Are de-converts open to re-converting?

July 5, 2008 at 11:59 pm 42 comments

Recently, Rachel posed this question on her post “A Curious Christian with A Few Questions for de-cons:

Are de-cons open to returning to the faith or is that impossible?

Here are a few of the responses from d-C contributors and readers:

I try to remain open to returning to my old faith, but am seeing less and less possibility as time goes on and searches prove unfruitful.
- Quester

I’m open to learning new things and changing my mind. However, after studying and seeking for over 40 years, I really doubt that I will suddenly discover that God is real. - writerdd

The ApostateSort of like asking Christians if they are open to new religions, is it not? Only in this case we are people who have at least admitted that we are capable of changing our minds on the subject. The problem is that this question implies that this was a conscious decision on our parts. For myself, and most here, it isn’t. If the evidence in support of whatever version of Christianity is strong enough, I am sure I would accept it – as a former apologeticist, I have only found that it fails in every historical and philosophical aspect known to myself. - TheApostate

LeoPardus “With God all things are possible.” ) That’s not totally tongue-in-cheek. If there is a god, and if he can show me he’s real, I would love to believe again. I’d be back “in the fold” in a moment if God would really act as he often did in the Bible. (Healings, epiphanies, prophecies, etc) But as long as there is NO activity or other evidence of existence on God’s part, I cannot believe. - LeoPardus

He Is SailingNo, it is not impossible – but it is very highly unlikely. I have read – and still read – plenty of apologetic books. But I have also read plenty of other books that show how these Christian apologetics really cheat with facts and logic – I don’t know if it willful or not, but … and I hate to sound condescending, but I can see right through most of it. I do not engage online much anymore, but I am asking more and more questions of my old Christian friends. I have asked God countless times to give me a reason to hang on to belief. I figure if God wants me to believe, he knows how to do it. Maybe someday he will!! But until that day comes, I cannot build my faith based on the personal experience of others. - HeIsSailing

It would be like returning to an abusive ex.

- The Nerd

If I am honest, I still hold on to a single thread of my faith now. But I hope to cut that thread soon because its based solely in fear. - WalkingAway

Impossible. I could see myself attending a church for social reasons (e. g., a UU church or an ethical society)
– blueollie

It is very very unlikely that I will return to belief. I am as sure as Richard Dawkins about this. However it is possible to use brainwashing techniques like or other immoral and covert methods to take me back to where I was. But that won’t last long, I will still crawl back on feet with the crutches of reason and morality. (One of the evangelical leaders of the catholic “cult” my mom’s part of, tried to threaten me of using his political powers to get me identified as medically insane and tried other immoral ways to get me back into faith, but I crawled back into atheism within a month.) - edwinhere

At this point I cannot see myself re-believing. I would need evidence, and at this point I do not see any forthcoming.
– Nick

I don’t know how to answer this one. If I had good reasons to, of course. But I don’t, so I don’t see any reason to. It’s possible, but not unless there’s a reason to. – Bad

It is impossible for me to return to mainstream Christianity. There would be a possibility for some of the more esoteric paths. Of course those are not considered Christian by most, so not sure it would still be possible. But then again, I am not technically an Atheist either since I do believe in a creative force, that we are all a part of. - dancingmoogle

I’m not planning to return to that particular faith or any similar.

- Clair

I could never return to the faith the way things are now, but if there was to be some sort of extraordinary evidence that made doubting the existence of god require more faith and denial of more facts than belief in god does now, then sure, I would believe again. - orDover

Short of the Rapture actually occurring, I don’t see myself ever returning. (But I could be mistaken!) - Ubi Dubium

I’m definitely open to returning. But I need a reason to return. “Feelings” and mundane miracles aren’t God. I can’t believe in a God that only chooses to reveal himself in ways that non-believers experience with the same frequency. Given that after 23 years of belief I can find no evidence of a real God, I don’t really expect to find it now. - SnugglyBuffalo

I spent several years looking for even the slightest reason to stay and my ultimate goal was to find the truth. If I find that I have reached this decision in error…of course I would return. - finallyhappy

That depends on what you mean by “faith.” If you mean a belief in the Christian God, then yes, I am open to that, if given sufficient evidence. If you mean “faith” as a method of thinking, then no. Faith is a broken way of thinking. This can be easily demonstrated. - SavageBeginner

I would return in a moment, given my extensive involvement in the church. However, I can’t do so until I see a reason to believe in it over any other religious system. - Bob

I can’t currently imagine anything that would make me return to Christianity, or any other religion. – Stephen P.

