Timid8967

How many of you have come from a religious background? And what was this background?

My father was a Baptist preacher - this was my upbringing. As an adult I transitioned to Episcopalian.

And what convinced you to become an atheist? Was it a journey or an epiphany?

Both, I guess. I knew there was dissonance between a literal reading of the Biblical origin stories and what was known of origins from reality. There were also theological dissonances that I never found satisfying answers for. Eventually, it all snapped into place and I was forced to admit to myself I no longer believed. It was a traumatic realization.

Did it cause problems with your family or partner at the time? 

Not at first, I kept it to myself for a few years sorting it all out in my head. I eventually told my wife. Once I assured her my commitment to our marriage was unchanged by one less (divine) witness being at our wedding - there has never been an issue. Telling my father was a little more difficult, but he and I maintained a close relationship until he passed. As a rule, we didn't generally talk about religion. I have lost friends - some from my own errors and some simply because I was an atheist.

And are you still connected somehow with the people from your old religious affiliation? 

I was consistently connected until a few years ago. I worked part time at the church I used to attend regularly. Either the church could no longer afford me, word got out I was not a believer (I became more outspoken once my father died), or a combination of the two led them to discontinue my employment. I still occasionally interact with my former priest and his wife - I consider them friends. 

Could you please take the time to highlight a few more of my threads that go some way to proving what both you and I actually do believe in.https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6366/post-links/274369

 Lol! True true... You said something interesting though. Right side of history?

You have one part here right, only disregard the other part. You're right that God eludes the physical senses because of the nature of God, as well as the nature of spirituality. But God does not evade the conscious nature of man, hence the overwhelming study of transcendental experience....or you may refer to it as spiritual experience. To disregard that is to disregard a massive portion of human experience. I have a relevant topic that you may find interesting to think about.

To put it bluntly, God is not just a philosophical idea, but a Reality any soul can learn and experience from through many channels of awareness. Albeit, these channels of awareness may be distinct from the physical experience.

I don't invoke the design hypothesis, rather function. Design typically gets one to focus on perfection while the other the focus is more on the products within the universe. If we focus on perfection we lose sight of the obvious, that the universe is created through a succession of intelligent processes. Yes, I'm a proponent of Theistic evolution as a process that is specifically tailored to creationism. I don't know why evolution as a process has been touted so long as a materialistic event but I'd like to bring awareness to the reality that for processes to occur, there must fist be awareness, thought or intelligence (mind). Why? because it's a common sense observation.

There is no need for perfection here, because that suggests there could be absolutely no flaws, death or change and exempt from decay of substance. And that would contradict the reason for a creating a physical universe to begin with. The physical experience was meant to be temporal, subject to change and adjustments and a universe that was meant to appear and disappear. The only perfection that exists, or better put, a deathless reality is only relevant to consciousness or soul....the state of existence that is natural to God.

Humans possess the highest state of awareness, we can articulate and express ourselves in more ways than animals. You're right, expression of thought and mind would be inherent to us rather than animals. I fail to see a real objection here, it doesn't work in your favor. Animals are subject to their anatomy, they have not the ability to show you what they think and feel in an intellectual or philosophical way, so what? They were created to experience this world in a primitive way. Humans have a higher range of conscious reception, a higher range of communication, a higher range of awareness and so we have a wider range of what we can experience and articulate.

Science is a neutral study, it doesn't belong to atheists or materialists. We don't need speculation for spirituality, it is acknowledged as observation not assumption. Before we start introducing claims, just make sure they are claims that I have made here.

The only thing useful in terms of showing that God cannot be disproved is for you to see that you have accepted a belief that is not a fact, even fictional. Creation is not a flawed proposition in any way period, saying it doesn't make it so and actually is in alignment with the evidence. You have not provided any rationale for me to consider that it is. 

Which is? what nonsense have I proposed?

