Jazzns' History of Belief

Thanks for reading! I am curious as to how you modified it. If it is not based on the Bible, what is it based on? Well, I think there may be a distinction here between truth and value. You have retained value in that sentiment. I have not.Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.

Yea, I shared this with some close friends first before posting here. I am beginning to think that I need to just get over myself on that issue. If someone asks a question about religion, it doesn't make sense to give an answer that avoids mentioning religion. "Non-religious" seems to be a good compromise.Thanks for reading. My worst fear was that nobody would notice. :-)

Hi JazznsThanks for asking about my faith but I don't want to go into detail on this thread as it could get bogged down into my beliefs and not yours.My faith is based on what I have read about science, history, a little biology, liberal and conservative theology, other religions, atheism and the Bible. (A little knowledge can be a good thing. ‘ )My quote from Micah was just suggesting that I think we would all agree that kindness, justice and humility are positive attributes, and if God exists, and if that's what it takes to please Him, it ain't so tough. Concerning that quote from Micah though, I put this to you which might confirm that you asked the right questions, and confirm some of your conclusions.A person who considers himself Christian sends $100.00 off to the 3rd world with the idea that this will help get on God on his side and give him an edge in the next life. Another person who calls himself an atheist quietly sends $20.00 off to the third world completely believing there is no payback in this life or the next. Of the two which do you think most exhibited humility, kindness and justice thus fulfilling what the Bible suggests God is asking of us?

