It could be argued that we naturally gravitate towards a society in which we agree upon certain morals, making objective moral law a human creation based upon natural circumstances.

Personally, I find the phrase "objective morality" to be oxymoronic anyway. Objectivity (as I understand it) implies that morals can exist without any mind to think of them, including God's.

That would not be an objective but a subjective moral law.
 
Upvote 0

Mr Bungle

Saved by grace through faith
Aug 29, 2012
141
1
Visit site
✟22,782.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Don't forget that the existence of an objective moral law giver does not in any way imply a god. It could be argued that we naturally gravitate towards a society in which we agree upon certain morals, making objective moral law a human creation based upon natural circumstances.

Personally, I find the phrase "objective morality" to be oxymoronic anyway. Objectivity (as I understand it) implies that morals can exist without any mind to think of them, including God's.

I think it unlikely that social convention could be used to describe anything as objective.

Are there any other examples of societal agreement (on it's own) which you would describe as constituting something objectively?
 
Upvote 0

Mr Bungle

Saved by grace through faith
Aug 29, 2012
141
1
Visit site
✟22,782.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
My only concern is to ensure that biblical truth is promoted on these threads, yes that draws fire from various quarters, but it has, and is my experience very evident that there is a clear increase of attacks on true Christians on these threads. I am also sorry if I have mixed you up with others.

Depends what you mean by 'attacks'?

I can't speak for anyone else, but my experience on this forum so far has been positive and have enjoyed conversing with non Christians as much as with Christians.

I suppose I would define an attack as when something gets personal, so I hope we all have the maturity to respect other peoples points of view and deal with them graciously.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 23, 2011
3,307
35
✟26,231.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Depends what you mean by 'attacks'?

I can't speak for anyone else, but my experience on this forum so far has been positive and have enjoyed conversing with non Christians as much as with Christians.

I suppose I would define an attack as when something gets personal, so I hope we all have the maturity to respect other peoples points of view and deal with them graciously.

Hmmm, having been on CF for over a year now my experience is as described!
 
Upvote 0

SithDoughnut

The Agnostic, Ignostic, Apatheistic Atheist
Jan 2, 2010
9,118
306
The Death Starbucks
✟33,474.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
That would not be an objective but a subjective moral law.

I think it would, but some would define it as an objective ideal that we gravitate towards. The argument is that although our own morals are subjective, we inevitably move in the same direction, meaning that there is a conceptual objective law that doesn't actually exist physically, but is a defining point around which other morals are decided.
 
Upvote 0

SithDoughnut

The Agnostic, Ignostic, Apatheistic Atheist
Jan 2, 2010
9,118
306
The Death Starbucks
✟33,474.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
However, when someone (no matter who) tells me that they are, or have been a Christian, the only bench mark I have concerning authentic Christianity is the Holy Bible, for which I make no apologies.

That's not a problem, but remember that you only see a tiny part of a person on a forum. Just because you don't see something that you would Biblically expect, that doesn't mean that it isn't there.

Maybe we should start again :wave:

Sounds good to me. There really needs to be a "shaking hands" emoticon.
 
Upvote 0

Mr Bungle

Saved by grace through faith
Aug 29, 2012
141
1
Visit site
✟22,782.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I think it would, but some would define it as an objective ideal that we gravitate towards. The argument is that although our own morals are subjective, we inevitably move in the same direction, meaning that there is a conceptual objective law that doesn't actually exist physically, but is a defining point around which other morals are decided.

If just one person has the ability to rebel totally against social ideals then the idea of objective norms defined from social conventions fails.
 
Upvote 0

SithDoughnut

The Agnostic, Ignostic, Apatheistic Atheist
Jan 2, 2010
9,118
306
The Death Starbucks
✟33,474.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
If just one person has the ability to rebel totally against social ideals then the idea of objective norms defined from social conventions fails.

Unless you consider the rebelling person to have some kind of disorder. I personally disagree with the entire idea of objective morality, but the argument is there.
 
Upvote 0
K

koshka

Guest
Just wondered how many people on this forum have deconverted/ recanted from the Christian faith?

How or why did this happen?

I lost my faith in Christianity earlier this year. I think it was due to a combination of things.

I had a mental illness and it kept being interpreted as at least partly demonic because it involved hearing voices. This was very scary to be told and I couldn't understand why God didn't take it away and I prayed endlessly about it and tried rebuking the voices etc but it kept going on (for years). I always felt an outsider because of this, combined with being on a low income and not in paid work. Finally, things came to a head when a couple well respected at church counselled me that it was definitely a demonic issue and then left me for over a week to stew while they were 'busy' before they could pray and deliver me. I became extremely anxious and the voices got much worse before I realised that enough was enough and I couldn't go through with such a psychologically stressful situation and it just tipped me over and I stopped believing. Incidentally, they also believed that 'owls' of all things were connected with the demonic based on their interpretation of the bible which when I thought about it later just seemed ridiculous.

Also, I was persuaded that it was right to tithe and good to give to 'God' so I gave away a large chunk of my benefits money to church until finally I realised that the pastors were having family skiing holidays and I hadn't had a holiday for over 7 years and started to struggle to pay for the essentials.

Also, my son introduced me to atheist/Christian debates on youtube and I thought that things the atheists were saying made more sense.

