Your Garage Luxury Beauty Best Books of the Month STEM nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Samsung S8 Launch Starting at $39.99 Wickedly Prime Handmade Mother's Day Gifts hgg17 Book House Cleaning billions billions billions  Introducing Echo Look Starting at $89.99 Kindle Oasis Nintendo Switch National Bike Month on Amazon disgotg_gno_17
Customer Discussions > Religion forum

I Lost (faith) and Found (reality)


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Sep 21, 2016, 11:21:22 PM PDT
Amygdala says:
Thanks, Toko. I wasn't sure what you meant in your initial post, so that's why I asked.

I don't label the people as much as their church's doctrines. Which is ironic because very few Church goers actually know their home church's doctrine.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 21, 2016, 10:17:26 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 21, 2016, 10:29:50 PM PDT
tokolosi says:
I guess I just think that there really isn't much common ground between a lot of the disparate groups who call themselves Christian, especially when comparing the further extremes of the spectrum. And the fact that many groups are so absolutely convinced that their way is *the* way, and might even be willing to (or even have) kill or die for that ideal certainly separates what should be the unifying bond of Christian love.

For example, I find little common ground between the extremely conservative evangelical reality I was raised in and what I've seen labeled "liberal" Christianity. Many words and phrases are the same, but when you understand each factions *interpretation* of the words or phases, any connection is fleeting at best. (I'm not going to provide specific examples. I'm just talking off the top of my head and don't feel like getting more in depth.)

Groups should simply identify as what they claim to be: Mormon isn't Methodist isn't Jehovah's Witness isn't Catholic isn't Presbyterian isn't Plymouth Brethren. I suppose you could lump denominations that are "evangelical", others "liberal" or "mainstream", though the last two seem too vague to me because those words have significant non-religious meanings; most people at least have an inkling of what's meant when they hear "evangelical".

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 20, 2016, 8:20:26 PM PDT
Amygdala says:
Your umbrella version of Christianity v. sects. What's the difference that you talk about.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 20, 2016, 1:03:42 AM PDT
tokolosi says:
Not quite sure what to elaborate on, Susie. Could you be a little more specific?

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 17, 2016, 5:11:22 PM PDT
Amygdala says:
Toko, would you talk more about this, please?

Posted on Sep 17, 2016, 1:34:36 AM PDT
Bryan Borich says:
>I Lost (faith) and Found (reality)

Wrong title.

Lost faith in others. But kept faith in my subjective experiences.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 17, 2016, 1:32:30 AM PDT
Bryan Borich says:
The problem with most Psi experiments lies in the assumptions made in their set-up (like everybody has the ability) and in some cases being able to differentiate what exactly is being tested (one example is the RNG experiments. Is it clairvoyance, precog or tk?).

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 17, 2016, 1:18:05 AM PDT
Bryan Borich says:
Peer review isn't exactly all it's hyped up to be.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 17, 2016, 1:13:57 AM PDT
Bryan Borich says:
Sorry about your friend.

I'd point out you asked mostly the wrong questions.

And you were told the wrong things about God.

Not mind you that it matters much.

Also, ignore Free Will, it doesn't exist. Neither does Free Choice.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 16, 2016, 12:33:34 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 16, 2016, 12:35:09 PM PDT
tokolosi says:
To me, the totally disparate range of what falls under the "Christian" umbrella label makes the term utterly meaningless. There are not 2 billion Christians on this planet. There *might* be as many as several million of any one particular sect who are devout enough to warrant the label, but then the label should be of the sect, not the umbrella.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 16, 2016, 12:17:21 PM PDT
Amygdala says:
I often wonder if the liberal feel-good Xtians, as in this forum, would recognize how dangerous religion can be. Just going along every Sunday to church because their wife goes, or just goes "for their kids", or the single Ones looking for a mate (i.e. The New Hope Church). They rarely discuss politics or SCOTUS and just go through the motions by smiling and agreeing with others that things aren't so bad.

I find myself growing impatient with Feel Goodies who remain calm when outrage is appropriately required.

The Silent Majority of the Liberal Christians on Valium.

😎

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 16, 2016, 11:05:11 AM PDT
tokolosi says:
Hard to say with "what if". I was raised in a tightly reined in fundy reality myself that pretty much dictated my entire world view until HS graduation from fundy school. I suspect that, most likely, had I been raised in a more milquetoast mainstream Christian setting would have continued to identify with it but in practice be entirely indifferent to the label, i.e., be close to the middle of the Christian bell curve.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 16, 2016, 1:44:54 AM PDT
Amygdala says:
If I hadn't been a fundamentalist for 20+ years, I doubt if I would have become atheist. The Nazarene church taught me how damaging religion can be.

Toko, how 'bout you?

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 15, 2016, 11:53:18 PM PDT
tokolosi says:
Hear hear!