Not going to happen. At least not the Christian faith. I never say never in terms of what I may believe down the road, but Christianity has pretty much killed any desire I would have to go back. - SarahC

No. Why? Because after researching and learning many other religions, I have found that 99% of them are all the same with the same basic principles. It doesn’t matter which one you belong to, that is like having 6 different colored t-shirts of the same kind…doesn’t matter, there are only minor differences. – Sandy

Can you provide reliable evidence, or even a sound logical argument that doesn’t just prove that a god “isn’t impossible?” Even then, is that god worthy of worship? - Steve

I’ve always been open to returning to the faith, just as soon as someone could produce ANY evidence whatsoever that it’s not just a big dog-and-pony show in the land of make believe. But let’s be honest… that’s never going to happen. - Randy Hunt


Related Post: A treatise on re-conversion

Entry filed under: ~Other. Tags: , , , , .

Is there a reasonable faith? Strobel’s A Case For Christ – religious propaganda

42 Comments Add your own

  • 1. RIchard  |  July 6, 2008 at 2:11 am

    For my oart — no, probably not. The damage is done.

    For a long time I flirted with liberal Christianity, and it might have worked for me (and I do mean very liberal — essentially a Don Cuppit, naturalistic, God-as-the-projection-of-human-values sort of way), but the symbol-system of Christianity has become so aversive to me that I couldnt go back. Crosses, atonement and suffering, however demythologized, leave me cold and/or creeped out. Just being honest. Fundamentalism was really toxic for me.

  • 2. RIchard  |  July 6, 2008 at 2:17 am

    One further thought — if someone were to somehow magically show me beyond all possibility of error that it was true then, yes, I suppose returning would have to be on the table.

    But it would then take a great many years in therapy to undo the undoing that my first round of therapy did for me.

    So heres to hoping its not true. I cant afford it. ;)

  • 3. Karen  |  July 6, 2008 at 2:31 am

    I would need both clear empirical evidence that a deity exists to believe in such. To worship such a deity, I’d need clear empirical evidence that she/he/it was not a sadistic asshole like the deity portrayed in the Christian bible.

  • 4. Aussie Ali  |  July 6, 2008 at 2:42 am

    Now that have broken away from a Christain perspective I don’t think I can convolute my mind to think that way again.

  • 5. Jamie G.  |  July 6, 2008 at 2:46 am

    Are de-cons open to returning to the faith or is that impossible?

    I’m sure you are asking about returning to the Christian faith. My answer is no. I would no sooner worship the christian god as I would venerate Hitler, even if “God” were real. The christian god is a monster, real or not.

  • 6. Obi  |  July 6, 2008 at 3:09 am

    The answer for me is “absolutely not”. I’ve learned too much, to be honest, and I wouldn’t be telling the truth if I said that the Christian (or any religion’s) God could possibly exist. I’m ambivalent on the idea of a God in general though, although I’m leaning quite a bit to the “the very idea of God is one fabricated by humans to explain what they couldn’t understand”.

  • 7. cornishevangelist  |  July 6, 2008 at 4:38 am

    God’s will. Matthew 26:39, “Oh my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: Nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.”

    I will never forget the time of learning how I had to surrender my will to God. It was a time during those seven years of affliction, which plagued my life. It was a truly horrific time for my family and I.

    I received many iron infusions, at Poole hospital, walking down those long corridors was near impossible for me to do because of my lack of breath. I really hated doing this, they would hook me up for a transfusion, the needle would cause severe bruising as it entered my veins. Many times leaning against the corridor walls, pale as a ghost, saying, “Lord, why do I have to do this, why don’t you give me more iron in my blood?”

    Then one time I prayed “Well Lord, if you want me to do this, if this is your will for me to have these infusions, then I surrender to you.” That was the very last time that I needed any more iron in my blood, and my breath returned to me, and I never needed to return again for any more infusions, the Lord completely healed me, after saying “I surrender to you Lord.”All to Jesus I surrender all to Jesus I freely give.

    Now Christ had to surrender His will to His Father completely, so that if we will surrender our lives to Him, and totally trust Him for all that He has accomplished on that cross, then healings and blessings will abound for us. For whatever comes our way we will have the victory, because Christ has the victory over all the powers of darkness.

    Dear Christians, today you may say, “Why have I got to go through this trial,” as you cry unto the Lord. Well, I can say from experience that Jesus will be with you, and bring you out of that fiery furnace, just like He was with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, and brought them out. You may be in a place where you just do not want to be, just like I was, now this will be a time for you to surrender your will to Christ, and say, “ Lord if it’s your will for me to go through this fiery furnace, then your will be done.” You can be assured of this that Jesus will bring you out just like He did for countless others who have put their trust in Him.

