The God of the Old Testament…

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

I understand that some people are mostly just looking for the truth above all else and I guess atheism/agnosticism simplifies things for many of them because it reduces some of the required assumptions they need to make by rejecting popular faith-based beliefs that aren’t directly supported by overwhelming evidence. However, I still think one of the major reasons that atheism appeals to many people is that it really is the easy way out by giving them a convenient excuse to reject any moral obligations so that they can basically live a selfish hedonistic life without feeling guilty about it. I think this is especially a motivating factor for ex-Mormon atheists because of the high demands that the LDS Church currently makes like tithing, the Word of Wisdom, time-consuming callings and meetings, etc.

Gotta say, I completely disagree with this, respectfully. I heard this line of thinking from so many “traditional Mormons” as I went through my transition that it really made me angry! In fact, I believe just the opposite — about both topics.

While I was studying/researching, I found that most Mormons were not in the least bit interested in looking into what I had heard. At the time, I thought it was the simple way out…the lazy way. It was easier to avoid the confrontation and conflict by ignoring the evidence that might change a person’s total paradigm of life. I found it was much more difficult, painful, and discouraging, than continuing in the status quo of putting the smiley face on and pretend it’s all “true” and historically accurate.

Also, before my transition, I believed similarly that atheists/agnostics were immoral and intellectually lazy. Today, if pushed, I would say just the opposite. If interested, here’s a link of a recent presentation given by Sam Harris:

http://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris_science_can_show_what_s_right.html

NOW, my outlook has changed. I find atheists and agnostics as equally spiritual, moral, ethical, and intellectually diligent in searching for truth. I find most religious people to be the same. What I’ve come to see today is that most people are doing the best they can with the circumstances in their lives. I really try not to judge what is going on for them, and I don’t feel it my duty to do so. I try to better myself, care for my family and friends, and my life is as full as I desire.

But, that’s just me….

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

just me wrote:

Quote:

At best, he will probably only convince some of the weaker Christians that are already looking for an excuse to doubt religion.

Hey DevilsAdvocate, most of us who are here did not find ourselves on this journey because we were looking for reasons to doubt. I think we should extend that same courtesy to all people who find themselves doubting, questioning and even turning away from their former faith. The search for personal truth takes a lot of strength.

I understand that some people are mostly just looking for the truth above all else and I guess atheism/agnosticism simplifies things for many of them because it reduces some of the required assumptions they need to make by rejecting popular faith-based beliefs that aren’t directly supported by overwhelming evidence. However, I still think one of the major reasons that atheism appeals to many people is that it really is the easy way out by giving them a convenient excuse to reject any moral obligations so that they can basically live a selfish hedonistic life without feeling guilty about it. I think this is especially a motivating factor for ex-Mormon atheists because of the high demands that the LDS Church currently makes like tithing, the Word of Wisdom, time-consuming callings and meetings, etc.

.

Whoah! Back up here! (takes deep breaths and is speaking earnestly) I am always slightly (OK, maybe more than slightly) irritated when I hear this thinking. You think it’s easy to completely change your belief system? You think it’s easy to risk being ostracized by your family and friends/neighbors? Why do you think this forum even exists?

I can assure you that for many Ex-Mormons, paying tithing, Word of Wisdom, church callings and attending Church is the easy part. A person doesn’t just wake up one day and say “Well, I think I want to become immoral and party my life away and be a heathen because being Mormon and believing in a God is soooo hard and the other life seems way easier”.

It takes a whole lot of courage to walk in your own truth and follow a different spiritual path than Christianity/Mormonism. I know many loving, moral, non-smoking/non-drinking exmo’s that are great people. Your statement seems to be made on assumptions and is rather generalized.

Now, are there Atheist/exmo’s who are selfish and live a “hedonistic life”? Probably. For some, that pendulum swings kinda high for a short while but usually comes back down to center. Many are more moral, less judgemental and way more accepting as they figure out what their faith is and how to believe. I admire these people that can be so open and honest. Sometimes I feel like a big, fat phoney because I don’t have the courage that they have.

Sorry for the rant D.A. Know it’s nothing personal. Just touched a nerve…that’s all

[Anonymous]

Actually the thing that also irks me is that many Mormons believe most people leave the church because they’ve fallen out with someone. Not so. My period inactivity was absolutely nothing to do with having a fight with anyone, breaking up with an LDS girlfriend or being snubbed by the bishopric. About the nearest thing to that, perhaps was that I felt I was suddenly getting overloaded with commitments that I couldn’t do.

By the way, I don’t consider Dawkins an agnostic at all, I think he’s a hardcore atheist who “knows” there is no God. He’s made up his mind, therefore is not an agnostic.