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 14, 2016, 11:23:13 AM PDT
tokolosi says:
Sure, Mac, whatever you say. I've had my say, too, so I'd say there's nothing more to say. See ya...

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 14, 2016, 8:26:26 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Feb 20, 2017, 7:52:09 AM PST]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 14, 2016, 3:12:20 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 14, 2016, 9:38:06 PM PDT
tokolosi says:
The term "insufferable boor" comes to mind.

It has been my observation that, instead of focusing on a particular issue being discussed, you consistently spew personal vitriol virtually anytime you interact with individuals with whom you disagree, many times extrapolating that vitriol to include entire groups you clearly despise. Then, many of the longer-termers who have any history of altercation with you might respond in kind, and a discussion can become more about your personal mutual animosity than the topic being discussed.

For a long time I took this in stride but finally just grew tired of it a while back, and for my own peace of mind to continue enjoying my time here put you on ignore. Once in a great while I'll take a peek at what you have to say but, given the above, usually go "oh, yeah" and default back to ignore.

It has been a while now since I've lurked in any discussion you've participated in; perhaps you've mellowed in your old age. I will say, your thoughts about the current election cycle I have glanced at seem more toned down and reasonable. That's a start.

P.S. For what it's worth, Mac, from this point on I will cease my negative snark about you.

Posted on Sep 14, 2016, 12:36:07 AM PDT
Amygdala says:
I'd forgotten about this thread. Mahalo, Toke.

Atheist for several years. Was reflecting the damage religion has done in my life. I always end up speechless and think about something else.

Skepticism should be taught starting in Middle School. That's where dreams can find their "teeth".

I've never once regretted atheism. It was the best thing.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 13, 2016, 3:55:45 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Feb 20, 2017, 7:52:03 AM PST]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 13, 2016, 2:06:14 PM PDT
Mary L. Mand says:
"Safe for tender tummies!"

Posted on Sep 13, 2016, 11:10:07 AM PDT
tokolosi says:
And here's a link to the thread that started it all:

https://www.amazon.com/forum/atheist/ref=cm_cd_pg_pg1?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx3VDTKO61HE6U7&cdPage=1&cdThread=Tx2JFD4C36ENPNS

Wow, I'm becoming quite the archivist!

Posted on Sep 13, 2016, 11:04:43 AM PDT
tokolosi says:
One thing I noticed is that Macheath has deleted his "contribution" to the discussion, so by default this thread is *New and Improved!*

Posted on Sep 13, 2016, 10:59:53 AM PDT
tokolosi says:
Just thinking of 'prob...

I've been able to stumble onto threads that are outside the 41 page archive even though A-zon took away the search box. Though this one has pretty much run its course, it's got some good content, and maybe there are one or two new(er)bies who might wish to contribute, so what the heck...

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 7, 2014, 12:26:20 AM PDT
Dear R.R.R,
just want to thank you for sharing your "de-conversion" story, and I also want to say that I hope you may release the guilt that you've carried, about not being able to be there, for your friend, the night that the minister raped her. No one but he, is guilty for anything that occurred, that night. He was a criminal opportunist, who would have found an opportunity, eventually, and probably did, on other occasions, with victims less fearless than your dear friend, according to statistics on child rapists.

The fact that you still feel guilt shows the deep empathy that you've held, for your friend, but it also indicates that you felt responsible for what she suffered, in some way, which you were not. You, too, were a victim, of that evil perpetrator, as guilt is a burden that you ought not to have carried, just because some criminal decided to use his position and opportunity, to harm your friend.

Horrible that some friends tried to blame your friend, so commonly, those that speak out, are subjected to re victimization, in the form of such accusations. The fact that the congregation disbelieved the minister was guilty of the rape was a terrible betrayal, and he may have gotten away with more crimes, than were reported, however, its a relief to know that he was eventually convicted.

Your whole story, is moving, and interesting, and I think this was a good idea, for a thread, the de-conversion angle. (Sorry for the loss of your mom.)

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?"

Great quote!

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 26, 2014, 4:39:56 PM PST
How many of those 29 studies were peer-reviewed?
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 356 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Religion forum

  Discussion Replies Latest Post
Announcement
Amazon Discussions Feedback Forum
1782 Mar 7, 2017
How many here believe these Myths? 37 40 minutes ago
Purden of Boof 181 58 minutes ago
How would you stop a dangerous meme from spreading? 167 1 hour ago
KJV BIBLE? 106 1 hour ago
Demographic Trends and Religion 5 1 hour ago
Poetry, etc. 15 1 hour ago
Three perspectives on why man is God’s master. 20 3 hours ago
Another 10,000 Quotes... 7841 6 hours ago
What is enlightenment? 2154 9 hours ago
Do Lizards believe in Atheists? 23 9 hours ago
Atheism is false 14 10 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Religion forum
Participants:  183
Total posts:  8879
Initial post:  Jun 11, 2012
Latest post:  Sep 21, 2016

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 7 customers