    Sometimes through testing times I go, dark seems the way, and full of woe; but in the furnace though I be, my great Physician healeth me, Lord, I would spread this truth abroad, the mighty power of thy word; It’s just the same, the blind now see, and demons at thy presence flee, for sin and sickness doth depart, when thou doth reign within my heart; and I from all the curse am free, since Christ, my Saviour healeth me.
    LINK
    EVANGELIST BILLY BOLITHO
    http://www.evangelistbillybolitho.blogspot.com

  • 8. Rebecca  |  July 6, 2008 at 7:54 am

    Show me proof of God, (in the context of my previous faith or even another), proof that I can’t think of any other possible explanation for…

    And I’d be open.

    So far, nothings come close.

  • 9. The Apostate  |  July 6, 2008 at 11:28 am

    For Leopardus:

    I’d be back “in the fold” in a moment if God would really act as he often did in the Bible.

    I’m not sure whether you had originally added more to this (a qualifier of some sort) – but would you actually serve this god if he did act as he did in the Bible? Once an individual is able to read the Bible without the blinders of Christianity he or she readily sees how Yahweh is a mischievous tyrant who decimates his creations as quickly as “He” created it. What if you were a Philistine, Canaanite, or Egyptian? I say keep that God in his place.
    Of course, what if Marcion was right and the God of the Jews was a corrupt of false god? Perhaps it is only the God of the New Testament that we should sing “His” praises. But could we truly start to pick and chose what to take with us once again? What if you try to cheat the established church and God strikes you down in cold blood? What if you accidently didn’t believe or do the right thing and you end up in the place of weeping and gnashing of teeth and all the horrible things that happen in Revelation? Infinite punishment for a being with finite understanding of the world hardly sounds just (much less merciful).
    Is this a god you could actually “fall back into the fold” even if “He” revealed himself to you? Of course, if that revelation said that everything he did before wasn’t really “Him”, that would be another question altogether, wouldn’t it?

  • 10. The Apostate  |  July 6, 2008 at 11:31 am

    Re: Comment 7

    I wonder if I do re-convert, could I suddenly start speaking in the King’s tongue or is that something I have to learn?

  • 11. Deborah  |  July 6, 2008 at 2:04 pm

    If you had truly converted in the first place, there would be no falling away or doubts. Therefore your question, and many of the comments that are posed/posted are by one who did not convert in truth, but was like the one who, having come to hear a word they did not like, nor understand, became offended and the faith they thought they had was taken from them.

    God is merciful to those who desire to return, and if they seek for HIm, He will be found of them. The Scriptures are abundant witness and testimony to this truth.

    But if you want to reject His grace and mercy to turn and walk away to serve some other version of a god you prefer or one that serves your interests better, then know you imperil your now eternal soul, and if such be the case, you’d better get used to the heat now.

    For those who think He is an abusive husband, know that you have not yet seen your attitude and behavior to Him from His eyes . . . yet!

    The bottom line is this: God is still God and your belief or unbelief isn’t going to change Him, it will only change where and how you will spend eternity. Do you not think that if God made abundant provision for your salvation in Christ, He also made abundant provision for the destruction of His enemies that would have nothing to do with Him? God is righteous, and you alone are the one who chooses what side of that righteousness you will stand on.

    Keep your Burger King faith (have it your way!) but what are you going to do in the end, on the day you stand before Christ and God to give account of your life before Him? Too late then, and do you know which breath will be your last?

    Repent, and get your act straightened out before Him now while you still can, and while there is still time, for the door is about to close, and woe to the one who is on the wrong side of it when it does.

  • 12. John T.  |  July 6, 2008 at 2:23 pm

    Deborah

    On the odd Sunday when I end up at Church, I look for people like you to teach my daughter what God is not about. You would fit that bill perfectly. I dont need mercy on my soul, but it seems you need some good old fashion love, because you sound like youre already in Hell.

  • 13. Lorena  |  July 6, 2008 at 3:18 pm

    I do not see myself going back to Christianity ever. I don’t even see myself joining any group that requires adherence to a belief in order to belong. Because I am sure that as long as I dissent on anything, the herd will take it against me.

    Would I even be tempted to go back? Maybe, but there would have to be some astonishing new development. All the cliches and worn-out arguments that Christians use when they come to our blogs to try to convert us will never bring me back.

    Often Christians write, with utmost pride and good intentions, arguments that they consider brilliant and verses they think cannot be argued with. But they ignore that we ourselves used the arguments as Christians. They fail to realized that we’ve heard the stuff many times already and that our decision to leave the faith was in spite of their rehearsed arguments and Bible verses, which we often even know by heart.