I’ve had to try and take the leap of faith again, so I don’t consider myself agnostic right now, but I’d say much of my adult life has been spent as one in one form or another. I never saw any decent evidence one way or the other (in my view), but I’m trying to have faith that there is now. To be honest with you, it cactually feels a lot better, even if it is not intellectually satisfying. Okay, so I don’t go for the full package necessarily… but then again, I think a lot of LDS go for a lot of “extras” which aren’t even Mormon doctrine to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Rix wrote:

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

I understand that some people are mostly just looking for the truth above all else and I guess atheism/agnosticism simplifies things for many of them because it reduces some of the required assumptions they need to make by rejecting popular faith-based beliefs that aren’t directly supported by overwhelming evidence. However, I still think one of the major reasons that atheism appeals to many people is that it really is the easy way out by giving them a convenient excuse to reject any moral obligations so that they can basically live a selfish hedonistic life without feeling guilty about it. I think this is especially a motivating factor for ex-Mormon atheists because of the high demands that the LDS Church currently makes like tithing, the Word of Wisdom, time-consuming callings and meetings, etc.

Gotta say, I completely disagree with this, respectfully. I heard this line of thinking from so many “traditional Mormons” as I went through my transition that it really made me angry! In fact, I believe just the opposite — about both topics…I thought it was the simple way out…the lazy way. It was easier to avoid the confrontation and conflict by ignoring the evidence that might change a person’s total paradigm of life. I found it was much more difficult, painful, and discouraging, than continuing in the status quo of putting the smiley face on and pretend it’s all “true”…Also, before my transition, I believed similarly that atheists/agnostics were immoral and intellectually lazy. Today, if pushed, I would say just the opposite…I find atheists and agnostics as equally spiritual, moral, ethical, and intellectually diligent in searching for truth…

misfit7 wrote:

Whoah! Back up here!…I am always slightly (OK, maybe more than slightly) irritated when I hear this thinking. You think it’s easy to completely change your belief system? You think it’s easy to risk being ostracized by your family and friends/neighbors?…I can assure you that for many Ex-Mormons, paying tithing, Word of Wisdom, church callings and attending Church is the easy part. A person doesn’t just wake up one day and say “Well, I think I want to become immoral and party my life away and be a heathen because being Mormon and believing in a God is soooo hard and the other life seems way easier”…It takes a whole lot of courage to walk in your own truth and follow a different spiritual path than Christianity/Mormonism. I know many loving, moral, non-smoking/non-drinking exmo’s that are great people…I admire these people that can be so open and honest…

I’m sorry if I offended all the atheist/agnostic sympathizers out there. I was thinking more along the lines of, “I don’t really blame you for thinking that way” but I guess the way I said it came off wrong. I really don’t mean any of this as a deliberate dig or backhanded compliment to anyone. I know that leaving the LDS Church behind (even if only internally) can be very inconvenient and I feel your pain if you have gone through that. However, I still think that rejecting traditional Mormonism and rejecting Christianity in general are two entirely different things and to do it all in one step seems to me like an unnecessary oversimplification and basically a classic example of “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”

I’m not trying to say that all or even most atheists or agnostics are particularly immoral people and I really don’t think that at all. However, to assume that these philosophies are all equal when it comes to morality is simply not true. In principle Christianity teaches an unselfish brand of morality which strongly emphasizes things like forgiveness, brotherly love, charity, sacrifice, etc. whereas in many cases the more natural tendency would be towards self-interest, greed, vengeance, etc.

Christianity absolutely features a more ambitious moral code that is clearly a higher ideal in my opinion because atheism/agnosticism doesn’t really say anything about morality other than that we supposedly don’t know that it came from any god so then it all becomes relative to the individual as far as what they think they should do or not. Sure some of the Christian ideals are easier said than done in practice but I really don’t understand why anyone would have a problem with their neighbors aiming for this lofty goal if that’s what they want to do. The real misunderstandings occur when some Christians lose sight of this and start to act in a self-righteous, hypocritical, or intolerant way that is actually contradictory to what Jesus taught but some people will still associate their bad behavior with the fact that they are Christian.

[Anonymous]

I always agree with DA 😆 so it’s no surprise I think his last comment was very well said.

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

… However, to assume that these philosophies are all equal when it comes to morality is simply not true. In principle Christianity teaches an unselfish brand of morality which strongly emphasizes things like forgiveness, brotherly love, charity, sacrifice, etc. whereas in many cases the more natural tendency would be towards self-interest, greed, vengeance, etc.