Fear has no place in determining the origins of our existence, this is a philosophical and intellectual exercise to determine what is true and most accurate about our world. Someone told you that, perhaps you believe it. But I'm here to tell you this has nothing to do with what I feel or want. Beyond that, as I pointed out, human experience is rife full of observation from a spiritual standpoint. Remember, that when you avoid that factor you avoid the truth as it exists in our world.

Why is Hell silly? And just because I like consistency, have you heard of the conditional immortality or soul sleep or annihilation? 

Depends on your conception of hell. Mine was a literal place off eternal torment and torture. It's silly because here we have the almighty creator of everything who can do whatever he wants, and he decides he will create us (his beloved children) and then create a place where he will spend the rest of eternity torturing us for not living up to his subjective standards after having created us in such a way that he knew not all of us would. Imagine trying to explain that to someone whose never heard of this.

Or right.  SO!?

Fraud! to believe in any gods - is nonsense.

I see atheists make this statement a lot, but they never give a convincing reason why so, well other than they believe God is imaginary and or religious thought is stupid. And while that's their opinion there isn't any real objective truth or rationale behind it. Because, you do realize that Theists find atheists and materialists beliefs nonsense right? Well I could actually give you some real reasons to think it is stupid to hold such ridiculous beliefs.

Without touching on religion, could you give me a small list of reasons why you think believing in a Creator is nonsense? the reason I ask that you not touch on religion is because not everyone accepts the same dogma as it's also irrelevant to whether God exists or not, and this will force you to evaluate the core reason people think God exists. I also am curious about your own reasoning to make such an outspoken claim, with such a claim you must have some solid logic behind it. 

Well. Like I have already explained over and over to the cretinous such as yourself, those questions and or critiques in those links to threads of mine and that you have so kindly highlighted for me, are there for anyone to challenge should they have mind to do so..

• I am not an atheist https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/811/post-links/36386
  

• I am not an atheist https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/811/post-links/36386
  
• So I would say that actually makes me a theist.https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/927/post-links/41322
  
• I am not a believer  https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/1985/post-links/86718
  
• I am not sure how someone such as yourself would describe  me.https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3236/post-links/136488
  
• I do marvel at times about you theists. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/3564/post-links/152455
  
• Theists  write and speak as if they existed or still exist. It is up to the atheist then,  should he wish to , to challenge what it is that these sycophantic fawning theist actually believe in . https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4023/post-links/168480
  
• I have no religious beliefs. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4120/post-links/170929
  
• The atheist isn't making the claims., what the atheist/me does is question the claims made by Christians  and you have either  to explain them ( not to be confused with explain them AWAY)  with logical fact or you simply ignore me and go away,   that is your responsibility and you owe it to your faith.  I don't have to explain a damn thing, at all. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4199/post-links/173452
  
• But I am not in the slightest a religious person, which helps. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4216/post-links/175790
  
• I am the atheist not you. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/5246/post-links/229552
  

But how did  these gospel writers  know the words spoken when they were spoken in the absence of anyone else.?

Which is wrong?

Multiple spouses.

or multiple sex partners.

One is concept based.

One is reality based.

Right and wrong are also concept based.

- I would have to write an encyclopedia, but this is a simple exercise. Take the practices of the Western society today & compare it to human society across history. Then realize there has never been a more extreme society in human history. 

- Umm... You're contradicting yourself! Lawful polygamy is illegal & its opposite, unlawful polygamy, is illegal too...!! Solid logic!

- Yet, more contradictions! Muslims are the only polygamists by doing the same thing supposed non-polygamists do, having one legal relationship plus other extra-legal?! The law of non-contradiction is having a seizure.

- Even more contradictions! A polygamist in a legal marriage & in another relationship is committing extramarital intercourse (adultery), yet a polygamist in a legal marriage & an extra-legal one is also committing marital-extramarital intercourse!? Are you waging war on the law of non-contradiction...