  • 14. Lorena  |  July 6, 2008 at 3:23 pm

    “For those who think He is an abusive husband”

    I don’t believe anyone here thinks God is an abuse husband. Most people here think GOD IS NOT. That is, He doesn’t exist.

    The abuse husband is the Christian church who has created an abusive-husband-like God to torture believers with threats of eternal damnation.

  • 15. LeoPardus  |  July 6, 2008 at 5:44 pm

    TA:

    I figure if a if a being with world creating/destroying power shows up and tells me to follow/worship him, I’d best do so. If said being threatens to send me to suffer eternally in a place his might and knowledge made to maximize my anguish, then I’d better just do what he says. And if I don’t like some things such a being does, what can I do?

  • 16. LeoPardus  |  July 6, 2008 at 5:49 pm

    Deborah:

    Oh do please look in the archives for the “Convenient Categories” article. You stepped into one of our favorites with your opening sentence.

  • 17. They are asking the wrong question. « WHATEVER!  |  July 6, 2008 at 10:15 pm

    [...] its content, but rather because it is interesting to peek in on the mind of its writers.  The site identifies itself as  “resources for skeptical, de-converting, or former [...]

  • 18. The Apostate  |  July 7, 2008 at 3:27 am

    Deborah,

    If you had truly converted in the first place, there would be no falling away or doubts.

    Are you implying that you do not doubt anything?
    If this is the case, you are correct, I never had really converted. But then neither did St. Paul of Tarsus, St. Augustine, nor especially Aquinas or Anselm.

    Your ad hoc theology is interesting, but thoroughly heretical, unsubstantiated and somewhat mean-spirited.

  • 19. TheNerd  |  July 7, 2008 at 11:05 am

    Deborah – For those who think He is an abusive husband, know that you have not yet seen your attitude and behavior to Him from His eyes . . . yet!

    That’s how you view abused spouses? As men/women with an attitude problem? Seriously? I hope you never have an abused person come to you for advice, because from personal experience I can tell you that your advice to cut the attitude problem won’t be anything that person hasn’t already heard time and time again from the abuser. And even if he/she did have perfect attitude and behavior, it won’t stop the abuse, because the problem isn’t in the receiver, it’s in the giver.

    As for the metaphoric aspects of my “abusive ex” statement, Lorena hit it right on the head: I wasn’t talking about God at all. I was talking about the Church.

    cornishevangelist – I don’t have anything against copypastries in and of themselves, but at least take the time to add some personal thoughts to it, especially when the raw pastry misses the point of the post here.

  • 20. MOI  |  July 7, 2008 at 2:56 pm

    Return to faith in God? Sure. Religion? Sure. But always, always on my own terms. No more would I hand over my thinking to another person or believe blindly in dogmas or doctrines that make no sense. No more would I be a member of a church roll or submit to “church discipline.” No one has the right to do that to another human being.

    I like to call this “faith” I’d be open to as a hope in something beyond and leave it at that. Giving a single God human characteristics, worshiping holy books, or consigning people to heaven or hell…. Nope. That ain’t right, as we hicks like to say.

  • 21. Stephen  |  July 8, 2008 at 11:39 pm

    Even if it could be empirically proven that (1) Jesus existed and was God, (2) that Jesus wanted me to live according to the Bible, (3) that Heaven and Hell both existed…I would not become a Christian for the simple reason that I’ve found a better way of doing things. Reason is a much better way to find the truth and compassion is much better way to live one’s life. The Bible does not teach compassion — not even the vaunted New Testament. There may be a few verses in its favor, but they are greatly outweighed by the actions of the “Saviour” and the attitudes of his ilk.

    The same goes for Islam.

  • 22. societyvs  |  July 11, 2008 at 3:47 pm

    “All the cliches and worn-out arguments that Christians use when they come to our blogs to try to convert us will never bring me back.” (Lorena)

    I notice the whole thing is about the proofs of God or for God – is the essence of why people left the faith? What if the faith was simply an explanation of morality and immorality and that clash in human civilization – what if this was what God was about? Would people still dump faith like a bag of bricks (heavey and burdensome)?

    My question is similar to the one asked at the beginning of this blog – when you left the faith of Christianity – have any of you truly left morality also and exchanged it for immoral behavior?

    Reason I ask is because this seems to be the point from point A in the bible to point b in the bible of any and all passages/contexts in the bible. God seems overly concerned with human behavior more than anything else (in my opinion). Now talks about resurrection, prophecy, and son of man/god is fun – but they are side stories to God’s actual intentions – for humanity to treat itself in a manner fitting of a community.

