Deconversion

[mathetes123]

At present there is still no convincing evidence that a historical Jesus actually existed so the debate about the resurrection is moot.

I don't think you really believe this.

 

[ianb321red]

I don't think you really believe this.

I guess it depends on what a given individual has used to arrive at a specific understanding about something or someone....

Regarding an historical Jesus - even his simple existence is a widely excepted fact outside of Christian / apologetic circles..

Without having to get the text books out, a simple wikipedia search shows us the following:

"Despite the divergence of scholarly opinions on the construction of portraits of the historical Jesus, almost all modern scholars consider the baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion to be two historically certain facts about him. James Dunn states that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent" and "rank so high on the 'almost impossible to doubt or deny' scale of historical facts" that they are often the starting points for the study of the historical Jesus."

(Take from - Historical Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

The point here is that if you don't believe or accept the evidence for a historical Jesus then you are simply ignoring evidence that is widely available and practically universally accepted...

 

[koshka]

The division between simple memories related by our internal narrative and those memories being able to have a realistic-sounding narrative is pretty fine. In about half of cases people are OK with the voice(s) and many find them helpful or comforting. But in about a third of cases hearing voices has started after a traumatic event and then the focus should be not on the voices but on fixing the other damage caused by the event.

The way to deal with it is usually to either become good at meditation, or a quicker way would be Schema Therapy with eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR).


That may sound totally crazy but it follows much the same principle as Buddhists and others have used successfully for thousands of years. But it EMDR is a lot quicker and more reliable because you don't have to learn it.


My understanding of it goes like this:

The brain is a trainable matrix of neurons where repeated use of pathways reinforces these pathways and also causes growth of new neurons in the areas most used giving further memory and processing power in those areas. And this gives the key: reinforcement of some pathways will change the way the brain works in those areas.

Until 20 or so years ago it was thought that because events very early in life cause the brain to grow neuron paths in particular ways that these led to incurable mental conditions, and events in the pre-verbal era had a long time to be reinforced and would also be permanent.

But it has since been found that the human brain has neuroplasticity and can even grow large numbers of new neurons and it is possible to totally change the emphasis in various areas that were inaccessible to reasoning alone.

I've found with people that the most superficial areas I can access just by talking to them are often enough to fix pretty major problems. Basically we live in a pretty crazy society and some of the problems can be fixed just by learning something and others require retraining the emotional parts of the brain.

Thanks for writing about this MorkandMindy. I have heard of schema therapy before, but don't know much about it so I will have a look on google. The trouble is with my situation is that I don't have clear memories about what some of the trauma was - only jumbled memories and impressions and a lot of fear which seem to have led to me experiencing paranoia, depression and psychosis as an adult. I just have clues about what happened fully in the past based on the bits I can recall, but noone who can help me further because the person involved of course is keeping silent.

Today I had a glitch because I was on my own working in a office, and I heard a man I'd never met before talking outside the room and I don't know why but I started to feel uneasy and a bit sick at the sound of his voice and had mild paranoia. At one time I would have concluded straight away it was the mental illness, but this time I just was aware that it was happening and let it subside before carrying on with my work and thought it could be connected in some way with past event.

Well, I've got off track here and onto another topic. But basically I think that if people, including people at church, had a better insight into how much trauma or abuse contributes to psychological or mental health problems then it could be of enormous benefit - especially rather than attributing things like to this to something demonic which can be so demoralising and problematic for the survivor to deal with on top of an already stressful situation.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Hi Koshka, Firstly let me send my sincerest sympathies. You need someone to sympathise, someone real and pure and nice.

Next I have a fair idea of what may have happened, and you had a flash back. I would suggest a high priority is to avoid being awake alone at night even more than alone in the office, and alone in the car most of all, better still use a bus if possible. I play sound all night long, sometimes I play nice music like Enya on continuous loop all through the night.

Do your best to understand that the person involved will most likely at some point get into very serious trouble, after you remember what happened. Remembering is hazardous and likely to cause you damage so I'd suggest putting it off until you have recovered more. Even if you recover completely and are evidently fine, the facts of the case once established will lead to very heavy penalties, and such abusers often die in prison at the hands of other inmates. The primary aim is to recover.

It has been found that victims engaged in law suits for example suffer more and for longer than those who can move on. The key is to develop a new life and forget what happened as much as possible. Recovery will not reduce the chance of justice, in fact being able to remember is what will make it possible. But it will be hazardous so ensure you have a potent sedative to hand if the memories get too powerful. But remembering is not the way to recovery - moving on is.

And in many situations the victim doesn't have any opportunity for justice. A Palestinian girl repeatedly raped by Israeli soldiers has no recourse at all for example. A woman I knew who was evidently raped or molested many years ago at 13 in a recovery room after an operation has no recourse and only the disease she caught and subsequent sterilisation to show for it.

