My Final Conclusion about Science and Religion

[aeroz22]

Wow. Aeroz22, I must say you have the most intellectually curious and open approach to the world I think I have ever read and it is incredibly refreshing. I read all of your posts and most of the replies. I was left very saddened by the paucity of empathy you received from Christians, with exceptions, but nevertheless comforted by the help you did receive, mainly from atheists. Either way, the vulnerability of your posts was breathtaking and humbling.

Unfortunately, having an open and curious approach also meant I was naive, and I got stung.

I was a little disappointed in the fact that I would not be able to reply to you directly since your account was inactive, but now you are back I am both glad to be able to respond and touched by your continuing candour about your life situation. Let me first say that whatever happens to you in life (or beyond...?) your honesty and vulnerability will forever mark you out as special. I would be interested in learning your occupation because unless it is Queen of the United Nations you are being underused.

Oh my. I'm in no condition for anything like that. But thank you.

I would be so grateful if you could grace these for a a little longer because it is desperate need of polite, informed debate, especially from people who can write as lucidly and engagingly as you. I pray for your swift recovery of health and though it may be an empty symbol for you and others, regard it as a homing pigeon of love that might, somehow, manifest itself in a tangible form.

So welcome back, and thank you for your thought-provoking and honest words.

I don't know if I'm currently capable of debate. But perhaps it would help my condition to debate. I will try.

 

[plindboe]

Regarding the troubles and when they started--the therapists I have seen thus far have told me that I have a depressive personality so that has likely contributed a lot to it. But If the deconversion didn't do it, I'm not sure what did.

Sometimes depression seems to strike out of nowhere. I zapped past a telly program on depression recently with a man who was struck by very severe depression. He had up to then had a great marriage, wonderful kids and succesful career as a doctor, and he said that it just struck for no apparent reason at all. He became so ill that he couldn't attend his job anymore, or get up in the morning, he lost friends and nearly lost his wife as well. He eventually got well again and sounded relieved and happy.

Perhaps it might help you to read other accounts about depression, to hear how people deal with it, what treatments that worked for them, you might find support in realizing that you are not alone and it's probably a good idea to check online that you've been diagnosed correctly. I'm sure you can find alot of info with some Google searches.

Also look up "Cognitive Behavioral Therapy". There's alot of flimsy therapy out there, and alot of poor psychologists, so it's easy to go wrong, but CBT is probably the most succesful form of treatment with solid scientific backing.

Peter

 

[Vene]

Two things:

1) Thank you for bumping this thread. Very interesting read. And nice to know that logic and evidence does matter to some people.

2) I'm sorry about the depression and hope you can find happiness as soon as possible.

 

[USincognito]

I'll look for you on AIM. Hopefully we can chat soon.

 

[Gawron]

To the OP (with respect):

The nature of many of the post here seem to equate Christianity with a cult religion, the leaving of which places the “de-converted” into terrible danger from either radical fundamentalist hunting them down or personal trauma from realizing the great lie of the church. Sorry, although I am sympathetic to anyone’s personal suffering, I don’t buy that the source of this suffering is the teachings of the church or the decision to leave them behind.

I tried to find all of your post in this thread, so given I may have missed one I did not find where you listed exactly which Christian church you attended. You simply speak of “fundamentalism”, again seeming to compare all of Christianity to fundamentalist seeking to either convert the masses or destroy them. You speak in absolutist terms, utilizing phrases such as:

“Deconversion will uproot the foundations of your life--everything you once knew, not just about science--is wrong.”

Do you really believe this statement applies to everyone who ever set foot into a Christian church, and then for whatever reason, later decided to leave? Is it your belief that everyone who grew up attending a Christian church and then in later life decided to leave and explore life must go through a deconstruction phase which automatically entails immense personal suffering and tragedy directly related to and caused by the teachings of the church? That every Christian church is filled with nothing but liars who lie about everything?

The Atheist will disagree, but Christianity doesn’t work this way. People are free to come and go as they desire, without having to worry about “fundies” pursuing them to the ends of the earth in order to force them back into the church. Members are not force-fed lies about the nature of the world or brainwashed into believing radical dogma designed to control their minds and thought processes. Christians are not robots which must be de-programmed over long periods of time while enduring periods of terrible suffering inflicted upon them by the realization that perhaps Christianity wasn’t for them.

The Christian churches all teach the same basic principal of life. God loves us, and wants the best for us. But he gave us free will. This means that if we decide to junk our Christian beliefs and adopt new ones, fine. Just realize that once this decision is made, we are on our own. We guide our own fates. Note however that God does not withdraw his love for us, and the door is still open. He simply isn’t going to try and force you to walk through it.

“Everything you know and everything you are will change.”

Change comes from within.

“And it will cause you great pain.”