I spent a lot of time praying over and over on all sorts of issues until finally I came across a website saying that God is Imaginary and it made a lot of sense too - it seemed that I had just been praying into the air. I really tried very hard to have a relationship with God and genuinely was a believer but because of a lack of sense of God 'speaking' or making his presence felt I felt bad about myself and struggled with doubts over my salvation.

I also found a list of contradictions in the bible on the internet and once I read some of those I could see with my own eyes that the bible wasn't innerrant.

When I had bouts of illness and withdrew from church I often would hear from my group leader that other people were praying and really cared for me - but it all seemed to be from a distance because people didn't contact me direct even though my phone number and address was on the group contact details.

I guess a lot of the problem must have been the stigma of mental illness even though I am approachable. I don't know for definite. But I never really found a niche although I've just about kept in touch with two people from church. When I left church, noone else telephoned or wrote to ask anything. My group leader urged me to come back for a visit and said to me 'they are your friends', but it didn't seem like really genuine friendship to me.

I know it shouldn't all be about what people are like - and you should 'look to God' - but Christians are meant to be God's hands and feet and are meant to be hearing from God and guided by His Holy Spirit. One time when I was desperate for prayerful help because I hadn't been sleeping due to the voices, I was advised to contact the pastor by my group leader, but he told me he was too busy to see me. I don't think I was a demanding person at all and my pastor later apologised when I bumped into him, but it was really hard to go through at the time.

Oh, I nearly forgot, the prophetic at church was what really started me questioning in the beginning because some of the prophecies just seemed like fortune telling or just too good to be true and the onus kept being put on the person receiving the prophecy - that they had to test or weigh it. There was a prophetic conference run by our church where people had to pay to gather together to worship with a live band and hear prophecies and it just seemed too much like a form of entertainment.

All in all, I think I was very gullible. Maybe I am still gullible, because I want to believe there's a God or higher power that's loving in some kind of way. But I've seen too much now - all the differences between denominations, the contradictions etc to still be convinced by Christianity and the biblical account.

That said, I think there are some positive values of loving others, reaching out to the vulnerable, caring for the poor etc, being kind and honest, which are really good.
 
Upvote 0

Gadarene

-______-
Apr 16, 2012
11,461
2,507
London
✟90,247.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Labour
Consistency, mainly. I was trying to render my beliefs more logical, coherent and consistent. I realised one day that I wouldn't believe a story like the resurrection if it was part of some other religion. Once I had had that realisation, I figured there was no way I could justify what I wanted to believe. So I reluctantly gave it up.

(I later realised this "technique", for want of a better word is as old as Jefferson, and has recently been popularised by an former minister (and ex-Christian) called John W. Loftus as the "outsider test for faith". I frequently find that much of what Christians take as justification for their beliefs, they reject when believers of other religions use the exact same thing as justification for theirs.)

Edit: Oh, and while Dawkins is hardly the most erudite of atheists and TGD is hardly that strong a case for atheism, calling him a showman while not calling William Lane Craig the same is a display of monumental bias.
 
Upvote 0

Gadarene

-______-
Apr 16, 2012
11,461
2,507
London
✟90,247.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Labour
If just one person has the ability to rebel totally against social ideals then the idea of objective norms defined from social conventions fails.

Subjectivity in morality does not rule out a large degree of commonality in what people think moral behaviour is.
 
Upvote 0

Mr Bungle

Saved by grace through faith
Aug 29, 2012
141
1
Visit site
✟22,782.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Subjectivity in morality does not rule out a large degree of commonality in what people think moral behaviour is.

I actually agree with this.
But a large degree of commonality inevitably excludes (at least) a minority of people within a society.

Does that mean that this minority of people are amoral?

The problem for me is that the social norms view of morality doesn't actually explain anything in terms of why or how the general consensus of what is moral (and therefore what is immoral as well) has been determined to be acceptable or unacceptable in the first place....

If it is an intrinsic part of human nature then it would seemingly be something we are all born with?
 
Upvote 0

Mr Bungle

Saved by grace through faith
Aug 29, 2012
141
1
Visit site
✟22,782.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Edit: Oh, and while Dawkins is hardly the most erudite of atheists and TGD is hardly that strong a case for atheism, calling him a showman while not calling William Lane Craig the same is a display of monumental bias.

I quite agree that WLC is also a showman, and actually I personally prefer Ravi Zacharias in terms of apologists...

So a question for you - who would you advocate as an atheist spokesperson? I'd be interested because I looked in to this before, and the general consensus amongst atheists back then was Chris Hitchens. Would you agree with this, or is there someone else you'd recommend instead?
 
Upvote 0

Mr Bungle

Saved by grace through faith
Aug 29, 2012
141
1
Visit site
✟22,782.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
(I later realised this "technique", for want of a better word is as old as Jefferson, and has recently been popularised by an former minister (and ex-Christian) called John W. Loftus as the "outsider test for faith". I frequently find that much of what Christians take as justification for their beliefs, they reject when believers of other religions use the exact same thing as justification for theirs.)

This is quite interesting actually.
I would like to think that Christianity can stand up to the same tests that I would apply to rejecting other beliefs.
But I will always challenge myself and my beliefs. If my beliefs are worth having, then they will stand up to any test thrown at it..

So give me some examples of this because i want to get to the bottom as this issue...
 
Upvote 0