Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion

actually, i find that claimed belief in what the scripture says frequently gets in the way of knowing what scripture says. believers are so ready to betray the very thing they claim to cherish, just to get it to line up with their predetermined belief.people who set out to know what the scriptures say are frequently very surprised that it does not accurately detail the beliefs they once had about those same scriptures.

---

אָרַח

For your information Dawnette, I was the one trying in vain to break through your idiocy and inform you of that same thing, that the topic is not about trying to make Dawnette deconvert. Yet you kept demanding to be told what would make you personally deconvert.Now suddenly you try to switch the tables and claim that I'm trying to make it only about you. That is a complete and utter lie!And in the midst of committing that lie, you have the gall to return to making it about Dawnette deconverting: Message 150, 14-Dec-2010 8:30 PM: You are nothing but an unprincipled liar. Why don't you try to be man enough to own up to your actions? But, no, you are not man enough. You will just continue to try to hide your lies under even more lies, even though everybody can see what you are doing.The decades I have tried to deal with creationists have left me with absolutely zero tolerance for liars.

Paul and the other inspired NT writers disagree with you. Do you have knowledge they did notSince you have provided no text, that you assume I have misinterpreted, I can only wait to see which ones fortunately we are not debating that thread, nor do I have desire, as I have already indicated, to follow Jars method of reasoning, which is repetetion without response Yes I am aware of this, the same way I am aware that Job, makes no reference to the Law, or even implies its existenceI never said every word in the OT was a messianic prophecy.One of the main ways i know an OT prophecy was about Christ is having an inspired writer in the NT tell me its interpretationI agree that some may not appear as messianic, but when told by an inspiried writer that they refer to Christ, it surpasses your disagreement that it is notThink about it, why would I accept your conclusions over thiers? Can you give me agood reason?The OT says that out of Israel will come a great king, that will rule in Israel and that his kingdom will know no end.This kingdom was of course the Church, that spoken of by Christ when he said, "My kingdom is not of this world, if it were my servants would fight""I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it, and i will give to Peter the keys to the kingdom"give me ag ood reason why I should accept your or Jars conclusions over one claiming inspiration, in a book filled with evidence"We have not followed cunningly devised fables, but were eyewitnesses to his majesty"Do you have better information? Its just your word against thiers and that is what it boils down to. Guess who I am going to acceptDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

I agree and there is no justification for you assuming that the writers of the NT, did not know Christ. that assertion alone is ludicrousNot only do they claim to have been with him, there is no time frame problem even if they were written as late as you claimThat dating is a bit liberal, even so, it does not lead to the absolute conclusion that they would not known or have been with himI think it is great we are talking about this right at Christmas timeWhere in the world did you get the silly notion that those writers did not know of Christ in a personal manner? Even if this were true, it does not lead to the conclusionof your assertion that they did not know him personally Ill let you demonstrate your conclusion here Amazing, he calls F. F. Bruce, misguided apologeticsThis is truely amazing, you really dont understand what you are doing do you? You reject without hesitation any conclusion I have drawn and say it is not possible and cannot be accepted.Then without even realizing it ( I believe) you assume that all of your assertions and conclusions must be accepted without hesitation, because that is what the evidence must demonstrate, yet it does notTruely amazingYou write But of course you are free from such a fate , correct? Best evidence Arch, thats all we haveDawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Taq writes: Arch writes:And of course what taq says and what you quoted from him, is simply double talk verbage, unless demonstrated on a single point in an argument formDo you have anything better than, "a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush"? You fellas are killing me with these gems of wisdomBut isnt that the point, we base our understanding against what the scriptures actually saysBut here is another amazing point. You clearly, as I have read other posts of yours, dont believe it is from God or inspired of God, yet your are sure that your conclusions must be the correct onesYou imply that others that do not accept your conlcusions must of course be in error, because they do not see things as you do against the "evidence" you have collectedBut using the messianic prophecies as an example, you cannot provide absolute evidence that they are not predictive of Jesus Christ. when in fact the "evidence" we do have certainly leans in that favorSo, is there any possibility that we could be correct concerning our conclusions atleast in that respect? Yes or No?Just curious?Dawn BertotEdited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Of course. Of course "king" means "not a king", and "will rule in Israel" means "will not rule in Israel".I think I'm getting the hang of hermeneutics. So when Genesis says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth", it means "In the beginning God did not create the heavens and the earth", right?After all, if we started taking the Bible literally we'd believe all sorts of silly things.