Dear Mr. Jazzns,reading your writings I can still see myself, in some sense.I also was brought up in a Christian family, together with my two sisters. But in my middle adolescence I was esnared by evolutionistic ideas and skeptical behaviour, very trendy in that epoch. I did feel very confuse so I gradually arrived to be serious doubtful of God existence.
The faith my mother instilled into me was — I did feel - something that didn't belong to me. I did feel it was almost only a tradition that was handed down from my mother — surely with the best of intents - to me.But, luckily, my reaction to this precarious situation wasn't a passive one.
At least, I was utterly convinced that knowing the truth about the existence (or nonexistence) of God and His possible Revelation, the Bible, were the most important search I did must finalize.
Any conclusions I should have draw, I should have started up my life on that conclusions.
I thought: "If my search will reveal that God doesn't really exist I must live my life seizing all the best this world may offer me. But, if I will discover that God exists, He must became the pivotal issue, the ‘cornestone’ of my life.".
So, I started an intense study period, getting on subjects like Logic, Maths, Physics, Biology, Astronomy, Ancient Literature, Linguistics, History (also Religions'), Sacred Books, and Bible, naturally.Little by little I became aware that my wonky faith was rebuilding itself, brick by brick.
I did let myself influenced by the fashioning thought, like: "The more a person learns about universe's phenomena and the more he realize God is nonexistent".
Instead, it was just the opposite!
The more things I learned and the more my faith did grow stronger.It is clear, from what you write (In the end I let myself be convinced, peer pressure and the desire to fit in at its finest, that my reservations about Christ were unfounded. Despite the divisiveness of having these two religions in the home growing up, I had finally chosen Christianity over Islam, been baptized, and decided to try to live in that religion. [] The circumstances dictated my growth into religion and not my true inner desire for spiritual truth. [] I know that the only real reason I was there [in the church] was because of my friends and an admiration for the pastor and the people. I wanted to believe it was because I had made the choice but I never took the time to have the knowledge that I would need to feel such confidence) that you did get off on the wrong foot, like me (in my adolescence). Our believe in God and in the Bible weren’t based on an accurate study about universal phenomena and Bible, but, admittedly, on a familiar tradition.
So you.
Could it be that you have never ‘proved to yourself the good and acceptable and perfect will of God’? (Romans 12:2) Some may attend religious meetings with their parents and be able to recite some of the basic teachings of the Bible. But when asked to give proof of their beliefs or to explain some of the deeper things of God’s Word, their knowledge proves to be disappointingly shallow. Such youths can easily be misled. (Ephesians 4:14)
Bible itself encourages to carefully examining the Scriptures, to convince ourselves that the things we had learned from our parents were really so! (Acts 17:11)Another aspect that cleared the way for disbelief - in your case — was the lack of rational answers to your doubts, from those which are - theorically - the experts of these topics. In fact you say that the Old Testament of the Bible had remained an enigma to me.
You was worried about Calvinism which teaches that not only can we not know but also that we have no power to change our fate! It forces a faithful person to decide that either our salvation is predestined or that God is not in fact omniscient about the future.
You are right. But this is not a Bible teaching, at all!
If you decide, in the future, to make a deeper Bible study, you will catch that this kind of predestination is not in the Bible, but only in the minds of some religious men.Another wrong idea about God is that I would burn eternally in a lake of fire if I didn't believe in God. Also this is a teaching not Bible-based. The Revelation of God speaks only about the right of the Creator to give death (not eternal torment) to those defying His laws.Granted, there’s a possibility that also if we do obtain a complete knowledge about behaviour and thoughts of God, we wouldn’t be attracted by His personality. Perhaps, this could be your case, since you write: The character of God in the Old Testament is nothing like the character of God that I was raised to believe in or taught to love in church. We are free moral agents. Nothing in the universe oblige us to feel attraction toward a person very different from our way of thinking.
For example, if we are not persuaded that the Creator of the Life has the right to establish what persons are deserving life or death, and — moreover - we don’t have the same inner level of righteousness of God, it is obvious to see the huge massacre triggered by Him at the Deluge time like a sadistic action.
A death-row execution of a self-confessed murderer can be viewed also a sadistic action from who believe that no one has the right to take someone life, in every case. The same situation can be viewed by other peoples - instead - a right and necessary action to dispense justice. The fact that millions of people are loving God and His quality and His (past, present and future) actions is a demonstration that we may decide to love or hate God, to accept His manner to do things, or not.In any case, whathever convictions we have about the righteousness/unrighteousness of God to give life or death to someone, are we — by logic — able to infere that a Legal Court is nonexistent because we are not agree with her decision to execute these criminals?
Why, so we are to obliged to think God is nonexistent because He executes (in a manner and in a time he wants) persons persisting in action and behaviour against His laws and against the neighbour of criminal itself?
God exists despite our possible disagreement about his way to manage human things.Getting back to my life experience, I was able — gradually - to see that all my doubts were only figments: partly through mine ignorance about the universe's phenomena, partly through my lacking Bible understanding, and partly on account of my non-critical and guileless lending an ear to trendy ideas un-supported by facts.I did feel really the odour of the truth when I did re-read Bible passages like these (bold is added):
"The simple man has faith in every word,
but the man of good sense gives thought to his footsteps"
(Proverbs 14:15, Bible in Basic English - 1965)."Put everything to the test. Accept what is good"
(1 Thessalonians 5:21, Contemporary English Version).I've found true the words I did read in a Christian magazine (bold is added): "In a sense, faith that is untested has no proven worth, and its quality remains unknown. You might liken it to a check that has not yet been cashed. You may have received a check for work that you did, for goods that you provided, or even as a gift. The check may look good, but is it? Is it really worth the amount that appears on it? Similarly, our faith must be more than just an appearance or a mere profession. It must be tested if we are to prove that it has substance and real quality. When our faith is tested, we may find that it is strong and valuable. A test may also reveal any areas in which our faith needs refinement or bolstering."I hope this my brief discourse can be useful about an your afterthoughts.P.S. I apologize for my woobly English.

Hi Jazzns,I appreciate the sincerity with which you've approached the attempt to vocalise what for many must be an invisible (even to self) process. I've an observation of two to make in drawing a conclusion and wonder what you would say of them and it.-In Romans, Paul details the reasons why salvation is something all people are in need of. He draws no distinction in this regard between the Jew (representing religious people down the ages) and the Gentile (representing irreligious people down the ages). He is pointing out that, for all their religion, religious people are as lost, blind, dead in their sin, separated from God, etc .. as the athiets, agnostics and pagans. And as dead-to-God people, are in need of salvation.There are indications early in your story, that the kind of Christianity you encountered was cultural Christianity. In other words, you were a lost person (the starting position in Christianity) who became a religious lost person by upbringing.You say:

quote:

---

In fact, the zest for the true wonder of the world is responsible for all the things I truly care about. People who fundamentally care about the truth of reality are responsible for nearly everything important in my life.