- "they do it too", right? Nah, wishful thinking. Adultery is particularly prevalent in western countries, they top the list like champions. Regardless, lawful (& unlawful) polygamous relationships are -respectively- consensual (& non-consensual) multi-partner relationships; the latter being predominant in western societies. One main difference between Islamic (lawful) polygamous relationships & western (unlawful) ones is that in the Islamic relationship all partners share equal rights & dues -& by extensions all the children, whereas in the West the relationship is non-consensual & one wife gets all the rights (& her children) when the other partners get no legal rights. 

- They just bomb them, burn them, dismember them, massacre them, shoot them, gas them, torture them, eat them... It's always shocking how westerners, especially Americans, are so detached from the world & their own history.

- First of all, this is a drop in a bucket in Western killings, in both scale & scope. Second of all, these deaths are natively instigated, the Chinese will  quickly forget what Chinese have done to themselves, but they will never forget what others have done to them. This isn't the case for Western killings, others will not forget what the West has done to them. Third of all, it was not until these countries (particularly Japan) adopted Western ideologies (like Nationalist & Communism) that they displayed the grandest show of violence in their history.

- That's the typical attitude. Reminds me of when the French went into North Africa, they massacred a 1/3rd of the population, burning entire villages with their people, while calling their victims violent. You're projecting. Today, one of the most violent countries in the world is the US, they can't help projecting that blame onto others to feel better about themselves. 

- Killing off someone for murder is violence. Your logic is top notch. Execution or severing the hand for capital crime is a punishment, which is, by definition, cruel.

 

- You gotta get on top of that, it's getting out of control in the West. 

- You have wild imaginations. Many states in the US have no minimum age of marriage -there are +300k child marriages in country. In fact, less than a century ago, the age of consent in the US was 10 years, down to 7 years (such as in Delaware). 

- The founder of Islam Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) was the greatest human being who brought justice & mercy to the world, to establish peace, honor women, end racism, spread freedom of religion & equity among all; & his wife Aisha is the most influential woman in Islam. You're conflating the great Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) with your bloody founders. 

- It's just that you don't know your history. Consensual marriage in the West comes from Islam, through Andalusia -thanks to Prophet Muhammed (pbuh). Pre-12th century, the Church did not establish consensual marriage, & that still persisted in the West until late 19th century. Divorce was also forbidden, subjecting women to essentially life-imprisonment. This didn't change until mid-20th century, after so much pressure from within to be like Muslims. Again, thanks to Prophet Muhammed (pbuh). Though, to be fair, the West is not the only culpable in this case, India as well. Women didn't have property rights in the West until the 20th century. In fact, in France it was until 1939. Muslim women had full property rights since day one, of course thanks to Prophet Muhammed (pbuh). I can go on & on & on...

The father is the head of the house.  Do you deny it? The eldest brother rules. Do you deny it? 

- No, God is the head of the family & of society in general. The man performs his role in society fulfilling his duties as a father, a husband, a son, a neighbor, an employee, a tenant, a friend...etc. Every connection a person has with another entails a role, with rights & dues. 

- Damn! You don't know anything do you!? Arranged marriage = forced marriage. Though, forced marriages are prevalent in the US as well, most states do not prohibit it. 

- Lmao! I guess you don't know. That's the general reputation the West has elsewhere. We can see the news; sex-tourism is dominated by westerners... You know the age of consent in Mexico is 12 years old... You can do the math.

- That's not true. Incest, zoophilia... are legal in much of the West. 

- That's propaganda. You keep forgetting I'm not American, this mantra means nothing to me. They keep telling you this day & night. It doesn't mean it's necessarily the case. Every state has PR.

- America is a rich country, handshake bribes are not worth the risk. Bribes are in the millions & in the billions. Tax evasion in the US is upwards of ONE TRILLION USD per year. In the US corruption is legalized. A lawyer can lie under the protection of the Law & sell himself to the highest bidder. A corporation can lobby -corrupt- the government for its own interests. A pharmacologist can charge a small fortune to a low-class citizen for his profit... 