    Maybe I am wrong and this can be proven – but am I asking something too hard from faith/myself/others?

  • 23. ubi dubium  |  July 11, 2008 at 5:45 pm

    societyvs

    My question is similar to the one asked at the beginning of this blog – when you left the faith of Christianity – have any of you truly left morality also and exchanged it for immoral behavior?

    A good and fair question, thanks.

    I would not say I have left “morality” behind, per se. But I have decided that I would rather run my life by “ethics”. I see “morality” as what your religion tells you you should do, and “ethics” as what your basic sense of decency tells you should do. I am a more “ethical” person now – I have more concern for the environment, I’m more active politically, and I try to encourage those around me to treat others with tolerance and compassion.

    But I refuse to “moralize”. I won’t condemn people for anything they do with a consenting partner in the privacy of their own bedroom (as long as they are not endangering the health of others). Although I am almost a teetotaler, I don’t condemn others for drinking (as long as they are not endangering the health and safety of others). I never feel I have to tell anybody they are “sinful” or “going to hell”. I have friends who are Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Kabbalist and several varieties of Pagan, and I feel no need to talk them out of their religions and/or superstitions.

    There are quite a few stories in the bible where god encourages or even requires what I would consider immoral behavior (murder, rape, child abuse, slavery). Overall, a person who believed every word of the bible is literally true and tried to live their lives by what it actually says would have a very hard time doing it. But I do think that it contains a fair bit of wisdom (as do most of the world’s holy books) along the lines of “treat others as you would like to be treated” and “judge not, lest ye be judged”.

  • 24. Joe  |  July 11, 2008 at 6:47 pm

    societyvs—

    I read your post and just wanted to say that the Bible doesn’t seem to imply that just because someone “apostasizes” that they will become an awful, immoral person. It does call them “ungodly” in the sense of “not having God in reverence in their minds and hearts”—but an apostate could be a decent upstaning, very giving person.

    Unfortunately, one can be a very good, upstanding person and miss the road of salvation though. Salvation cannot be gotten by being good:

    I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing. (Gal. 2: 21)

    The only way to salvation is through the cross of Christ.

    But if one rejects this it doesn’t mean they will become a criminal or bad person, or an immoral individual. They are just rejecting the only means there is for salvation.

  • 25. cornishevangelist  |  July 12, 2008 at 3:40 am

    Reject Christ Jesus, or accept Christ Jesus, it still doesn’t change the fact which is the absoulute truth. That Jesus is the way and the truth and the life, and that there is no other name which is given among men whereby we must be saved. You either have Christ or you have nothing, and no wisdom of words or thoughts of men can change this fact.

  • 26. societyvs  |  July 16, 2008 at 3:29 pm

    “Unfortunately, one can be a very good, upstanding person and miss the road of salvation though. Salvation cannot be gotten by being good” (Joe)

    That’s a tough one to swallow – it’s illogical. Salvation, as an idea, is based on the word ‘salve’ – which is in essence about being healed – or made whole. if someone comes to me and is a ‘good’ person by all means known to humanity – and yet does not serve the faith I follow – by all means they are ‘saved’ – in the sense they are made ‘whole’.

    The Tankah is replete with references about serving the One God versus serving idols (other gods) – the defining problem is immorality inherent in the actions of serving those other gods. The problem seems to be that the community of God has followed ideas that are immoral versus moral.

    When one reads the wisdom lit or psalms – this becomes a very clear motif. Good is always the opposite of evil – and this is termed in the sense of one’s moral guideline or immoral guideline. David and others seem to point to the godly person as upholding certain tenets and the ungodly as upholding certain tenets (usually abhorrent ideas – ie: like being quick to shed blood or greed).

    it becomes clear that godliness is related to morality and ungodliness is related with immoral ideas. Even when they get into belief in God they still use the same pattern – as a warning to those not following this path – they will self destruct themselves. The one who follows God is the one who maintains a moral living (which would be consistent with a Good God) and the one who does not follow God is the one who enjoys immoral behavior (consistent with living with no regard for a law).

  • 27. societyvs  |  July 16, 2008 at 3:51 pm

    “You either have Christ or you have nothing, and no wisdom of words or thoughts of men can change this fact” (comish)

    I will say this one clearly – so we can both see the wisdom of your own words. Everyone prior to Jesus did not have the Christ/Messiah – they may have hoped for some day of a Messiah – but did not have one. So by your logic, the whole of the Tanakh (OT) – written well before Jesus ever appeared – is basically words of wisdom that have no meaning?