Most of life’s experiences cause pain, most lessons learned are hard lessons. I realize how this comment will be interpreted, but blaming the church and its teachings for inflicting this pain I find to be disingenuous at best.

 

[aeroz22]

To the OP (with respect):

The nature of many of the post here seem to equate Christianity with a cult religion, the leaving of which places the “de-converted” into terrible danger from either radical fundamentalist hunting them down or personal trauma from realizing the great lie of the church.

I'm sorry that I made it sound that way. I come from a background of isolated, fundamentalist independent baptist church-goers where the members are "protected" from outside influence and taught not to interact with people outside of the church, except to convert them. It wasn't a compound, but it felt like one.

It seems like you come from a moderate to liberal christian background and are not familiar with fundamentalism. I was speaking of fundamentalism and fundamentalists only, not all christians. I think that coming out from a moderate to liberal christian faith would not be painful or require a transition.

 

[consol]

It seems like you come from a moderate to liberal christian background and are not familiar with fundamentalism. I was speaking of fundamentalism and fundamentalists only, not all christians. I think that coming out from a moderate to liberal christian faith would not be painful or require a transition.

I am an Atheist, but I have got to ask you this, but please tell me no if you want.

How do you get on with your parents after your de-conversion? do you feel any animosity towards them?

I ask because I don't know how I would feel if what happened to you, had happened to me,
I think I would feel that they had somehow let me down.

I know I am the lucky one, (and I had no religion to escape from)

 

[Glass*Soul]

It gives me a creepy feeling to know that my words might somewhere, somehow be remembered by someone.

Have you tried a Unitarian Church? I've thought about going to one myself.

I have. But the closest one is over an hour away. I don't think I'm that dedicated.

I've read his book "Saving the Bible from Fundamentalism." Its hard for me to consider him a Christian. The book made some good points, but it didn't tempt me to come back to Christianity. I have a hard time now seeing how religion can benefit me. Ironically, I almost feel like it would be a sin to return to religion.

I probably worded what I said awkwardly. I wouldn't want to tempt you back into the situation you left. I'm an atheist myself and I truly don't think I'll ever return to theism. Like you, I would see it as a sort of dissolution. I merely meant to suggest, because you described yourself as being so collapsed by your loss of faith, that there may be some things you could retain from Christ's teachings of an entirely non-superstitious and non-religious nature that could act, at least for now, as a basic structure for you to work from, not even worrying if it qualifies as Christian or not. I left my fundamentalist background and exposed myself to peace and justice issues among the Mennonites for several years before I left theism. What I was eventually able to take with me may not be what you have available to you from your background, so what works for me might not work for you. Anyway, let me say again, that I don't want in any way to encourage you to go backwards.

A therapist recently recommended two Buddhist books to me, and one new-age type book. So I'll be reading those shortly. She said that all I know is what I do not believe, and that I need to replace the void with that which I do know. So thats the purpose of reading the books.

That sounds like excellent advice. The Tao te Ching might be interesting to you too. There's an nice little paraphrase of it by Stephen Michaels available that makes it quite accessible.

 

[aeroz22]

I am an Atheist, but I have got to ask you this, but please tell me no if you want.

How do you get on with your parents after your de-conversion? do you feel any animosity towards them?

I ask because I don't know how I would feel if what happened to you, had happened to me,
I think I would feel that they had somehow let me down.

I know I am the lucky one, (and I had no religion to escape from)

How do I get on with my parents? I don't. I'm still very angry with them and indeed, I feel they've let me down. I do not yet know how to reconcile my feelings towards my parents, and so I have not dealt with the feelings yet. My dad should have known better (very intelligent man, experienced in the world, etc) but is in deep denial; my mom is too dumb to know better.

 

[aeroz22]

I probably worded what I said awkwardly. I wouldn't want to tempt you back into the situation you left. I'm an atheist myself and I truly don't think I'll ever return to theism. Like you, I would see it as a sort of dissolution. I merely meant to suggest, because you described yourself as being so collapsed by your loss of faith, that there may be some things you could retain from Christ's teachings of an entirely non-superstitious and non-religious nature that could act, at least for now, as a basic structure for you to work from, not even worrying if it qualifies as Christian or not. I left my fundamentalist background and exposed myself to peace and justice issues among the Mennonites for several years before I left theism. What I was eventually able to take with me may not be what you have available to you from your background, so what works for me might not work for you. Anyway, let me say again, that I don't want in any way to encourage you to go backwards.

I suppose we really can pick and choose our beliefs and values like they are on a buffet table. I guess I thought before that if they were available to just pick and choose, then why believe them? "I only want to believe something because its the truth, not because I feel good about it." I still have difficulty with that. But then again, there is no absolute truth; I can't think in absolutes anymore. Whats truth for one person may not be truth for the next; truth is relative and subjective. A tough one for an ex-fundie like me to swallow.