I would suggest pushing revenge on a year and dealing with recovery now. I'm not sure of the best way to do that but if you can get free or affordable treatment of the type I mentioned that might be the best choice, if not then focused meditation might be the next best option.

you have all my sympathy, M&M

 

[koshka]

hi MorkandMindy,

Thanks for your kind reply. I don't know that I'll ever remember clearly, but at least now I've realised what's happening. As it happens, I really like Enya too (!) and listening to relaxing music when I am by myself or trying to go to sleep sounds like a good suggestion. Buying myself a new CD has been long overdue.

Take care,

Koshka

 

[MorkandMindy]

Have a look at New Friends from page 8 onward and either post in it or PM me; it would be nice to hear that someone has looked at it other than myself.

I keep updating it because I use it a lot when I'm in just to play music and sometimes watch the video that goes with it. I don't log in to CF, I just go there from the history tab, and open a new tab to do whatever I'm doing, or email or word processor or whatever and leave New Friends playing while minimised. Sometimes I open a couple of New Friends tabs and alternate or cycle between different songs.

 

[MorkandMindy]

...

Without having to get the text books out, a simple wikipedia search shows us the following:

, almost all modern scholars consider the baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion to be two historically certain facts about him. ... and practically universally accepted...

Wikipedia have very real funding requirements. The last thing they are going to do is upset the Christians who wouldn't take 2 seconds to spread the word that Wikipedia is the tool of Satan.

The statements therefore just agree with whatever you initially thought: 'Almost all' and 'practically universally accepted' sound great to a Christian.

But if the evidence was there then the belief would be universal. Also the consensus is taken of theologians who are of course paid by the churches. In the end it means very little and the atheists and agnostics will also find nothing wrong with the article.

I can't go any further on this because General Apologetics is closed and discussion of the premises underlying Christianity is not allowed in this forum.

 

[MorkandMindy]

At present there is still no convincing evidence that a historical Jesus actually existed so the debate about the resurrection is moot.

...

I don't think you really believe this.

'This' could well be a complex issue, and I used the term 'Historical Jesus' to help specify what I meant.

If you have evidence for an 'Historical Jesus' then do present it but not to me because I can't read Aramaic or NT Greek; there are plenty of theologians who would really like to see it.

 

[ianb321red]

Wikipedia have very real funding requirements. The last thing they are going to do is upset the Christians who wouldn't take 2 seconds to spread the word that Wikipedia is the tool of Satan.

The statements therefore just agree with whatever you initially thought: 'Almost all' and 'practically universally accepted' sound great to a Christian.

Well - that it basically stating the obvious.
It's kind of like me posting a link to a website that tells you that planet earth is round.
If there is a generally largely agree upon fact, and this forms the basis of my belief (or argument) then I would be ignoring the obvious not to reference this?

Beside I made the reference to Wikipedia because it's the source that required the least effort to find...i have better ones, but I'm not about to sit here and type out reams of references from books...

But if the evidence was there then the belief would be universal.

See my above reference to the statement 'practically universally accepted'

Also the consensus is taken of theologians who are of course paid by the churches. In the end it means very little and the atheists and agnostics will also find nothing wrong with the article.

I can't go any further on this because General Apologetics is closed and discussion of the premises underlying Christianity is not allowed in this forum.

Fair enough, but inevitably talking about deconversion would involve this type of thing wouldn't it??

 

[mathetes123]

'This' could well be a complex issue, and I used the term 'Historical Jesus' to help specify what I meant.

If you have evidence for an 'Historical Jesus' then do present it but not to me because I can't read Aramaic or NT Greek; there are plenty of theologians who would really like to see it.

With all that has been written about Jesus are you seriously suggesting there is no evidence for a historical Jesus. Do you deny the historicity of Caesar Augustus? There is more written about Jesus.

 

[MorkandMindy]

You must both be aware that arguing against Christianity is against CF rules, so of course I won't be doing it.

Also that you are off topic.

And that using arguments that have been refuted a thousand times is not something I'm going to waste time refuting on this wonderful Saturday morning.

And that the Church stance last time I heard it was that if convincing evidence existed then there would be no need for faith.



But I'm perfectly happy to talk about myself, so I'll just do a quick mention of 'burn-out' de-conversion.

Anyone who knew us back in our last year as Christians would know we ran the welcoming committee at Church, went to the weekday and Sunday Bible studies and family service after the Sunday Bible Study. Mork was also a Bible Study leader for a Tuesday night Bible Study which took a lot of preparation which he took a bit too seriously, and did a daily private prayer and Bible Study, and was in the choir.

So there was a crisis due to lack of time. 55 hours of work, 27 hours of Christian activities, and the calendar was nearly full.

So rethink time was upon us. Out went lots of activities and at pretty much the same time Christianity too.

I'm sort of thinking what is called: 'burn-out' is at a minimum a feeling of losing, but hopefully progresses into a realisation it just isn't working. In our case it went as far as to realise the promises made at the beginning were entirely false.

The 'wonderful plan for our lives' we never found. The church that preached the word and we were with for 5 years would have loved to have us run a Sunday School class as well, and more.

There is no wonderful plan, just people wanting to turn our labour into their church attendance and therefore revenue.

That was how we ended up de-converting.