    This would include names like Moses, Abraham, Joseph, Samuel, David, isaiah, Micah, Nehemiah, etc. None of these people had a messiah – they were without the ‘only way’ by all standards. And yet…we learn their teachings are sacred and ‘God’s words’…why? Because they could say there was the possibility of a Messiah? No, these people are still valid even prior to a Messiah because the Messiah is re-ittirating their words.

    Jesus’ teachings from the gospels are clearly tied back to essential Jewish teachings – many from the Torah/Law in fact. The teachings about love God and love your neighbor – from deut 6. the teaching ‘treat others how you want to be treated’ is grounded in Hillel’s rabbinical teaching. I would contend all of Jesus’ teachings hearken back to teachings from the Torah and the Prophets (as he himself points out).

    There is a rabbinic belief the Messiah would be expert in the Law/Torah – and would stamp the approval of all the teachings…I think we see an apsect of this in Jesus.

    In the end, we followed Paul more than we followed Jesus anyways – and now have a very Gentile looking faith – which has cast off it’s actual Jewish roots and connection. I think that’s alright – but it is clear (to me anyways) Jesus was thoroughly Jewish and would of been a Jewish version of Messiah in essence and teaching.

    This only way idea was a narrowing of Jewish thought – and mant believe that was his intent. However, maybe Jesus is saying his school of thought is the ‘way to God’ – and live this and you will see it. It’s not so much about what we want to believe and think – but about what those teachings from that school of thought (the messiah’s) make us become. In fact, Jesus teaches morality through and through.

  • 28. Derek  |  July 23, 2008 at 7:12 pm

    Lately I’ve felt like the best descriptor is an atheist-leaning agnostic. But I think I’m still in the middle of de-converting. I’m not fully convinced yet that I won’t “re-convert”, but I do know that that would take something very, very different from the same tired old rhetoric defending Christianity and recasting my deconversion into something insincere. And no, I’m not sure what that is, but if God is all-knowing, then surely He does.

  • 29. cornishevangelist  |  July 24, 2008 at 2:10 am

    Dear Societyvs ,

    You cannot seperate God the Son Jesus Christ from God the Father Jehovah.

    David, Moses, Abraham etc, knew Jesus Christ for He is in Jehovah,

    remember what Jesus said,
    ” If you have seen me you have seen the Father.

    Now Abraham knew Christ because he Knew the Father, but Abraham had to wait until the coming of Christ for him to be sealed by the Holy Ghost through the shedding of the blood of Christ.

    It is the blood of Jesus and only the blood of Jesus that can save.

  • 30. John Morales  |  July 24, 2008 at 3:09 am

    cornishevangelist, the Romans tortured Jeebus, you torture logic.

  • 31. cornishevangelist  |  July 24, 2008 at 4:12 am

    “The foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.1 Corinthians 1:25

  • 32. John Morales  |  July 24, 2008 at 4:39 am

    cornishevangelist, What’s this?

    The foolishness of my dog is wiser than yours.

  • 33. John Morales  |  July 24, 2008 at 4:39 am

    OTOH, I don’t pray to my dog. Fool.

  • 34. Deliberatus  |  November 25, 2009 at 12:12 am

    No, the scar is too deep.
    1.Having found many critical faults and having proved them, there is no sane way to do so.
    2. scriptures insist one cannot be saved twice, so they must argue that I was not saved the first time. Therefore. how can we be cure it would work the second time? I had faith then, and all essential knowledge.
    3. Some would therefore argue i WAS saved then, and still am, faith or not today. Yet my unbelief of Christianity is complete. I am content that they do not seek me out, and leave me alone.
    I do not bandy words with the insane. I regard Christianity as of a broken m ind; parts, fragments are sensible, eve n lovely, but the overall thing is unsane, and I will not have it.

  • 35. Joe  |  November 25, 2009 at 8:07 pm

    Deliberatus—-

    I ask, and sincerely, this is purely out of curiosity—-do you then think the words from Heb. 6:4 apply to you?

    “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, if they shall apostasize, to renew them again to repentance…” ?

    I know you no longer believe, so even this verse is just pure hogwash to you most likely, but do you view a reconversion as truly “impossible”? Perhaps that is an unreasonable question to ask someone who sees Christianity “as of a broken mind”, but I am curious just the same. I am still trying to learn how this whole process works.

  • 36. Joe  |  November 25, 2009 at 8:14 pm

    Perhaps the question above is just plain unreasonable to ask. I am asking you to comment rationally on something you no longer believe in—-and I can see that is unfair. So, just ignore me—many people do. :>)

  • 37. atomicgumbo  |  November 25, 2009 at 9:10 pm

    Not to preempt Deliberatus, but allow me to take my own stab at, if you will.