The real problem is when one person imposes their truth upon the next person, thinking it is absolute truth and that it works for everyone else. Its just not "true."

So, here I go to the buffet table...

 

[consol]

How do I get on with my parents? I don't. I'm still very angry with them and indeed, I feel they've let me down. I do not yet know how to reconcile my feelings towards my parents, and so I have not dealt with the feelings yet. My dad should have known better (very intelligent man, experienced in the world, etc) but is in deep denial; my mom is too dumb to know better.

I don't know how to reply to you, I feel that whatever I write will not be enough,
I can not imagine what you must have been through, and must still be going through,
all we can do is hope that one day you will be able to discuss things with your parents,
and perhaps get them to understand what happened to you and why it happened.

What really irks me as well, is that most of the religious people reading about your experience will take absolutely nothing from it,
they will remain trapped in their own little world. (hopefully some will)

That's why I say that some forms of religious indoctrination should be classed as child abuse,
and in my opinion you are living proof of that, you have, and you will be suffering for a long time to come,
and if that's not child abuse, I don't know what is? anything that damages a child is surly child abuse.

If you think I am wrong please feel free to blow me out of the water, because if anyone knows, I think you do.

 

[DuckPhup]

I am a freethinking individual. I spent a great deal of time, thought, and anguish in search for the universal. When studying the world religions and human ideologies, I always came back to the question of what can actually be proven. I do not say this in arrogance and I do not say this as the member of any bandwagon but the resurrection of Christ is one of the most well evidenced events of ancient history. However, unless we are able to also establish that we live in a theistic universe, the event itself is nothing more than an anomaly.

Absolute twaddle.

The gospels were not written by eye-witnesses. The earliest gospel (Mark) was written no earlier than 70 AD. Matthew and Luke both used Mark as a template, and were written after 80 AD... most likely around 95 AD. John... the last... seems to have been written some time after 120 AD... perhaps as late as 150 AD.

There is absolutely NO contemporaneous evidence for any of the events described in the gospels... no writings... no artifacts... NOTHING. (You are hereby challenged to produce any such contemporaneous evidence.)

Contrary to "...the resurrection of Christ is one of the most well evidenced events of ancient history"... there is absolutely no evidence for it at all, beyond the self-serving and self-referential gospels. Zip... nada... none. Further... the so-called 'evidence' that Jesus actually existed is not that compelling, either.

The gospels aren't a history of ANYTHING. The gospel story is a series of vignettes... sort of like the old episodic serials that they used to show in the movie theaters on Saturday mornings... like Buck Rogers. The gospel story is a version of the VERY familiar suffering-hero-king mythical archetype... Judaized by the addition of elements from Hebrew scripture. For example... where scripture contained something that could be interpreted as a prophecy, the fictional fulfillment of the prophecy was written into the story-line. The 'sayings' of Jesus represented an attempt to update Jewish religious thought (via midrash) under the influence of 'modern' Hellenistic religious and philosophical thought... particularly the 'Cynic' and (to a lessor extent) 'Stoic' philosophies.

Interestingly... if you add up all of the 'Jesus-time' specifically accounted for in the gospel story (not counting the alleged 40-days spent bumbling around in the desert)... it works out to no more than 3-weeks.

You seem to regard yourself as some sort of a scholar. I tend you regard you as profoundly gullible.

 

[DuckPhup]

If macroevolution occurs, how come we NEVER see an ape produce a non-ape? So what makes you think it happened a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away?

Oh, goody... I just love questions like this. I'll bet you're one of those folks that likes to ask "If we're descended from apes, then how come apes still exist?" Whenever I hear that question, I ask another question in return: "If North America was colonized by England, then how come Englishmen still exist?" Then I say "When your intellectual powers have grown to the point where you can understand how stupid my question is, and why it is so stupid, you just might be getting close to being able to appreciate the stupidity of your own question."

Anyway... you seem to have some gross misconceptions about evolution. It looks to me like folks are trying to get you to defend what I like to call the 'cartoon version' of evolution. This is essentially a straw-man that has been erected by creationist puppet-masters... intentionally designed to look stupid. Then they tell their scientifically-ignorant constituency that scientists think this... scientists say that... when scientists do NOT think or say any of those things at all.

Here is a post that addresses those very issues, in detail... richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=24090&p=853517#p853517

With the following, I would like to puncture a few cartoon-balloons for you...

• DNA DOES NOT 'evolve'... and scientists DO NOT think that DNA evolves.

• Organisms (creatures) DO NOT 'evolve'... and scientists DOES NOT think that organisms evolve.

