4) Christianity has a very unusual history of documentation. In terms of the number of existing historical documents, we have more proof that Jesus lived than we do of anyone born before the invention of the printing press. There are close to 100,000 copies of the New Testament, some books dating back to 70 AD. With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the accuracy of the Old Testament was proved to be unparalleled. A document of that size with hudreds of years seperating the copies and only a few errors were discovered. None of the errors even changed the meanings of the verses.

Simple please this subject line has already been abused and I am trying to get to the bottom of this.

1. Do you worship your God as you understand him from reading the Bible and consider the book a tool for the message being passed on by man, or do you consider the bible to be a divine cornerstone of Christianity. If you think it's holy in some way that is fine, but the distinction is do you hold it as a holy symbol, or an idol to worship and follow?

2. Do you believe that the bible contains the only valid passages about the teachings of Jesus, the world he lived in, and the people he loved written during his times?

Though I have not seen enough of your posts to get a grasp of your perception of God, etc - I would say that your objection with "Christianity" and what your perception of it is does not come from a discernment of what a spirit filled believer of Christ is - from those who attend a local congregation and claim adherancy to Christianity. Your objection is more with - for lack of a better word "Church-iolity". Those who's faith is in their church, or congregation - rather than Christ and his message of truth. Those of us who's faith is in Jesus through the work of the spirit do not "blindly" accept interpretations from a pulpet - unless the exegesis is complete and consistant. The problem most have with Christianity is they blindly accept what the secular media has defined as Christian denominations, and in turn they take the actions of the aberrant ones as representative of the church as a whole.

For those who think that the church of Jesus - which began with the disciples - has anything to do with what goes on in ornately decorated buildings on Sunday or Saturday mornings, and is defined by such, knows little, if anything about scripture. Claiming to be a Christian does not bring one closer to God, nor does it get one to heaven. Christianity does not save anyone - Jesus does. It is only through Jesus that one gets to the heaven of scripture.

So I would here in like to announce that I am not a follower of the Christianity that I see defined in these threads. I am a disciple of Jesus - not of any congregation with whatever dogma or tenants they may follow. If in chosing to become a disciple of Jesus, that has made me a "Christian", it is by my understanding of what a Christian is, not society at large.

Okay sorry guys, I wanted to post earlier but was at work and wasn't able to really dedicate any time to it.

I grew up a Christian, went to church every Sunday, Baptized, went through first communion and all that fun stuff. Unfortunately I was at the age where I was still believing what anyone told me and not really thinking for myself. About the time I hit age 14 and I started thinking for myself, I started asking questions, and man did bad things hit the fan from there. No one would give me any type of actual answers for what I was asking without referring back to the bible and just saying, That's just the way it is, Or you just have to have faith,

So then I of course got upset. Wondering how they could expect me to just accept and believe things on blind faith without any tangible proof. Especially when those things just didn't make sense. Even to a 14 year old. So I started doing my own research on religion. I researched a lot of different types looking for something that synced with me. After a few months I came upon Wicca and that was the closest thing to any religion that made any sense to me. Mainly because a lot of it had to deal with the energies of the world and things being in balance and it was a very nice, nature based religion. Gives you freedom to live your life as long as you are not harming others in the process. Just be who you are.

So from 14 til about 6 months ago I considered myself Wiccan. Although I never really practiced the religion. Finally I just kind of realized that I don't need to follow any type of religion to be a good person or to be happy with my life. So now I consider myself Agnostic. I don't know whats out there. I don't know if there is one being ruling over everything or if the world is just made up of energies and spirits that come together to make us what we are. I just know that I am alive and a decent person and I like to ask questions and understand the way other people look at things.

me to mx

that is both your right and your choice quick, but can we keep this thread on subject - its about cherub wanting answers from those who were christians that have left christianity and now believe differently - all black bird was doing was stating his case - for "cherub, as i asked spider and now you - i know you have evry right to say what you believe and feel how you feel but please if you must try to be patient and let the thread run it's coarse before posting your thoughts if you can manage your patient's ok? i really would like to see this post which is a continuation of my post in one sense find it's conclusion with little argueing as possible - thnx in advance

This is a forum, if I see something stated about Christianity that I believe is not true, I will reply to it. I'm sorry if that aggrevates you, feel free to ignore my posts. But if I allow a false statement about Christianity to stand, it simply leads to other objections which people can raise about Christianity.

The beginning of the end was the christian congregation itself. I was a Lutheran and heavily involved in my church when I was young and helped found groups within the church. For anyone unfamiliar Lutherans stress the love and acceptance of God. There was in incident where during service some children who were non christian or not required to attend church were playing in the church playground. It is my belief that a house of God belongs to the children of God which includes everyone. If we built a playground it should be open to the community. The adults and even my sister disagreed stating the children could come inside and join service or leave. They reasoned that it was too much of a temptation or torture for the children attending service. I personally thought the congregation had a responsibility to explain to it's own children in the congregation about the choice of attending service and ensure that they enjoyed it rather than forbid others to use the playground. The entire incident implied duplicity to me. If the children had to be protected from outside thought or influence and held against their will they were not willing attendies.

