Evidence for God from Science

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Butterfly wrote:If anyone would like to know more I have written extensively about my journey out of Christianity on my blog...here are links to a couple of those articles Progress Report and Second Progress Report.

Both links you provided are for the Progress Report dated March 21, 2011. Ooops!

Butterfly wrote:Richard (Spock) and I were never involved in any cults together.

Sorry! I thought Word of Faith was also a cult.

FL

Sorry, I'll fix that. Here is the second link Second annual progress report
-

Butterfly wrote:

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Butterfly wrote:If anyone would like to know more I have written extensively about my journey out of Christianity on my blog...here are links to a couple of those articles Progress Report and Second Progress Report.

Both links you provided are for the Progress Report dated March 21, 2011. Ooops!

Butterfly wrote:Richard (Spock) and I were never involved in any cults together.

Sorry! I thought Word of Faith was also a cult.

FL

Sorry, I'll fix that. Here is the second link Second annual progress report

Your blog is full of errors and misconceptions about the bible and God. If you actually left Christianity as you claim - you would not be on this forum at all. Your blog reveals a closed mind that is not at all opened to differing opinions so...

Why are you really here?

Are you attempting to be an agent of change?
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:
Your blog is full of errors and misconceptions about the bible and God. If you actually left Christianity as you claim - you would not be on this forum at all. Your blog reveals a closed mind that is not at all opened to differing opinions so...

Why are you really here?

Are you attempting to be an agent of change?
-
-
-

I am an agent of my own change and I would be grateful to you if you could point out the errors on my blog. If you will remember my first post on this forum was my article on morality...I wanted feedback and man did I get a lot

-

@butterfly
i read your blog and i will say that you are very hypocritical in your "transparency" approach. how can you be open to the notion or idea that the God of the bible can be true but then say in order to understand the bible you must kill the notion of it being the word of God and instead viewed as the word of man? you are not being transparent but instead you have already closed off your mind to the fact that the God of the bible is God. also by using the butterfly metaphor you are implying that somehow because of your metamorphosis you have attained some higher knowledge...but from the posts i read you have absolutely no idea how to interpret the bible and instead have an agenda to destroy it and other peoples faith. how can someone who is supposed to be transparent in the sense of seeking the truth completely shut off a whole avenue and say they are being transparent? you are not being transparent you already have made up your mind. if that is the case what is your agenda? you trying to convert people to your new age oneness collective nonsense? i think you have a problem with God because of whatever experience you have had or maybe you have a problem with the God of the bible because by accepting Him as your God would mean that you must admit that you are sinful....or maybe you have a problem with the God of the bible simply because He is referred to as a He and you dont want to accept that your creator is masculine whatever the case i dont know but nonetheless if you're going to be transparent and searching all angles than stick by your word otherwise just come out and say that nothing can convince you that God is real and be done with it.

Zionist wrote:@butterfly
i read your blog and i will say that you are very hypocritical in your "transparency" approach. how can you be open to the notion or idea that the God of the bible can be true but then say in order to understand the bible you must kill the notion of it being the word of God and instead viewed as the word of man? you are not being transparent but instead you have already closed off your mind to the fact that the God of the bible is God. also by using the butterfly metaphor you are implying that somehow because of your metamorphosis you have attained some higher knowledge...but from the posts i read you have absolutely no idea how to interpret the bible and instead have an agenda to destroy it and other peoples faith. how can someone who is supposed to be transparent in the sense of seeking the truth completely shut off a whole avenue and say they are being transparent? you are not being transparent you already have made up your mind. if that is the case what is your agenda? you trying to convert people to your new age oneness collective nonsense? i think you have a problem with God because of whatever experience you have had or maybe you have a problem with the God of the bible because by accepting Him as your God would mean that you must admit that you are sinful....or maybe you have a problem with the God of the bible simply because He is referred to as a He and you dont want to accept that your creator is masculine whatever the case i dont know but nonetheless if you're going to be transparent and searching all angles than stick by your word otherwise just come out and say that nothing can convince you that God is real and be done with it.

My use of the word transparency was in the context of showing my motivations at each step of my journey. If you read some of my earlier articles from 2010 you would have clearly seen where my starting point was - a solid Christian - I had no agenda and no motive to toss out the Bible as the word of god, it happened quite by surprise. All of your musings as to my reasons for rejecting the Biblegod are wrong, you are merely reading into my words your own way of thinking.

It is my freedom to view the Bible from a different perspective than the one I held for 28 years that has allowed me to see the human aspect of it that I was blinded to. When I became a Christian I accepted the Bible as the word of god without question, because that's how it was presented to me, now I see so much of what I took as foundational truths are not true at all.