• One kind of creature DOES NOT transform itself into another kind of creature... and scientists DO NOT think that one kind of creature can transform itself into another kind of creature.

• One kind of creature DOES NOT give birth to another kind of creature... and scientists DO NOT think that one kind of creature gives birth to another kind of creature.

• There IS NOT and NEVER WAS and NEVER WILL BE a creature that is half one thing, and half another kind of thing... and scientists DO NOT think that there has ever been such a creature... or ever will be.

So... if none of that stuff is true... what 'evolves'?

Well... it is an observed FACT that the genetic makeup of populations of organisms (the GENE POOL) changes, over time. We have a word that means "changes, over time"... that word is: 'evolves'. So, there you have a FACT... the FACT of biological evolution... the genetic makeup of populations of organisms (the GENE POOL) changes, over time. Nobody made that up.

We call it a FACT because that is what we see... in the lab... in nature... and in all the time we have been looking (around 150 years), we have seen absolutely NOTHING that contradicts or casts any doubt whatsoever upon that FACT.

Now... theories...

In science, 'theories' occupy a MUCH higher level of importance than mere facts… and theories do not MAKE UP facts... theories EXPLAIN facts.

With that understanding in place, it becomes possible to perceive the 'Theory of Evolution' in its proper context...

• The Theory of Evolution EXPLAINS the observed FACT of 'biological evolution'... it tells us HOW the genetic makeup of populations of organisms (the GENE POOL) changes, over time (evolves).

So... it is the GENE POOL that evolves... NOT DNA... NOT creatures... NOT ANY kind of organism. The GENE POOL... the genetic makeup of a SPECIFIC population of organisms.

You may also find these posts useful, on your path to enlightenment...

• The natural selection of rocks...
  richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=35845&p=673829#p670303

• The land of the doozlebongs...
  richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=43573&start=25#p879156

 

[Glass*Soul]

That was an excellent post DuckPhup.

You do understand that GodsSamus is probably still going to go right ahead and pose exactly the same questions in other topics.

(If I'm wrong about this he can easily come here and correct me. I don't think he will.)

 

[Pwnzerfaust]

@ the OP:

Welcome to the dark side. We have cookies.

EDIT: Holy carp, this thread is 3 years old.

EDIT 2: Oh, okay, it was revived by the OP. Confusing thread is confusing.

 

[Pwnzerfaust]

Okeedokey, ignore my above post. I posted it after reading the OPs and not realizing that it said "June 22, 2005" and not "June 22, 2008". Not quite sure of the response I want to post just yet but when I get more time I will.

 

[Danyc]

Excellent post Duckphup.

I highly doubt, like Glass*Soul, that GodsSamus will even read, much less reply, to your post. I also believe GodsSamus will continue to post such misconceptions in other threads, despite being told why she was wrong.

Very dishonest, IMO. Not very Christian-like at all.


(I just wanted to make sure she read this. )

 

[Glass*Soul]

Excellent post Duckphup.

I highly doubt, like Glass*Soul, that GodsSamus will even read, much less reply, to your post. I also believe GodsSamus will continue to post such misconceptions in other threads, despite being told why she was wrong.

Very dishonest, IMO. Not very Christian-like at all.


(I just wanted to make sure she read this. )

Particularly considering that the post was made 3 years ago, which I only just now noticed. According to this user's profile, his/her last activity was August 18. 2005.

This is a tricky thread to negotiate.

But Duckphup's post was indeed excelleint.

 

[DuckPhup]

That was an excellent post DuckPhup.

You do understand that GodsSamus is probably still going to go right ahead and pose exactly the same questions in other topics.

(If I'm wrong about this he can easily come here and correct me. I don't think he will.)

I wholeheartedly agree... and I have no illusions about that. GodsSamus is probably too far gone to pay attention to anything like my post. But it's not about GodsSamus... it's about other people who might read it... people who have not yet been rendered totally immune to knowledge, logic and reason.

I regard people like GodsSamus as a valuable RESOURCE. They can be relied upon to provide a constantly spewing font of ignorance, absurdity, and toxic, drooling stupidity... which is the very fodder we require in order to confront it, expose it and reveal it in the bright, glaring light of reason. Sure... they can be bothersome and frustrating. Any stubborn refusal to think, and see reason can be frustrating. I know it gets right up my nose. So... we just have to keep reminding ourselves... "resource"... "resource"... and be grateful for the gift.

(For those of you who know about this... think of Don Juan Mateus' "Petty Tyrant.")

 

[Danyc]

Particularly considering that the post was made 3 years ago, which I only just now noticed. According to this user's profile, his/her last activity was August 18. 2005.

This is a tricky thread to negotiate.

But Duckphup's post was indeed excelleint.

Ah, I see

Oh well

I'll let it sit as a reminder for anybody else