Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,230 Year: 5,487/9,624 Month: 512/323 Week: 9/143 Day: 9/13 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can a valid, supportable reason be offered for deconversion
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 14 of 566 (595429)
12-08-2010 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Dawn Bertot
12-08-2010 3:15 AM


How about a discussion examining (some of) the alledged reasons for deconversion
Deconversion for me began when I started deciding for myself what I would and would not believe in. Up until that time I just assumed that I believed in God because that is what I was supposed to do. I soon found that the only reason I could find for believing as other christians believed was to fit in with the group. After awhile it seemed wrong to go through the motions of christianity, so I quit attending church. Haven't been back since.
There wasn't any real justification for my deconversion. Christianity, and religious belief in general, is something that I find uncompelling. I see no evidence for any deities, so I see no reason to believe in them. It really is that simple.
If you are looking for a justification for my continued disbelief it would be lack of evidence for a claimed deity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-08-2010 3:15 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 75 of 566 (596186)
12-13-2010 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Dawn Bertot
12-12-2010 7:30 PM


Ive read the entirity of the posts and I have failed to see a valid 'reason' offered as to why I should deconvert from the things I have studied and been taught through the years.
Then we can only ask why you converted to begin with, and if those reasons are still valid.
To make a very large generalization, for most atheists with a religious background a disbelief precedes the deconversion. The deconversion is the unavoidable consequence of not believing what you have studied and been taught over the years.
What specificallly bothers or concerns you about its doctrine.?
It's not a matter of doctrine bothering us. To use an analogy, does it bother you that Santa Claus is said to use flying reindeer? I would not describe that as bothersome, just something that I don't believe in.
If you could show us compelling evidence then we would believe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-12-2010 7:30 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-13-2010 9:23 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 126 of 566 (596344)
12-14-2010 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Dawn Bertot
12-13-2010 9:23 PM


You clearly did not have an adequate education in the scriptures.
Yes, I did. Knowing what scripture says is independent of believing what scripture says. They are two different things.
Your analogy is quite inaccurate and its attempts to equate Christianity w/Santa are easily deniable and silly
Do you find the belief that Santa uses flying reindeer to be bothersome? Yes or no?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-13-2010 9:23 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by arachnophilia, posted 12-15-2010 12:57 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 177 of 566 (596514)
12-15-2010 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Dawn Bertot
12-14-2010 4:58 PM


Re: scriptural unity
You once again, provide no argument or vaild reason why I or anyone should deconvert
I no longer believed that God existed. Why is this not a valid reason for my deconversion?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-14-2010 4:58 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 178 of 566 (596515)
12-15-2010 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2010 3:43 AM


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 form
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?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 3:43 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 188 of 566 (596532)
12-15-2010 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2010 12:36 PM


Re: The purpose of repetition.
I have provided as much support for those prophecies as evidence will allow
If someone finds that evidence to be insufficient would this be a valid reason for deconversion?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 12:36 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 1:07 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 194 of 566 (596541)
12-15-2010 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2010 1:07 PM


Re: The purpose of repetition.
Let me correct that Please. define insufficient from a evidential standpoint
For instance, the need to insert "spiritual" in order to explain away contradictory evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2010 1:07 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 235 of 566 (596673)
12-16-2010 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by Dawn Bertot
12-16-2010 2:24 AM


Re: scriptural unity
Please explain why I should not accept the NT writers conclusions and estimations about the fulfillment of the prophecies they cite as relating to and the fulfillment of said prophecies
The process of deconversion begins when you ask why you should accept them to begin with.
How did you determine that the NT authors were inspired? Just because they say so? If it is that simple:
Taq is inspired by the Holy Ghost because Taq says so.
There, I am now an inspired author. With that said, Jesus was not the Messiah.
Your deconversion can now commence.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-16-2010 2:24 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-17-2010 3:37 AM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 258 of 566 (596861)
12-17-2010 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by Dr Adequate
12-17-2010 5:55 AM


Re: scriptural unity
I prophecy that tomorrow you will see a grufflepuff, by which I mean an animal with five heads and purple wings that incessantly plays the trombone.
If you don't see anything fulfilling that prophecy tomorrow, then let me ask you this.
Or better yet, you can claim the next day that Dawn really did see a grufflepuff in a spiritual way which Dawn was completely unaware of, therefore the prophecy was fulfilled.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-17-2010 5:55 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 262 of 566 (596872)
12-17-2010 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by Dawn Bertot
12-17-2010 3:37 AM


Re: scriptural unity
Why is it that people cannot think in logical terms?
I know, right? That post clearly states that I am God inspired, and you have shown zero evidence that I am not God inspired. Therefore, logic dictates that I am inspired by God. Right?
Until you can present evidence that I am not inspired by God then my statement stands. Jesus was not the Messiah.
At present I and others are comparing the OT and NTs prophecies and trying to determine whether Christ was that fulfillment.
No you aren't. You are assuming that the NT authors are inspired because the Bible says so, therefore whatever they have written is de facto fulfillment of OT prophecy.
But, now listen and pay close attention. It is ludicrous for one to assert, with certain assuance that he was not the fulfillment of those prophecies and believe at the sametime that the writers in the Old testament were unreliable, inaccurate and mythical
Did I miss my history lesson where a Jewish King conquered the lands of the Middle East around 30 AD? If not, then the prophecies were not fulfilled.
To get around this rather obvious failure of prophecy the NT authors argued for a "spiritual" kingdom. IOW, when the evidence doesn't match up to prophecy just invent new evidence. Even more, you can't even show that Jesus existed in the first place.
So why should I believe that prophecy was fulfilled by a Messiah that you can't even demonstrate existed in the first place?
The Gospels and Acts are good representation of historical support for those things advocated, along with Independant sources
The historocity of the Gospels and Acts are the very thing under question. You are assuming your conclusion.
IOWs, there is no valid reason from an evidential standpoint to bleieve they were lying or inaccurate
You have things reversed. You need evidential support before accepting the Gospels as accurate. Where is it?
It is this type of sloppy thinking on the part of fellow christians that led to my deconversion.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-17-2010 3:37 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 335 of 566 (597457)
12-21-2010 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 334 by Dawn Bertot
12-21-2010 7:02 PM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
This prophecy, like all deliverance prophecies are about God and God alone. There is an involvement of the current events and future events in the prophecy
the shepherds and leaders may have reference to some, then current even in Gods plan or they may have an explanation in the time of Christ
They may be a symbol of Gods power then or now. The numbers themself may be symbolic
IOW, it can mean whatever you want it to mean.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 334 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-21-2010 7:02 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 343 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-21-2010 7:37 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 374 of 566 (597609)
12-22-2010 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 343 by Dawn Bertot
12-21-2010 7:37 PM


Re: How to test Dawn Bertot's writings.
This would be true, if I wrote the books of the NT, I was inspired by God to explain the fulfillment of the words he gave the prophets
Either the prophecies were fulfilled or they weren't, claims of inspiration aside. If you cant twist and reword prophecies to fit any outcome then they aren't prophecies. If someone claims inspiration and then twist and reword prophecies to fit any and all outcomes then they are not prophecies.
Its not necessary for every word or idea to be explained in full for the NT writes to explain Gods overall plan
Unless you don't believe in God, then it is nothing more than humans inventing a plan for humanity based on commands from a non-existent God. IOW, you have to believe it is true before you can accept it as true.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 343 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-21-2010 7:37 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 376 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-23-2010 10:20 AM Taq has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024