    For me, it’s not an unfair or unreasonable question. I often wonder what it would take for me to “re-convert”. My reasoning goes something like this:

    Let’s say I believe in the Christian god and worship and love him and follow him to the best of my ability, but then life blows up and I can’t find satisfactory answers to my questions as to why. It seems like God is out of the picture, so I painfully divorce myself from belief. If the loving, personal god I believed in exists, he probably doesn’t like the idea of me going to hell now, anymore than he did before I decided to become a Christian. So why wouldn’t he do something about it? Why wouldn’t he fight for me? He has unlimited power and knowledge, knows exactly what it would take to bring me back. If he would act on that knowledge I would once again be his.

    Do you think that your god is interested in winning me back, Joe?

  • 38. Joshua  |  November 25, 2009 at 9:52 pm

    Ahh, the ‘ole Hebrews 6:4 passage. I should write a post on this site about that passages some day. I’ve got a unique view since I spent a good 10 years trying to figure it out.

  • 39. Gael  |  March 30, 2013 at 9:37 am

    I hope you all are right and I am wrong, but I think they just capitalized Afterlife like sonomee would capitalize Heaven and Hell. I kind of doubt they would name a potential album before it was written yet. However, all the themes are perfect AOTY was about death (per Billy), and The Mystery Song and this new talk are about ghosts/resurrection/afterlife. Looking over the last few years, I’m just not sure when they would have had the time to really get the songs together, let alone record them. So if an album is in their plans, I bet it wouldn’t be a long time yet. Plus, nothing would be guaranteed until it was done b/c without a record contract obligating them, if they all weren’t happy with whatever they make, we’ll never hear any of it! If they do make some more new songs and if the theme is afterlife, I hope it will be a little cheerier than KFAD and AOTY I miss Roddy’s influence on those, and besides, an afterlife should be a little happier!

  • 40. Alban  |  May 26, 2013 at 6:28 am

    Looks like the last 4 posts support quality of life issues with an interesting association to car insurance. Is that like the association of faith to what God may be?

    Reconverting and deconverting don’t give much credence to WHERE God may be. Most of the scriptures I have read or heard about indicate (the Kingdom of) God is within each of us literally. It is also said even in our Bibles that that kingdom was and is able to be entered, literally. Parables were for people ‘not getting that’ (essentially)

    So why without this ‘entry’ and its knowing are we speaking of turning away from or turning back to group agreement on imaginary or at best hypothetical (because you did not experience what the original{vs. what was transcribed} authors did) belief of an extraordinary power that sustains all life, we think…or think not?

    What we think and what we believe without knowing first, is guesswork. Like if I start taking cialis, I’ll get better car insurance rates.

    Maybe we’re supposed to assume long lasting sex makes for safer driving!

    Can anybody else understand how absurd this entire conversation is? IF THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS WITHIN YOU (each of us individually) WHY ARE WE NOT SEARCHING SMARTLY FOR SPECIFIC HELP IN THAT PURSUIT?

    Find that, enter it everyday and this conversation will be looked back upon as bizarre. But do not believe me.

    Get off your analytical duffs and finally practice what both sides here both preach. Try to uncover Truth. You all walk around with it breathing you and yet you argue about “belief” in it like it’s a film critique, one side in hypnotic obsessive passion, the other in defiant science fictional rebuttal

    And here is my prophecy. There will come a time when we look back upon these statements/debates and will have a good chuckle like those of us who have enjoyed the antics of Laurel and Hardy, Abbott and Costello and The 3 Stooges. It will seem funny and preposterous at the same time.

    You have the preciousness/importance of the conversation right in your own minds (both sides), but the accuracy is lacking.

    First though, determine if you want to be right or do you want to be fulfilled, making sure to distinguish motivations for both. Genuine desire is much different than emotional or intellectual fervor.

  • 41. Alban  |  June 22, 2013 at 8:22 pm

    A number of posts here indicate wanting to learn or be shown something other than book learning to reignite faith. If that is really the case there is a viable experience very close by, that may far exceed even the glory days of what is now lost faith

    Continuing from #45, awareness is amazing. It utilizes the brain in a multitude of capacities. On this site we see a number of them including intellectual, scientific, use of memory, emotional and imaginary. (and spam as well).