---

..whereas the chief concern of people both in the bible and who have come to faith in Christ is arguably holiness (where holiness might be expressed as 'a sense of having obtained moral perfection' or in some way, 'having the fact of your moral imperfection 'dealt with' so that you can rest in the matter').If a person is a Christian through upbringing but not in fact (if they are what Paul calls a Jew), then the issue of holiness won't have arisen as the key concern in their life.Have you ever encountered the problem of your own unholiness and if so, how is it dealt with now that it is not dealt with in Christ?-

quote:

---

Also, when you look at the practice of Christianity you find a disconnect with this sentiment that we should be waiting for salvation. Battling for human rights, institutionalizing marriage, and generally working for the future are fundamentally against the notion that we get from Jesus and Paul. According to them, our destiny is to be beat down by the powers of the world. We are not to build wealth and in fact if we do, we are instead destined for damnation

---

In his opening statements on the Mount, Jesus gives the characteristics of those who will enter the kingdom of God. Blessed are the poor in spirit*, he says, for theirs is the kingdom of God. It's not "blessed are the poor in money.."The battle being talked of is, first and foremost, a spiritual one - although it will often manifest through the physical world. And the clear instructions are:a) The Christian is expected to pick up their cross right here and now and follow the One who is battling against the powers of darkness right here and now.b) Expect and prepare for opposition in the fight. The powers of the world are but the frontline of he in whose sway the world lies.So struggle? Of course! The warfare motif in the bible is unmissable. Defeated? Never! The victory is already won. This doesn't mean ever-cheer. On the contrary, the struggle can be expected to get as dirty and ugly as any physical warfare - something which the psalms testify to (in their offering solace to the battle weary Christian). There is no hint of the resignation you're extracting from it.The chief weapon to be employed is the one which works opposite to the chief weapon deployed by the Adversary. Love is to be used to counteract, overrule and dissolve hatred. Against that there is no law. And so we are of course to battle for human rights because the source behind human rights being trampled on is hatred. Just as the source behind the rape of the planet is hatred (manifest in selfishness). Just as the source of so much of my own sin lies in hatred (manifest so often in selfishness).If you have a talent for wealth creation and use it in this fight (which doesn't preclude your enjoying wealth yourself) then so much the better. God doesn't mind if you have a Porsche.My point isn't to engage in theological debate here. Rather, I would be suggesting that what I've written above is a relatively straightforward and orthodox Christian understanding of the place of struggle. Yet your understanding recognises none of this. Why?-Given the above points, is there a case to be made for your potentially having shifted position from lost Jew to lost Gentile?* poor in spirit being a description of the person whose chief concern has become their lack of holiness.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Good on you Jazz. It takes balls to come out like that in an open forum, let alone the internet.I would like to say to the theists posting here: good job for making jazz feel like he/she made a mistake. Good job for trying to keep shoving your religion Jazz's throat even though this person made it abundantly clear they had already went through the whole religion phase.Iano, for example: Implying that Jazz just had "the wrong kind of xtianity". Let me guess, yours is the right one?This is what sickens me about religious people. You're all pompous and every one of you has the "I'm right, you're wrong" mentality. Except you guys throw in the "and you're going to hell cuz you're wrong".

I promise I am not attempting to be dismissive. I feel that such questions are actually quite useless. One of the main things that I feel I discovered is a rejection of this need to define ones self and ones self worth by some rubric of ancient mythology. Moreover, I don't think humility, kindness, and justice are things that can be measured at all, least of which by thing such as a person's intentions.

Thanks for reading. "He" by the way.I think you can cut them some slack. They are well meaning. I am not offended. I do think it is a good point that iano is assuming that I had a "cultural Christianity". While it was a little bit disjointed, the sincerity expressed for religion during my upbringing was very real. I "found" christianity despite a divided household, I didn't inherit it. I did inherit the sense that I needed some kind of faith, but I originally found it on my own.

You're doing just fine. As long as you keep questioning and throwing gods away you can't go very far wrong.

