Post by popinjay
So no matter how good you think you may be as a lawyer, I assume you
would not be able to argue before a jury, effectively and
convincingly, the existence of God and the resurrection of >Jesus. If
you were offered a lot of money to argue the case, but your pay
depended on you winning, you would just pass. Is that correct, my
Correct. It's not that I would pass, it's just the case that there is
no compelling evidence to believe any Bible story, much less one that
describes supernatural acts that violate the laws of the natural world.
I have been studying this for several years now, and believe me, I tried
to convince myself of it, but the more I dug into the more I found
myself doubting. Bible stories about Jesus were not written down when
they happened. They were passed from one generation to the next orally
for 50 to 100 years after the events, only then did anonymous scribes
write them down. You know that this method is not reliable. This is how
myths are created.
The worlds religions are not compatible. When Richard Dawkins gave a
lecture, during the Q&A after, a girl asked him, "what if you're wrong?"
The implication being that he was making a high stakes bet by being an
atheist, and if it turned out he was wrong, then he was screwed. He
replied by ascertaining that the girl was a Christian, and then he
reminded her that she was an atheist as to Islam, as to Judaism, as to
Hinduism, as to every other religion in the world, she was an atheist
from the point of view of adherents to other religions. Then he asked
her, what if *you're* wrong?
Have you considered that? What if the Muslims are correct and you're
wrong about Christ? The proliferation of religions in the world, each
compatible with the other, tells me that they are man-made. There is no
I read a horrific news story several months ago about a mother who lived
in a slum in either South Africa or Brazil. She went out to get drunk
and left her female infant alone in a shanty shack. While she was gone,
giant rats ate the little girl alive, feasting on her eyes, lips and
other soft spots first. The infant died. Whenever I read stories like
that, I try to think of any justification for a just God to allow that.
I cannot think of any. Mysterious ways does not excuse a being from
having the power to prevent atrocity but failing to do so. If God does
exist, he is an old testament tyrant.
I remember the "GOD IS DEAD" magazine cover ... TIME? [Do they still
print TIME magazine?]
I am much older that maybe everyone still posting on this group. I was
raised Roman Catholic and was a "believer" until likely in college ...
so long ago. I insisted that my fiance convert so we could be married
in the One True Church ... it still amazes me that she agreed. After I
finally came to the realization that I could not continue to deceive
myself about every detail of the whole thing (to "doubt" is to "sin"), I
became not only anti RC but anti "religion". [I put the quotes because
all of us do not mean the same thing when we use the word "religion".]
During my raging atheist period, I simply did not think much about it.
Since I had given up my entire moral code, I needed to come up with
something new. I did a lot of reading about all sorts of things and
eventually rediscovered an interest in the numinous. My studies in
science all seemed to be trying to expand an understanding of the
"unknown" and provide explanations that "made sense" to someone who
needed a new framework to live by.
There are so many "unknowns" still available to be discovered or
explained so that scientists can agree on the truth ... not! I just
finished the other day with the series "Genius" about the life of Albert
Einstein. What a great documentary/story. [Still used the word "God"
in a very special way. I was a bit surprised. I do believe his idea of
God is close to my current version.]
So, eventually, I decided that some sort of church-like group might be
interesting as long as it wasn't anything like a real church ... I met
someone who invited me to a Unitarian-Universalist fellowship. One did
not have to believe in any version of "God" to be a member ... it was
very interesting. It was definitely a liberal/progressive political
group and very active in the civil rights movement.
I attended quite some time and found it much like a country club for
quite interesting folks. Most interesting was the idea that everyone
should not be "grouped" into only one way of looking at things.
Everyone had ideas and just because they attended one fellowship, one
could not say that anyone agreed on much of any one thing. It was a
safe place for all ideas. Until the ERA was being considered ... a
political question ... not any sort of "religious" question ... at least
to me. The board of directors wanted to "go on record" for supporting
the ERA and publish a letter in the local newspaper. I said I would
agree with such a thing if everyone (every single person) said that they
agreed with such an action. [I pointed out that everyone might not be
able to say that they believed in god and they were attending a group
that might be called a church even though they would never actually call
the building a church.] I also said that there were many, many groups
that anyone who wanted to could join and support the ERA ... why would
anyone want the fellowship to did it if even one person did not want the
fellowship to be a political action committee? Would not the only
reason be to make the public believe that everyone at the fellowship
agreed with the letter, even though that might not be true? [And the
letter would not be of any importance anyway.]
All groups are interesting ... I have been a registered Democrat my
whole adult life ... but I cannot say that that registration identifies
me in any meaningful way. Later, we left the Unitarian group and moved
to where I have lived since the late 70s ... and we found a good day
school for the kids at the oldest Episcopal Church in town. Met
interesting people and settled in. Not really a high church but
certainly not a low church ... a real country club church. Sort of
Catholic-Lite. Twice the fun with half the guilt trip. It was an
interesting time for me ... spiritually. Eight or nine summers at
Kanuga in North Carolina ... kids at camp and adults at Christian
Spiritual Activities. Met marvelous teachers exposing me to all sorts
of new ideas. All sorts of religious ideas explored and discussed ...
one of my favorites sill is Sufism. I decided on four years of more
formal seminary studies as well. The bible took on new meaning for me
as an excellent guide to developing a moral code that seems quite
suitable for me.
I no longer attend any church of any kind ... I really do not "study"
religion any more. I am quite content at the moment ... spiritually.
Still many unknowns; still many questions ... but I have decided (for
the moment) to go with God=Love. Explains a lot for me. Love can move
mountains if you get enough like minded folks to help. Non-love=Evil
Seems to work for me. God has nothing to do with the evil in the world
... not in the definition. My God=Love does not meddle in the world,
only helps where a person can help. God=Love is not science and has no
explanation for anything that science argues about. God is simply Love.
Love is not dead. Love is all there is. All you need is love. Put a
little love in your heart.
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.