    One place awareness can go but doesn’t get the credit it’s due in going there, is to go within. To do that, any kind of thinking after the decision to go in, will not fit. Like the path of a razor’s edge. Only the awareness gets to enter. After spending some largely indescribable time there, there is tremendous benefit to thinking beginning with a unique peace of mind.

    This should not be confused with meditation which is thinking induced quietness or stillness. Specifically that meditation ‘controls’ brain waves like nsaids (asprin, tylenol, ibuprofen etc;) control inflammation. Quieting and soothing has its own benefits in healing and in that type of thinking (meditation) app.

    What I am referring to however, is a doorway that is extremely small to our external sight. Yes, it is for every intent and purpose, except for one…… invisible.

    That one intent, that one purpose though put simply here, has very profound implication. The genuine desire to know, to feel and to perceive real peace, the kind cag, that is timeless (as an afterthought), no matter the label people place on it, is the only intention that triggers the genuine sincerity and inspiration to DISCOVER the specific help to learn how to ‘get small’ so to speak.

    Or better yet the term “naked” in this sense, is like the proverbial onion being peeled. And it is not like stripping down to a new type of thinking, it’s more like learning to let go, which puts separation between you and ego. I used to quip, “wherever ego, I go”.

    Nevertheless the awareness is free. In this endeavor it is not stuck to the brain. You are not entering something that is created… because you can. The brain can only conceive of what is or can be created. It does not have the capacity to touch or mesh with what is not created, so thoughts are not able to enter.

    Some like to call the awareness “soul” but that’s a little ghoulish I think …like Caspar the friendly ghost. The awareness and the “uncreated” can be joined! It’s like an exclusive union. Nothing else can be or is able to be present. That always throws the philosophers if they hear or read that conclusion, for a loop.

    It is amazing when ego-self separation begins, to explore an entirely new kind of inspiration. One that just naturally wants more. And it is there in endless supply. What seemed small is in fact humongous on the other side of the door. No buildings or group agreement needed. Imagination left in the dust.

    It has been my experience that history inaccurately using some of the concepts I have mentioned here, distorts the nature and the simplicity of accessing that endless supply. Why?

    The concept of being a genuinely free person has historically rubbed human authority the wrong way. Our race boils down to whoever has the most, wins. But access to the endless is one on one so to speak, not societal. So society has always had difficulty if not rejection of fitting the concept of pure genuine freedom into the mix of any kind of possession. Too big to fit…so separate it out, term it ‘invisible” and provide imaginary access to it That is the nature of all religion even the less confronting non denominational type.

    Making inspiration of this caliber a ‘mystery’ is not an art form. It is based in ignorance, misunderstanding and most significant of all, non interest. Just write it off as a mystery and be done with it. Or if an atheist, drown/relish in the prove it to me model while it breathes you and is actually literally available to perceive. (Pretend you didn’t read that part)

    So if “God” exists to even the extent we have created HIM in our own image, sure he’d be pissed but not bewildered. If we continue our slow dance with ego it would appear we continue on, business as usual. Maybe “he” would allow more of our own created problems to swallow us up or just hit the kill switch. But negative expectation nor fear need be a reason to know what you already have ‘built in’ you. Buried way deep inside believe it or not, is the genuine desire to know “such a peace that will never die”. Find that and the peace will find you.

    In reality, there is a mutual interest there. Not a created imaginary god, but a beauty and a love that is indescribable as well as indestructible. One on our end that is way beyond talk of any kind of conversion.

  • 42. Alban  |  July 27, 2013 at 1:12 pm

    In short, think outside the box. Finding “God” is more akin to “knowing thyself” than re-establishing connection to faith.

    Ironically going outside the box means going inside. And once inside you can see the the unintentionally left behind breadcrumbs inside the abandoned box. That often inspires me for one to take in, learn, compare and enjoy the clarity behind the HOW TO live lessons/sermons.

    Interpretation within the clarity will generally be unique but with enough loose agreement to bring a fair balance in many of life’s activities. Common sense here will be much more common.

    The fundamental values of living a good life are valuable commodities. But more importantly having the actual intimacy of life itself within one’s self is the number one priority in my humble opinion. The ‘yield’ on that commodity is immeasurable.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Attention Christian Readers

Just in case you were wondering who we are and why we de-converted.

de-conversion wager

Whether or not you believe in God, you should live your life with love, kindness, compassion, mercy and tolerance while trying to make the world a better place. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will have made a positive impact on those around you. If there is a benevolent God reviewing your life, you will be judged on your actions and not just on your ability to blindly believe in creeds- when there is a significant lack of evidence on how to define God or if he/she even exists.

Twitter

Archives

Blog Stats

  • 2,031,342 hits since March 2007

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 203 other followers