You remind me of Heritic, you simply can't get anything correct.You a funny guy. Dewise, simply because I am asking for a valid reason to convert, is not equivolent to me personally asking for it for my purposesFrom the start it was meant to be set out as an argument or question and for someone to provide that reason.Your making to much out of a cavil. You do know what a cavil is, right? Im sure you are a nice guy in person and your family and the Navy are proud of your accomplishments in both Navy and writing.But kindly and respectfully, I must say you have a long road in the area of reasoning properlyBTW, doyou have an argument that you could put forward that would be a valid reason for ANYONE to deconvert. Atleast from you perspectiveCalm down Dewise1 we are just here to learn and have funYes, you have taught me that my grammar sucks. Ill try and do betterDawn Bertot

My guess is that you know exacally what Christ was saying concerning his kingship and kingdom, just like the rest of us, but you enjoy playing the dumb card.But it wont be until your death bed or the fear of old age setting in that you will make the typical recantCowards usually operate in that manner. To bad I wont be there to see it, but my guess is that it will happenDawn Bertot

As Dr. A. pointed out - and which you ignored by trying to change the subject: You obviously cannot read well.
Most of the time you don't even know what you have written.
Why should we think that you can read the bible when you can't read posts on a forum.Many people have mentioned this before.
Your reading and writing is at a young child's level.
What is wrong with you?

My, my, what a nasty piece of work you are to be sure.However, neither your real character nor your fantasies about my imaginary character seem germane to the topic or my post.According to you, the OT predicts "a great king that will rule in Israel".Clearly Jesus did not fulfill this prediction.

The purpose of repetition is to point out to all that you have not responded to the issues raised or questions asked.And the purpose of pointing you towards the other thread was to allow you the opportunity to present support for your many assertions that there are Old Testament prophecies that refer to or are related to Jesus and that Jesus somehow fulfilled some of those prophecies.It is interesting that you do not respond to any of those requests except by continuing to claim such support without actually specifying anything that can then be questioned, verified or tested.Edited by jar, : fix subtitle

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

I no longer believed that God existed. Why is this not a valid reason for my deconversion?

I can read the Iliad and understand the goals and actions that Zeus and others had during that time period. In understanding those goals, does this force me to believe in the existence of Zeus and the other gods?I can read many articles on Santa Claus and learn that Santa Claus wants to reward good kids with toys and bad kids with coal. Since I now know the doctrine of Santa Claus does this mean that I must also believe in the existence of Santa Claus?

Everyone make a mental note, DA disagrees that Jesus Christ is a Spiritual king over the Church (Spiritual Israel) and that is what the prophets predicted and the inspired writers in the NT make clear through inspiration and evidenceSo Now, all DA has to do is demonstrate why I should believe HIM, with no evidence to the contrary and why I should ignore that Christ fits and fulfills those promises, the way they were originally intended, in a spiritual fashionMy guess is that you cannot provide a reason or evidence, anymore than you could not show a theme or purpose in the KoranLets see what youve got Of course he did, its the church and he and his apostles make that known in both thier verbage and the evidenceDo you have any evidence that the church is not the kingdom the prophets spoke of?Dawn Bertot

I noticed you have 300 and something posts to my 2200, do you think your tactics will work? Your a sad excuse at attempts to intimidate. If cavediver couldnt do it, you have no chance. He tried for several yearsIll tell you and keep telling you, your wasting your time sonperhaps you could actually present an argument to the topic of the thread. As of yet, I dont remember any attempt by yourselfSuch is lifeDawn Bertot