Another incident that happened around the same time involved "Sunday school". One of the teachers went into theological discussion and was teaching finer points of belief. He posed a question. I asked that the question be repeated and clarified. I then answered with my personal belief about the answer and he told me I was wrong. I at that point realized that there was something wrong with the overall makeup of christian congregations because they form based on personal belief, but then teach the children or insist that others agree with their personal understanding.

Later I tried to return, but found that my understanding of a higher power had changed and evolved enough so that if I entered the chapel during service I would start to hyper ventilate because my body knew I was opposing my personal belief. At that time I was about sixteen years old.

So far as what originally made me start examining the church it was a teacher. I was attending a private Baptist school and regularly had debates with the bible class teacher because our views of God as a Lutheran and a Baptist were completely opposed. She taught fear and seperatism and I had been brought up taught the love and acceptance of God. It made me start to examine closely the behaviors of congregations. It was another teacher at the same school that once posed a question to use that I heard a rumor she was later fired for. The question was do you believe what you believe because it is in your heart, or because you were taught to believe it? The discussion lasted for some time and when it started I thought I was on firm ground having a different view from the Baptists I was surrounded by. By the end of the discussion she had made her point to me personally.

Over the years this question served me well driving me to seek the truth of understanding my own existence and my own personal beliefs. My understanding has evolved and the more it lead me towards acceptance of individual belief, the more it lead me away from accepting those that attempt to force their beliefs on othes regardless of what relgiion they consider themselves to follow.

I'm all for relgion, spirituality, and each person seeking spiritual progression. I'm against conformity of the soul, spiritual or cultural slavery, and the use of pressure or threats to attempt to change another's views. I am also set dead against those that justify hatred and seperatism as religeous duty.

I actually requested a copy of his list when he completes it. It helps in a "religous" debate to know what side of the fence they lean on. I have learned through reading these posts for the last couple of weeks what angles to avoid in these debates. Like I said in his thread, I am not going to use Bible verses to try to convice Abra or JB that my arguement is valid. They don't believe in the Bible so it would be like bringing a knife to a gun fight.

I will let Tribo answer my question about weather or not he hates me but I am pretty sure his answer will be "no". I don't think he REALLY hates Christians. I think he detests the theology and the extremists that try to shove it down his throat and scare him into heaven with the hell, fire and brimestone sermons. And personally....I don't blame anyone who hates that. I am a Christian and I hate that. It serves noone, let alone Christ.

Have I got that right Tribo?

Tribo created a post titled “How Many”. He wanted to know how many were once involved in Christianity and now no longer believe or practice Christianity.

My question is…

Why did you leave?
Was there a defining moment?
Was there a straw that broke the camels back?
If so, what was it?
Did you read something other than the Bible that gave you an epiphany?

your correct - sorry cherub - but this thread is "not about" scripture quoting from either side - again i plead all to stay on subject - if you are not hear to answer cherub's question's as i or blackbird or abra or others then dont ruin it again by showing your "righteuosness" for your god - you believe in the power of your god and the answrering of prayers by him??? - so go pray for us to be smitten or killed or dibilitated or what ever - this is not the place for holyier than thou disvcussion or bible banging remarks - if you truly want to understand us as cherub does - the n stay listen learn - otherwise start another thread and call it " calling all christians unite against the demons." no emoticon's

You are a strange person...you threaten other Christians to not use scripture, but you use scripture out of context.

In context, Jesus is saying that anyone who works in his name, but doesn't consider himself a Christian or a church goer is still a Christian. From the context, it is clear that Jesus is only talking about those who believe in Jesus.

Mark 38-42


Jesus makes it clear that those are are "not against us" is anyone who works in Jesus' name.

Because I came the realization that it can't possible be true.

I was born and raised into the religion from birth. I was a 'believer' up to and including the time I was 'saved' in my teens. By 'saved' I merely mean that I went to the altar and accepted Jesus Christ as my lord and savior.

I confess that I didn't fully understand precisely what they meant in terms of the actual doctrine (the actual bible). Although I had gone to bible school and was taught the biblical stories I didn't fully understand the big picture. Other than the idea that God has rules, man is disobedient, all men are sinners, and they all need to seek salvation by accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior and that he with then come into their lives and make a profound difference in their life.

That's basically all I was taught. I wasn't taught a perfectly logical understanding of how this all works and why it makes sense. That was deemed unnecessary. I was taught that the only thing that is required is that we accept Jesus as our Savior and HE will take care of all the details.

Fine, so I did that without asking for logical justification.

My questions concerning Christianity up to that point were purely innocent questions. I just wanted to better understand what God wants from us.