I admit as much directly. As I stated though, my lack of sure footing does not make up for the positive discoveries I made while trying to remedy my ignorance. My rejection of faith is founded in knowledge and study and not just metaphysics. I cannot "unring that bell" so to speak. I certainly and sincerely sought to do that. Of one thing I am sure, if there is such a thing, it most certainly is not contained within the Bible. This goes back to the above which I feel I addressed adequatly in "A Failure of Weak Faith?". Some people discover that the Bible is false starting from a quite strong founding in faith. Bart Eherman for example. Just because I didn't travel on a path similar to his does not change the fact that half of the New Testament, including 2 of the 3 verses you quoted above, are from dubious origins. Well yes! And I am in fact NOT pursuaded, either that there is such a Creator or that even if there was that he would have the right to establish who is deserving of life! There is absolutly no definition of "righteousness" that I could accept that would be sufficient to absolve any theoretical entity of genocide. And there we will have to disagree. Thank you very much for your time and thoughts.

Hi Iano,Thanks for your reply. First off, I think it is interesting that you refer to Gentiles and pagans are irreligious. It was the Christians that were referred to as "atheists" during their early years.I could go into a lot about Paul. I started to write a whole bunch but I'll just ask this instead. People are in need of salvation from what exactly? As I indicated to hooah, I believe that is something you are reading into my message. Perhaps I am not being clear in that section.My young faith was very much my own and, according to my feelings at the time, was very sincere. My stumbling block was knowledge but I only realized that in hind sight. I don't believe that the other people around me at the time had the same stumbling block as I did. Holiness is very poorly defined in the Bible. In fact, there are multiple contradictory definitions of holiness in the Bible and in fact the interpretation of that has varied with nearly every generation since Christianity was born. Again this is based on the assumption of the "false", "inherited", or "casual" nature of my early faith. Holiness most certainly was a concern in my life. I was quite the guilt striken young adult.I deal with my "unholiness" now by understanding the complete bankruptcy of the concept of holiness. Holiness is a completely vacuous word. People use it as a substitute for everything from chastity to murder. [qs]In his opening statements on the Mount, Jesus gives the characteristics of those who will enter the kingdom of God.
Blessed are the poor in spirit*, he says, for theirs is the kingdom of God. It's not "blessed are the poor in money.."I won't quote your whole section on wealth and money but just use this to root my reply. My point was less about money that it was generally about the division advocated by Jesus and Paul between "this" world and the "kingdom of God". You seemingly think that the kingdom is spritual and perhaps that it is already here? I believe that a straight forwarding reading of the Bible shows that Paul and Jesus did not believe that to be true. I don't want to get off on too much a tangent so I will just reiterate that that section was more than just about money. There is a central division between the two worlds. I understand that there are different interpretations but I do not subscribe to them. I consider the spiritual argument to be merely an apologetic. The entire REAL body of work of Paul is anethema to the idea of a current kingdom or a spiritual kingdom in my opinion. Because it is not founded on anything. It is a fake struggle. A take home point might be that the concept of being "lost" is a false concept. I believe I have rejected the notion that I need to be "found".Thanks again for reading and for your thoughts.Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.

Every one of us? The way I see it, if God exists and is able to and willing to care about we humans, He (She?) will deal with us based on the parameters that we ourselves have consciously or unconsciously agreed to. Hell as a concept was never meant for us. It is only a given default for stubborn people who wont face reality.

I agree that those things can't be measured and we can never know what a person's intentions are. It all boils down to something inside of us that is largely indefinable. Half the time I don't know what my own motives are let alone the motives of someone else.Like I've posted other places I just find it more reasonable to believe that humility, kindness and justice are much more likely to have evolved from a source with similar attributes than from a non-sensing, non-intelligent and non-moral source.That does not in any way suggest the Christian God but whatever we are going to believe, including atheism, requires us to make a subjective conclusion about why things are the way they are.I also don't see it as defining oneself by these attributes, because for one thing we all have those attributes one way or another just as we all have their opposites. It's all a matter of degree I suppose. Probably even Hitler exhibited kindness at points in his life.

And what "reality" is that, Phat?

quote:

---

Proverbs 14:12 There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death.

---

It all boils down to whether or not we are open to the possibility that there may be a way to live life that is not of our own inclination.Then again, why on earth would humanity be so declined?