When one thinks about it, there is a big problem with god being referred to as masculine, because masculine is defined relative to feminine. So, where is his feminine complement? Something can only be masculine if it is in contrast to something feminine, that is why a true god must be gender neutral, but the authors of the Bible saw its god through their own masculine eyes which is why he is portrayed as male.
-

Butterfly wrote:It is my freedom to view the Bible from a different perspective than the one I held for 28 years that has allowed me to see the human aspect of it that I was blinded to. When I became a Christian I accepted the Bible as the word of god without question, because that's how it was presented to me, now I see so much of what I took as foundational truths are not true at all.

Back in the days when I was an atheist, I lived on a remote island - Cortés Island - where even children smoked pot. On that island, there was - and stil is - a place called Hollyhock. I worked at Hollyhock for a while, cleaning up stuff, doing odd jobs and trying to stay very busy so that no one there would speak to me. You see, everybody at Hollyhock struck me as weird...really, really weird. Weird in a nice, dripping-with-honey way that made me feel uncomfortable. Hollyhock never identified itself as New Age, but it clearly was and still is.

I'm sorry to tell you this, Butterfly, but I get the same impression from your blog that I got from Hollyhock. The markers of New Ageism are there in your blog for all to see. As such, I can't take seriously any of your Bible studies posted there because they are tainted by unbelief. Not the unbelief of a seeker: the unbelief of a hater of God. Like Eve, you have believed a lie.

Butterfly wrote:Please don't be too sad, I am exceedingly happy experiencing life to its fullest with my wonderful husband right by my side.

I'm glad that you are happy and have a wonderful husband. My disappointment comes from knowing that you and he are on the road to hell, and there appears no way for you to make a U turn.

FL

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Butterfly wrote:It is my freedom to view the Bible from a different perspective than the one I held for 28 years that has allowed me to see the human aspect of it that I was blinded to. When I became a Christian I accepted the Bible as the word of god without question, because that's how it was presented to me, now I see so much of what I took as foundational truths are not true at all.

Back in the days when I was an atheist, I lived on a remote island - Cortés Island - where even children smoked pot. On that island, there was - and stil is - a place called Hollyhock. I worked at Hollyhock for a while, cleaning up stuff, doing odd jobs and trying to stay very busy so that no one there would speak to me. You see, everybody at Hollyhock struck me as weird...really, really weird. Weird in a nice, dripping-with-honey way that made me feel uncomfortable. Hollyhock never identified itself as New Age, but it clearly was and still is.

Now I'm curious, how do you interpret the words of Jesus that tell his followers to love their enemies, turn the other cheek, and to give someone who asks for your coat your cloak also? Doesn't get much more "dripping with honey" than that.

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:I'm sorry to tell you this, Butterfly, but I get the same impression from your blog that I got from Hollyhock. The markers of New Ageism are there in your blog for all to see. As such, I can't take seriously any of your Bible studies posted there because they are tainted by unbelief. Not the unbelief of a seeker: the unbelief of a hater of God. Like Eve, you have believed a lie.

Tell me, which lie did Eve believe? That the tree was good for food? That it was pleasant to the eyes? That it was a tree to be desired to make one wise? Or that their eyes would be opened, and they would be as gods, knowing good and evil? According to the Bible all those things were true...Adam and Eve's sin was disobedience.

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Butterfly wrote:Please don't be too sad, I am exceedingly happy experiencing life to its fullest with my wonderful husband right by my side.

I'm glad that you are happy and have a wonderful husband. My disappointment comes from knowing that you and he are on the road to hell, and there appears no way for you to make a U turn.

FL

Even when I was a Christian I did not believe in the doctrine of hell. I couldn't, it was just too horrendous of a concept for me to believe a loving God could purposely create such a wicked form of punishment for the "crime" of unbelief. No person could ever be that wicked to warrant such a horrendous form of eternal punishment. The only idea I could tolerate was that of separation by choice.
-

Butterfly wrote:The only idea I could tolerate was that of separation by choice.

Precisely what hell is.

@butterfly
so what do you call the way you portray the bible then? wouldn't it be you being wrong and reading into it's words with your own way of thinking? see what i just did there?

Butterfly wrote:Even when I was a Christian I did not believe in the doctrine of hell.

You were a nominal Christian, just as most people are. I'm sure you believe you were a God-respecting Christian and I know you use this belief to give yourself credibility now that you have revealed your true nature. You will convince non-believers and you will convince nominal Christians of your spiritual ''growth'' but you can't fool Christians who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

Butterfly wrote:ow I'm curious, how do you interpret the words of Jesus that tell his followers to love their enemies, turn the other cheek, and to give someone who asks for your coat your cloak also? Doesn't get much more "dripping with honey" than that.