Christianity absolutely features a more ambitious moral code that is clearly a higher ideal in my opinion because atheism/agnosticism doesn’t really say anything about morality other than that we supposedly don’t know that it came from any god so then it all becomes relative to the individual as far as what they think they should do or not. Sure some of the Christian ideals are easier said than done in practice but I really don’t understand why anyone would have a problem with their neighbors aiming for this lofty goal if that’s what they want to do. The real misunderstandings occur when some Christians lose sight of this and start to act in a self-righteous, hypocritical, or intolerant way that is actually contradictory to what Jesus taught but some people will still associate their bad behavior with the fact that they are Christian.

Umm, perhaps no surprise, but I just think you need to get to know a few good people from these other walks of life. I think you’ll have a hard time judging them as you have when you really understand them.

I understand from a “the natural man is an enemy to God” perspective, this line of thinking makes sense. I disagree with that foundation. I think the natural man is from love…and fear is what turns them away from love. But that’s a longer, deeper discussion (for another thread, if you want). I very much agree with Sam Harris on the video if you had a chance to see it.

DA, perhaps our core disagreements really stem from our diverse background (or belief) of religious history. I see Christianity as a borrowed religion from prior traditions. I do believe that Jesus most likely existed as a brilliant, enlightened teacher, but the bulk of what we read of his miraculous, magical events were applied to him by political leaders (Constantine et al) and borrowed from Pagan/Greek mythologies.

So with that background, my approach is to find the good in each life paradigm…and I find good in most religions. I think spirituality is individual, and I hope we each find what works for us and makes us better, moral people.

[Anonymous]

Rix, I actually agree with both of you on this one – and I think there’s a bit of “same words/different meaning” going on.

In my own words, I think DA is focusing more on the philosophical / idealogocial side of foundational belief paradigms and comparing one that (in its ideal) teaches explicitly love and service and the beatitudes to one that posits natural law. Humans aren’t exactly loving of each other, especially those who are different, so, in a real way, atheism can be benevolent and all-loving only after theism has posited a comprehensive family of mankind.

Otoh, Rix is focusing on the people who call themselves atheist and theist. Especially within an existing framework of the family of mankind, individual atheists can be every bit as loving and benevolent and charitable as individual theists, so it’s not accurate to paint with a very broad brush when dealing with individuals – and too many atheists and theists do that.

[Anonymous]

Rix wrote:

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

… However, to assume that these philosophies are all equal when it comes to morality is simply not true. In principle Christianity teaches an unselfish brand of morality which strongly emphasizes things like forgiveness, brotherly love, charity, sacrifice, etc. whereas in many cases the more natural tendency would be towards self-interest, greed, vengeance, etc.

Christianity absolutely features a more ambitious moral code that is clearly a higher ideal in my opinion because atheism/agnosticism doesn’t really say anything about morality other than that we supposedly don’t know that it came from any god so then it all becomes relative to the individual as far as what they think they should do or not…

Umm, perhaps no surprise, but I just think you need to get to know a few good people from these other walks of life. I think you’ll have a hard time judging them as you have when you really understand them…I understand from a “the natural man is an enemy to God” perspective, this line of thinking makes sense. I disagree with that foundation. I think the natural man is from love…

I have known a few atheists and many non-religious people and I’m not really judging anyone or saying they are terrible people because of this. It’s like Ray said, I was mostly talking about atheism as a philosophy not atheists and their character. All I’m saying is that atheism by itself does not say that you should do good or even that such a thing as good exists the way Christianity does. So if atheists have some sense of ethics most of it was probably just learned behavior they pick up from their society and culture and maybe some of it is natural as well. I don’t really believe that the “natural man” will typically be a monster without religion but I do think that in general human selfishness is actually much more common than love and at least Christianity tries to reverse this to some extent.

Rix wrote:

DA, perhaps our core disagreements really stem from our diverse background (or belief) of religious history. I see Christianity as a borrowed religion from prior traditions. I do believe that Jesus most likely existed as a brilliant, enlightened teacher, but the bulk of what we read of his miraculous, magical events were applied to him by political leaders (Constantine et al) and borrowed from Pagan/Greek mythologies…So with that background, my approach is to find the good in each life paradigm…and I find good in most religions.

I think I’ve already read every kind of wild speculation and conspiracy theory about Jesus that there is such as the idea that he is an entirely fictional character copied from Mithra or that he was the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier named Pantera and rather than admitting this they made up this virgin birth story. Then there’s the idea that he faked his own death or had a twin brother that was killed instead. This idea that the New Testament was mostly invented at the time of Constantine as some kind of political scheme sounds way too cynical for me. One problem with this idea is that many of these New Testament writings were already quoted extensively by Polycarp and other early Church Fathers long before that.

