-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
ex Christians
- Thread starter syo
- Start date
Shadow Rose
Member
I walked away from Christianity and chose to follow another path. I grew up as a Christian but the older I got the more I started really paying attention to the teachings and some just didn't sit well with me. I felt a lot of hatred and judgment from Christians and I didn't want to be a part of it. I will never turn my back on Christians and there are some beliefs that I have taken from Christianity but the religion as a whole was not a good fit for me.
If you do not feel at home in a religion then you should really step back and think about why you feel that way. If it is just because you are confused then find someone to guide you into understanding. If it is that the beliefs are what you don't agree with or if you feel differently then you should think about doing some research into other religions to see if there is one that aligns more of what you believe. Once you find your place it will feel like home.
Good luck my friend. I hope you find the answers that you seek.
Sand Dancer
Crazy Cat Lady
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I simply can not go back to a group of people who routinely meet in a room and make believe that a God exists when there's really nothing there that will give any of it credence. It's far too strange and bizarre, now that I'm free of the mental programming associated with unsubstantiated belief.
In reality I realized it's just a bunch of people with an imaginary friend that they pray and talk to essentially.
In reality I realized it's just a bunch of people with an imaginary friend that they pray and talk to essentially.
Neutral Name
Active Member
Beard-A-Bear
New Member
As an ex-Christian, my relationship with Christianity is...rocky to say the least. Antagonistic might be a good word for it. I'm no fan of Christianity, and I'm quite frankly opposed to it on theological and ethical grounds that I won't get into here. That said, I tend to leave it and its followers alone. My Christian friends and family members agree to disagree and leave it at that. Should you leave Christianity? Honestly, the only one who can decide that is you.
Science itself doesn't deny possibility. In front of science, literally everything is possible such as resurrection or the miracles. It's a twisted version of science trying to advocate that "something is not possible". Science is about proof. You can't prove that "something is not possible" in the case of resurrection and miracles. Thus to say that they are not possible is just a faith statement.
Another deceptive perception introduced by this twisted version of science is that "everything can be proved scientifically today", if not then we can assume that they never happened such as resurrection and miracles. Now I am trying to give you an example,
You had a dinner on Mar 07, 2009. Please prove scientifically what you ate that day, that is the food contents of your dinner that day. You can't, no one can. In this situation, you did something simple, however it's out of our science's capability to give it a proof. So if science can't even prove simple things in the past, why do you have to expect that complicated things such as resurrection and miracles happened in the past can be proven?!
In a nutshell, today's humans are educated with a twisted line of reasoning. That's the situation why they deny the possibility of resurrection and miracles. It's the twisted version of reasoning which leaves no room for the existence of resurrection and miracles.
Last edited:
Audie
Veteran Member
You have a very odd idea about what science is.
Science can never ever prove something.
One can have ideas of how things are, like the
old belief that heavy things fall faster than light ones.
It is easy to disprove that. Try it once, and it wont
happen. Try it a billion times, and it wont happen.
The "law of nature" that heavy falls faster is thus
shown to not be a law at all.
To the extent that science could said to have a doctrine
and to make it a matter of faith, it is that laws of nature
are consistent through time and space.
We dont think that heavy things fall faster on planet
x, or that they fall up instead of down. Electrons are
not positive in other galaxies.
Nobody has ever shown that any law of nature
we know about is quirky, sometimes in effect,
sometimes not, sometimes working differently.
Everything that we can test or have ever tested
anywhere on any subject has consistently given
the same result-laws of nature are not subject
to whim.
If you wish to believe that miracles used to happen,
or still do, terrif. Just dont think you can lend any
scientific weight to your notion, especially via false
claims as to what science is and does.
And try to be aware that the probabilities dont stand
with an equivalent belief that in other galaxies far away
and long ago, the law of conservation of mass / energy
was non existent, or that Boyles law was inoperative.
You have a very odd idea about what science can do. Science does prove things. Proof can closely be related to how humans can reckon a truth.
If science can't prove the Newtonian framework, no astronauts dare to land on moon or Mars. As a proof, our theories are predictably and repeatedly true that it lands us to the surface of moon.
It is so because us humans don't have the capability to predict a future event. If theory which allows us to predict infallibly how a phenomenon can repeat itself, we (our brain) will perceive that it's a proven truth. At the theoretical level, we thus prove (know for sure) that our theories at hand can repeatedly and infallibly bring us to moon. That's why astronauts will risk the mission. They don't risk on a theory which can be mistaken, the theory itself is proven it can't be mistaken. What they are willing to risk is the uncalculatable factors such as human errors.
To put it another way, whenever a rocket explodes, we don't blame that the Newtonian theories at hand are mistaken. It must be something else but not the theory itself. It's how the theory is regarded as proven!!
Get a clue before you fart!
Last edited:
Audie
Veteran Member
It is said to be against forum rules to click the
"funny" icon in a case like this, so I will just
say that I did get a laugh from this demonstration.
You this reply contains no argument. It's well... a kind of ad hominem. That is, you attack the author instead of the points he made.
It's low and cheap. I understand that it's all you can do though. Typical atheist!
Audie
Veteran Member
Poe's law?
You should read something called fallacy. Google it up what fallacy could mean then you may realized that you just made use of it.
ad hominem!
Another specialty of atheists (no offense, it's a speculation) that they tend to drag on pointlessly and endlessly, as demonstrated in the last chain of posts in this thread! They have the ability to make a hundred posts without presenting a single valid point! lol.
Audie
Veteran Member
Look this is my last comment on this. I explained in small
detail, in my first post why you are mistaken about science
and proof.
It was, vaguely, amusing to see you tell me
I had not done my homework,
Should it be the case that you would check for
yourself you can try some beginner stuff, like,
google for such as "can science prove".
You would have to eat all of your ill considered
words if you did, so maybe you should avoid
any of that "due diligence" that you may have heard of.