I interpret the Bible literally. For the atheist that I was, the niceness of New Agers was just as annoying as the niceness of Christians. I'm sure you are a very nice person but you are still on your way to hell.

Butterfly wrote:Tell me, which lie did Eve believe? That the tree was good for food? That it was pleasant to the eyes? That it was a tree to be desired to make one wise? Or that their eyes would be opened, and they would be as gods, knowing good and evil? According to the Bible all those things were true...Adam and Eve's sin was disobedience.

The lie she believed was: You will be like God. (Gen 3:4-5)

FL

Most people don't believe in their interpretation of the doctrine of "hell" and those that do, don't think they are going there !
LOL !

Now I'm curious, how do you interpret the words of Jesus that tell his followers to love their enemies, turn the other cheek, and to give someone who asks for your coat your cloak also? Doesn't get much more "dripping with honey" than that.

Jesus understood ( of course) what breaks the chain of hate, violence and fall of Man and that is Love.
Hate begets hate, violence begets violence and treating others like crap begets them treating you/others like crap.
He also understood WHO He was talking to, a conquered people on the verge of rebellion and He was trying to make them see that their path of hate and violence would only get them destroyed.
I don't think it was a "hippie" "dripping with honey" thing but a very correct understanding of human nature and how to break the cycle of perpetual violence.
That is why, for a Christian, the notion of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a STARTING point and not the end.

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Butterfly wrote:Even when I was a Christian I did not believe in the doctrine of hell.

You were a nominal Christian, just as most people are. I'm sure you believe you were a God-respecting Christian and I know you use this belief to give yourself credibility now that you have revealed your true nature. You will convince non-believers and you will convince nominal Christians of your spiritual ''growth'' but you can't fool Christians who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

It's funny, when I was a Christian I felt the same way, but now nothing has changed...I still feel an inner guide and deep intuitive knowing just like I did when I was a Christian. Also, I can look back to the years prior to my conversion to Christianity and see that I had the same intuitive sense at a less developed stage. One of the advantages I have at this point in my life coming from non-Christian (because I hadn't heard the Gospel), to Christian, to non-Christian (because I reject the Biblegod) is that I can look at how my inner-self has changed. My conclusion is it hasn't...I'm still the kind, caring, loving person I always was.

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Butterfly wrote:ow I'm curious, how do you interpret the words of Jesus that tell his followers to love their enemies, turn the other cheek, and to give someone who asks for your coat your cloak also? Doesn't get much more "dripping with honey" than that.

I interpret the Bible literally. For the atheist that I was, the niceness of New Agers was just as annoying as the niceness of Christians. I'm sure you are a very nice person but you are still on your way to hell.

Don't you see how that statement reveals the nature of the Biblegod? How can a god who's called "love" purposely create a place of everlasting torment just because someone doesn't believe in him? It can be likened to a parent who sends their child to prison to be tortured for life, just because the child doesn't believe in them.

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Butterfly wrote:Tell me, which lie did Eve believe? That the tree was good for food? That it was pleasant to the eyes? That it was a tree to be desired to make one wise? Or that their eyes would be opened, and they would be as gods, knowing good and evil? According to the Bible all those things were true...Adam and Eve's sin was disobedience.

The lie she believed was: You will be like God. (Gen 3:4-5)

FL

The Bible says they would become like gods knowing good from evil. Which they did! That is why they were kicked out of the Garden.
-

Zionist wrote:@butterfly
so what do you call the way you portray the bible then? wouldn't it be you being wrong and reading into it's words with your own way of thinking? see what i just did there?

I portray the Bible truthfully. Throughout my Christian years the only way I knew how to deal with the "bad" parts of the Bible was to try and justify them, or push them aside and not look at them. When I actually started looking at what the Bible really said about its god,I didn't like what I saw... It went against my internal sense of right and wrong, good and evil...and that my friend was the road that lead me out of Christianity.
-

Butterfly wrote: Don't you see how that statement reveals the nature of the Biblegod? How can a god who's called "love" purposely create a place of everlasting torment just because someone doesn't believe in him? It can be likened to a parent who sends their child to prison to be tortured for life, just because the child doesn't believe in them.

The "Biblegod's" nature is revealed through Christ's sacrifice for us. It's a good thing he came down and was brought to our level. He experienced fear, pain, and humiliation so that we could be with him. He doesn't make us be with Him, he offers us a way to get to Him freely- not by works.
It looks like a "choose me, or else" to you simply because you choose to look at it that way. Your glass is half empty.

"We are the recipients of a love letter written in blood on a wooden cross that was erected in Judea some 2,000 years ago."
- Chuck Missler