- You're hopelessly delusional. Can't you break a little bit the stereotype!? You have backwards, Western countries use aid & bribes & various other persuasive means -offers you can not refuse, to pressure countries to cede to their interests. They have been doing this since colonial days, it has never stopped. In fact, it was US official policy to ration African countries for population control, unless they cede to American demands, because these countries do not have other options. But the world is different today, there are options. China is rising as a super power. The balance is shifting.

- Did I shock you that much? You can't handle the truth?... In effect, if you're confident you have the truth, then you can just disprove my lies & establish your truths. Shouldn't be hard right?

1) Believe women.  Currently I support the fifth amendment.

2) God.  Currently I don’t worship any higher power.

3) Abortion.  Currently, I’m pro choice.

what is that meant to mean to me? Muslims have weird practices as well. 

- No where near the extreme practices in the West; the most extreme in human history.

Polygamy.

- The West is the global leader in polygamous relationships & unlawful polygamy, aka adultery. In France, more than half married men & women commit adultery. 

violence.

- The West has lead the global output of violence every year for the past 1000 years. According to the Encyclopedia of War, the death toll is something around 550 million.

pedophilia.

- The West has been leading in that too, since ancient Greece.

domestic control and dominance.

- Some of the highest rates in the world of domestic abuse & incest are in the West, after all they invented it.

patriarchal practices.

- Lmao! Can you be more cliche!

Arranged marriages.

- The entire world prefers arranged marriages, except the West. They rather spend half their lives whoring themselves before marriage. Sad!

bribery and corruption.

- The West bribes & corrupts the entire world to maintain their control. 50 billion USD of American tax payer money went to bribe Iraq alone.

none of these are biblical. biblical beliefs are dangerous. As are Christian beliefs.  both need to be mocked and ridiculed. I have suggested in other places what I think ought to be done with the bible.  Yet, it needs to be done in an ethical and honest manner.  Anyone can produce a strawman and kill it off.  Yet this is a dishonest manner of attacking something.  when the verdict is in - - then we can get to the judgment. 

- This is hilariously delusional! You seem to be boasting a lot of confidence, maybe you can debate me on Islam. 

So show us then.  don't just assert it, prove it.  

- I meant in practice, not in beliefs. LDS have some of the weirdest beliefs among Christian denominations. They follow Bible teachings in chastity, modesty, polygamy, family, gambling, intoxication...etc.

as the Brother would suggest "You may start now". 

- Which of you is the sock puppet?

 Give it a couple hundred years & they will considered Orthodox. LDS are actually closer to the teachings of the Bible than most Christian denominations out there.

You don't believe in Hell though do you? So is it the case that everyone now goes to heaven? Including Adolph Hitler? 

I absolutely believe hell exists. It is out darkness, where no light shines at all. Not that of a single, distant star. Hell may be what science calls "black hole." I don't know, but I do know hell is the abode of Satan and his minions. It is a place of no doors, where, once placed, there is no escape. In a sense, those who abide by hell's precepts consistently are in hell, now, just as those who consistently abide by heaven's precepts live there, now. Ultimately, the final placements, by our eventual judgment from God will be permanent, and much more intense in both places.

However, where as hell is a singular kingdom, heaven is actually an abode of many separate kingdoms, not just one. This is roughly explained n Romans 1: 25.

Ok. So this is clearly a contrast from the traditional position of Jesus being God?    

Yes, this is a distinction of LDS theology, I believe, although it is my impression that, contrary to what is taught in "traditional "Christianity, many people find this concept agreeable. It just makes sense.

Ok. Would the Holy Spirit in the LDS be the same as the Holy Spirit in the Catholic Church?