There were a tone of straws. Do I really need to point at just one of them. They all came together to produce an impossible load that broke any hope of continuing to believe in the biblical picture.

Some of them were,...

Nothing happened after I asked Jesus to come into my life. Nothing was any different. I didn't notice any profound change in my life. And I most certainly wasn't contacted by any extraterrestrial or spiritual being.

The other 'staws' came from the fact that I began to study the bible more intently after having been 'saved'. Not only did I want to better understand it for myself, but I also wanted to offer other people better explanations of God's word.

After all, even people in my very church (including preachers) would often state that there are things they just don't understand in the Bible and find hard to believe, but they just continue to have faith anyway. So I wanted to look into those things to see if I could understand them better. Perhaps I can help other people understand them better too. But what happened was that I simply saw why other people were having trouble believing certain things. They truly were incredulous and there were no explanation offered in the bible.



If I had to pick one thing, it would have to be the crucifixion of Jesus as a sacrificial lamb of God to pay for our sins via the flowing of his blood.

The question came up? Why was this necessary. Well the stupid answer is "Because men are sinful!"

But that's not meaningful answer. The real question is, "Who did this act pay for the sins of man?" Who was PAID by this act. You received PAYMENT from this human sacrifice. Who was being APPEASED?

Well, if you go back thought the bible it's the God of Abraham who demand blood sacrifices before he can forgive sins. That was already a 'straw' in its own right. Why should an all-wise and all-loving God demand blood sacrifices before he's willing to forgive sins? That has never been explained in the bible other than to suggest that his is just something that God arbitrarily chose to want to do. But why would an all-wise, all-loving God choose such an ugly act to pay for sins? Wouldn't it have been wiser to demand that men do something constructive and positive to pay for their sins. Why choose to have them slaughter animals every time they sin. What sense does that make? Why should God require that animals be slaughtered before he can forgive someone????

It makes utterly no sense to me and the bible doesn't offer a reasonable explanation for it. In fact, it makes much more sense that men would make up something like this based on superstition than it does to believe that a supreme all-loving, all-wise creator of this universe would want such an appeasement. So this got me realizing that men wrote the damn book based on their own superstitions.

Then we come back to Christ hanging on the cross and ask what he's doing there and how did he get there? Well, God sent him there specifically to be a sacrificial lamb to appease God so her can forgive men of their sins.

Yes, if I had to point to the straw that broke the camel's back this would have to be it. It's a totally hopeless situation of a God who can't forgive until he sees some animal or person being butchered.

WHAT????

God can't forgive unless someone is butchered?????

Where's the burn barrel? I need to toss this demented sadistic book away before it falls into the hands of innocent children!

It's a completely dead horse to me now. In fact, at the risk of sounding sadistic it actually appears more like a horse that has been nailed to a pole, butchered, skinned, and sold for dog food.

There's no reviving it now. The biblical picture is forever dead for me. It's utterly absurd and irreparably incredulous.

The Noah's ark story is similarly incredulous, and also relates to the story of the crucifixion indirectly. The story of Jesus claim that "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son to save it". Yet in Noah's day God so hated the world that he flooded the entire place out including the entire animal kingdom. He must have really been angry.

That just another contradiction. A supposedly unchanging God who at one point in history hate the world so much he floods it out, and in another point in history he loves the world so much he has himself nailed to a pole to appease himself?

The overall story is inconsistent. And therefore the God is inconsistent and thus undependable.



Not until I had already realized that the bible can't be true. But once I knew that the bible is a false picture of our creator I did search for a better philosophy of what god might be like. I never stopped believing that I have a creator. I never stopped believing that there is a spiritual essence to my being. I simply realized that the biblical stories can't be true.

I found a picture of 'god' in pantheism. Pantheism is the view that nature herself is god. That we are all manifestations of god. There is no specific doctrine that comes with this view. There are many books written on pantheistic views though. I personally found books by Allan Watts to be inspiring. However, there are many pantheistic views. The pantheistic view is basically that we are children of the universe, and the universe is a manifestation of god. We are all children of god. We all came from god, and we all return to god. I prefer to use lowercase for the word 'god' when speaking of god in this way because the pantheistic god is not an egotistical god. God wants nothing from you, she only wants to be your servant, not the other way around. Her love is truly unconditional and she is completely forgiving with no need for any blood sacrifices.

I only use the personal pronoun 'her' because I don't want to call god an 'it'. And I also think it's fitting since we have always traditionally referred to nature as female, (i.e. Mother Nature, Mother Earth).

I am completely happy with this view of god, and in fact, I feel a true relationship with god in this way. I can feel her beneath my feet, I feel her in the wind, I feel the warm of her light when I walk in the sun. She is in everything, including you and me. She is truly omniscient and has nothing but unconditional love for everyone.

I love her.

Albert Einstien

" There are only two things i can think of that are infinite - the universe and man's stupidity - and i'm not sure about the universe."