I know that skeptics like Bart Ehrman like to make a big deal about minor changes in these texts and the fact that some of them were written long after fact by anonymous authors. Personally, I don’t really care that much about most of these details and prefer to believe that Paul and the rest of these authors sincerely believed in what they were doing. Why die for a lie? To me, it still looks like a fairly consistent story supported by multiple trustworthy witnesses.

Sure I think it’s possible that maybe Jesus was just another man and these stories were all embellished and eventually developed into a highly exaggerated myth but at the same time I don’t believe that this has to be the only possibility. Personally I think the main problem skeptics have with this is that they absolutely refuse accept the possibility of anything supernatural and because of this they need to come up with some other explanation than the one given. As for myself, I actually like supernatural explanations and unexplained mysteries and don’t feel any real need to try to fill in all the blanks.

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

Sure I think it’s possible that maybe Jesus was just another man and these stories were all embellished and eventually developed into a highly exaggerated myth

Yup. That’s pretty much it for me. Like Joseph Campbell says, “It’s ALL myth!” But if it works for you, please go for it! I am comfortable looking at it all as myth, with a splash of history blended in…and I love the story of it all!

[Anonymous]

Rix wrote:

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

Sure I think it’s possible that maybe Jesus was just another man and these stories were all embellished and eventually developed into a highly exaggerated myth

Yup. That’s pretty much it for me. Like Joseph Campbell says, “It’s ALL myth!” But if it works for you, please go for it! I am comfortable looking at it all as myth, with a splash of history blended in…and I love the story of it all!

Man I love this website! Where else can you say something like that to a group of predominately “active” or even “semi-active” Mormons, and not get “stoned” to death because of it? Yeah, I really like this site.

[Anonymous]

After years of inner struggle, I’ve pretty well accepted the fact that I am truly an agnostic by the very definition of the term. “Not—Knowledge” I just don’t know anything anymore, and I find it VERY hard to conceive that ANYONE can honestly come to know and fully understand the “Truth”. Sure, one can find a pathway that gives “meaning” to their own life, and accept a version of truth that resonates within – but that is not knowledge of “Truth” – that is just existentialism? No? So I guess if we have to put a label on it, I would certainly be considered an “agnostic existentialist.”

The problem — those are TWO ugly, sinful, offensive terms to most loyal devout Mormons – as well as other christian faithful. And, even though i personally disagree with the concept that agnostic is a “cop out” and an “amoral” lifestyle, I’m going to guess that DA nailed it when he insinuated that most LDS would classify it as such.

[Anonymous]

cwald wrote:

After years of inner struggle, I’ve pretty well accepted the fact that I am truly an agnostic by the very definition of the term. “Not—Knowledge” I just don’t know anything anymore, and I find it VERY hard to conceive that ANYONE can honestly come to know and fully understand the “Truth”. Sure, one can find a pathway that gives “meaning” to their own life, and accept a version of truth that resonates within – but that is not knowledge of “Truth” – that is just existentialism? No? So I guess if we have to put a label on it, I would certainly be considered an “agnostic existentialist.”

The problem — those are TWO ugly, sinful, offensive terms to most loyal devout Mormons – as well as other christian faithful. And, even though i personally disagree with the concept that agnostic is a “cop out” and an “amoral” lifestyle, I’m going to guess that DA nailed it when he insinuated that most LDS would classify it as such.

I’m sure many Mormons and Christians would think I’m an agnostic, heretic, and blasphemer simply because I’m willing to admit that I don’t really know if God exists or not and assuming that he does I still have major doubts about the Bible being the authoritative and unquestioned “word of God.” On the other hand, many atheists would think I’m a religious fanatic because the idea of intelligent design makes a lot more sense to me as an explanation for life and man than random chance and because I like most of what Jesus said and think Christian religion is mostly good for people whether God exists or not. In any case, I still think of myself as a Christian and Mormon regardless of what other people want to call me.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, DA – that sums it up pretty well for me, even though I choose to self-identify as a “faithful, believing Mormon”. I just leave off the qualifying, “according to my own definitions and views”.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

re “Myclob, has more been posted?”

Wife has been on bed-rest, and I start projects, and wander off… But, I’ll be back with more on the moron (Richard Dawkins).

My latest thought, as I start to doubt, is what about people who hear voices, and see visions… my Grandma was one of those people, and no one says she was Crazy… I’m not sure about the church… In fact I don’t like it much, often, but what about all those visions in Kirkland?

[Anonymous]

myclob wrote:

… but what about all those visions in Kirkland?

drug-induced. See: http://www.mormonelixers.org (link appears broken right now…)

[Author]

Posts