Frankly, I don't have sufficient knowledge of Catholicism to render an opinion. As I read the Catechism, they are different concepts. We consider the Holy Ghost, or Holy Spirit [we use both terms] as a personal being, an entity who is not some amorphous, formless shape, but a humanoid of spirit matter, as we all once were. We believe that, as. a person, he, too, will have the opportunity to come to Earth to obtain a physical body and live a mortal life. There will come a time, at the Savior's second coming, when Satan will be bound, and people will not suffer the temptations Satan works today. During this period, the mortal person who was  the Holy Ghost will live his mortal life, effectively a perfect life much as Jesus lived. However, at the end of Earth and its mortal state [yes, Earth will, itself, transform into a perfect sphere, and it will be the highest kingdom of heaven where the most righteous of us dwell] Satan will be released "for a season" - that could be for quite a while, to tempt those born during the age while Satan in bound, so that those people, too, can be tested by temptation. This is only fair; no one living on Earth can be deprived of temptation. Not even Jesus was so protected.

For the record, how would you describe a cult? 

I don't like the term, but there is nothing particularly derogatory about it given its dictionary definition.as being a religious organization that does not teach "traditional" Christianity, whatever that is.

 And isn't it a bit rude to continue calling them " Mormons" when Fauxlaw has  explicitly said: 

First, we prefer to not be referred to as "Mormons." That was tolerated for a long while, but it was recognized as one of the reasons why people not familiar with the church classify us as non-Christians. Officially, the Church is known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, #3

fauxlaw

You are correct, I should not call Mormons Mormon, I should refer to them as LDS.

I know. 

And should  you need reminding yet again, of your own plea as to the direction that YOU wish your own thread to go? I will remind you.

#1

Timid8967  Please do not use this as a slanging board against the LDS. 

You are the one with the bragging rights.  Go for it.

 Nice of you to suggest that, but I don't see it that way.

Those "rights" that you mention belong to them that go around calling themselves Pastors, Priests , Ministers and Chaplains that actually do claim to know better than anyone else on the planet simply  because they have awarded themselves these titles. I am sure you know the type I mean don't you? 

The type that you have called 

and Tradesecret and pga2.0  #20  are both Deluded a bit nuts

Timid8967

And their "movements":  

"  No wonder we see so much weirdness in the Christian movement. "#141

 Please remember that you started this shite dimtim. I asked you to remember what you had said and requested . And  it went clean out of the window once you were challenged, didn't it?

And while we are on the subject, didn't you once inform us all here that:

I am not a christian, so cannot speak as to how they think.  #111

Timid8967

You appear to be doing quite a lot of thinking for them on this and many other threads too.

  So this is in contrast to what traditional Christians would say is true. 

Define a "traditional Christian " for us. And what is it they " say is true"?

Why don't you answer the question for yourself?

 Because I have politely asked you to. And it not "irrelevant" to the thread, your own thread, if you have raised the point about what YOU have called the

"traditional Christian", on your own thread, which you have and did.

Are you saying the "Mormons" are not "traditional Christians" ?

 And isn't it a bit rude to continue calling them " Mormons" when Fauxlaw has  explicitly said: 

First, we prefer to not be referred to as "Mormons." That was tolerated for a long while, but it was recognized as one of the reasons why people not familiar with the church classify us as non-Christians. Officially, the Church is known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, #3

fauxlaw

And do you need reminding yet again, of your own plea as to the direction that YOU wish your own thread to go?

#1

Timid8967  Please do not use this as a slanging board against the LDS. 

  So this is in contrast to what traditional Christians would say is true. 

Define a "traditional Christian " for us. And what is it they " say is true"?

Why don't you answer the question for yourself?

 Because I have politely asked you to. And it not "irrelevant" to the thread, your own thread, if you have raised the point about what YOU have called the

"traditional Christian", on your own thread, which you have and did.

  But I am not here to argue a point.

So don't argue, simply explain your definition of " traditional Christian". 

And I am not arguing anything.... at all.   I have asked you to explain your comment.

This topic is about Mormons. It is not about traditional Christians

Yes, traditional Christians that you introduced into the thread, your own thread.

After all you you are the one bragging about your brilliance having studied religion and the bible for 40 years. 

 "but I have studied religion for over 40 years. So do not make the mistake of believing I know nothing of the scriptures." https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/506/post-links/22710

Didn't you once not so long ago on this thread asked members :  "Please do not use this as a slanging board "#1 ?    It hasn't taken you long to start dragging your own thread down into a slanging match has it?  I did ask you to remember that it was you that said that. .#4 Stephen

You can call it  "bragging" if you wish. I would call it simply stating a fact. But yes. I have studied the scriptures for over four decades. And this why I am puzzled that you, after reading the bible just once AND dismissing it ,  can go on to talk about what it is a "traditional Christian" is, when the supposed leader of the Christian movement never once even says the word's Christian, or Christianity, you see.   And it is this type of question that comes after studying the scriptures for over four decades with bible ignorant and  dismissive "anti theists" such as you.  You still are a ardent "anti theist", aren't you? Or was that yet another of your rigid statements that you wish you hadn't ever said?

 If you do not wish to be questioned on your own comments don't comment or at least think out your comments before  you post.

 And I remind you once more to keep your own wish in mind, before you begin to derail your own thread simply because you have been challenged.:

Timid8967 wrote: "Please do not use this as a slanging board"... #1

OK

  So this is in contrast to what traditional Christians would say is true. 

Define a "traditional Christian " for us. And what is it they " say is true"?

Why don't you answer the question for yourself?

 Because I have politely asked you to. And it not "irrelevant" to the thread, your own thread, if you have raised the point about what YOU have called the

"traditional Christian", on your own thread, which you have and did.

  But I am not here to argue a point.

So don't argue, simply explain your definition of " traditional Christian". 

And I am not arguing anything.... at all.   I have asked you to explain your comment.

I have asked fauxlaw a question. Let him answer first. He knows what a traditional christian is as I suspect most others do.  

 But I have simply asked you to define a "traditional Christian"?  You see, I haven't forgot that you have dismissed the bible after just one reading.  So I will remind you that Jesus himself not once in the bible even mentions the words - Christian or Christianity and neither do a single one of the four gospels? They were Jews you see.

So do you find the term Mormon derogatory? 

Not derogatory, just misdirected. Jesus Christ heads the church, not Mormon, a Book of mormon prophet, circa early 5th century CE, named for him as he was its editor from a much larger group of records.

Savior and redeemer of what and from what? 

Savior of man from perpetual death following mortality by resurrection to life everlasting in perfect bodies, and redeemed from the influence of evil forever more, conditional on keeping the commandments of God.

Jesus is begotten - but eternally begotten. And they would also say that Jesus is not mortal.   

To beget is to be born in the flesh. We are born but once, and birth does not extend beyond that moment, so no one is beget eternally, not even Christ. Christ is no longer mortal, having died and resurrected, the first of all to do so, and the promise to all men, women, and children who die - all of us.

Is this the same as the Holy Spirit? 

Yes, the same.

Three persons in One Godhead?

Yes, as long as it is understood by this that we mean three separate, distinct beings who comprise the Godhead, not one being with aliases, as some believe.

similarities

That Jesus is the Christ, the living Son of a living God, the Father.

However, there is much with which we disagree. For example, we do not believe we bare the stain of Adam and Eve for their transgressions, but only for our own. To believe that we bear Adam's stain is a denial of the Atonement, that Jesus overcame death, but also our pain and suffering, disappointments, mourning for losses, suffering by the actions of others who abuse us, our failures of mortality, virtually everything that happens in our mortal lives that deter us and delay our progression. We are spared the ongoing misery of death, itself, to rise in the resurrection as perfect beings, ready to move on in that progression. 

Not a similarity, in fact, it may be somewhat unique among Christians is that we believe the potential of our progression is eternal; thaat we, by our obedience in this life, can earn the right to become gods and goddesses ourselves, to be not only in the image of God, by to be like him.

We may also be somewhat unique in the firm belief that we have a Mother in Heaven, whom we should also revere.