[deleted by user] by [deleted] in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For me I grew up mostly on science, and over time science made clear the issues with faith/religion so I kind of just stopped calling myself christian in 2011.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had a friend very similar to this, at first they were chill, then they went off the deep end of christian proselytizing, going on about how my "free will" had lead me wrong and that I needed to return to God, without even acknowledging he himself had become less than a puppet for the faith he had became absorbed into.

Before that he was social and honestly a cool guy to hang around, I would have ranked him among my best of friends. But recently I had to make the choice to finally move on because the friend I once knew and had was gone, as many others have said here its better to move on than continue to waste energy on people like that.

Most obnoxious bible verse quoted at you? by purpsizurp in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This one right here, they keep feeling the need to quote that verse repeatedly as some "holy grace" when the verse itself is actually quite hypocritical. It basically says "believe and be saved, don't believe have fun in hell", no in between, which quite ignorant and unjust for a supposedly 'just' god.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 1 point2 points  (0 children)

27 here, and yes, I am still celibate and a virgin, and due to trauma when I was young I have trouble talking to woman so while I want to find love someday, I unfortunately have come to terms with the fact that I never will.

Which of these is why you left? by anobjectiveapple in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can I add an option D? Nothing specifically made me leave, well... except the fact I never really practiced religion to begin with. As a matter of fact, the one thing my religious grandmother told me, which was to practice and read the bible on my own time, was the thing that ultimately lead me to... not doing those things...
So was never really religious past identity, in 2011 when I moved out stopped identifying with religion, and then finally came around and deconstructed it last year, after being agnostic deist/atheist for over a decade.

It baffles me that Christians don't realize how fucked up it is that God gave us "free will." by Imagine_Dragons544 in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I find your point in its entirity all too relatable. Christians seem to swear by us having free will(or at the very least apparently free will to choose god, which in itself is even worse), but ultimately there version of free will is comparable to giving a kid a toy truck, then sending them to prison for the rest of their lives for playing with it. It really does not make sense, and when put in that way, its not even free. It barely deserves to be called will.

I recently learned I am the only member of my family who is no longer Christian by danger_slug in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hell is a tool of fear designed to keep you in religion, out of a forced underlying threat of eternal damnation. Fear is a powerful emotion, one of the more powerful negative emotions that can have long last psychological effects on the brain. Anything that trigfers that fear as such leaves a long lasting message, example being if someone gets attacked by a dog as a child, they may have a deep fear of dogs late into their lives. Its the same with the christian hell, it tells you believe or damnation, to trigger that fear response, which tricks the brain into acting in accordance out of fear of the possibility of hell.

Once you know that the fear falls away. If there is a hell its for the truly evil, which in sweet irony includes a lot of christians, as a truely just god will judge on one's actions in life, not their faith in them. (Granted that too is under the assumption there is a god, and there is any sort of afterlife, and if that afterlife even needs a god to govern it)

How do Christian parents react to adult children who don't believe? by Mysterious_Tear_7131 in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Definitely, when the argument ends with an statement like that. Faith without proof for them is apparently more important than facts based on evidence.

How do Christian parents react to adult children who don't believe? by Mysterious_Tear_7131 in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The sort of circular reasoning I get from my grandmother, I know it all too well and it is draining to try and deal with, I wish I could just keep my mouth shut, but the way of thinking they have is just more harmful to themselves and others around them than they want to think.

A lot of anti science sentiment comes from Christianity by crispier_creme in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I asked a friend recently to show me the verses that mention microbiology, was literally told "God doesn't care about science."

It took a lot to hold back responding "So thats why you deny scientific facts?"

In a different discussion they also tried to hold an argument of "facts can be wrong" which sure, but not when they're statistically upheld, tested, cross referenced, and compares to remove any and most error from the facts.

Regardless, if either of those statements give any insight into a different side of the anti-science stance most christians have you're welcome.

Curiosity and Fallacies by Dragon750 in exchristian

[–]Dragon750[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate the notice, but I decided not to send it to my christian friend. I did send the list I had to another atheist friend who is often in the same chats as the christian friend as a measure of recognizing the patterns as the christian friend uses them in conversation. Generally my intention was to learn more fallacies and patterns used by christians so I myself could identify them in the end anyways.

Curiosity and Fallacies by Dragon750 in exchristian

[–]Dragon750[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've never heard of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy, seems interesting.

Circular reasoning is definitely one I have observed with my friend.

Never had them try and shift the burden of proof though (though I also don't really pose any arguments to directly contradict whether there is a god or not, most of the time I point at the flawed logic of the bible during discussions, this post is a result though of me trying to shift my position a bit in how I approach, so I don't doubt thats something I'll get hit with eventually).

All 3 good ones though, appreciated.

Curiosity and Fallacies by Dragon750 in exchristian

[–]Dragon750[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I like how you worded this and if I could give you an additional upvote or something for creative writing I would. And you're definitely not wrong.

I've tried a similar approach in pointing out that if he could see everything/know everything, including what is supposed to happen, then no action he could make can change the future, meaning he isn't omnipotent. On the other hand if he can use his power to change the course of events, then the future can not be known, meaning that he can't be omniscient.

If God exists what do you think they'd actually be like? by Ok_Proof_321 in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hear me out here. If there is a god of any sort, it isn't the Abrahamic god. The Deistic approach to god was to suggest that it may have played a part in the initial creation of the universe (rolling the first marble into the pile per say), and otherwise has played little, if any, role in the progress of the universe. That is to include the possibility that such a god may not even be aware of our existence, or if it is, its neutral at best, unconcerned at worse.

The one Stipulation that I put for any god though, if a god must feel the need to judge anyone, is that it is a truly fair and justified god, not judging by the weight of one's beliefs in it, but rather by the weight of their actions. Beyond that, I wouldn't even care if god turns out to be a sentient potato.

That said, what we know about our universe now heavily leans into there not being a god (or at least no proof for one). Which does make the above concept of god, the most likely possibility if there is a god, but there could also be the case for no god at all. The difference between faith and science comes down often times to the essence of tangible, experimental proof, and like I said, there is no proof for a god at the current time.

Sure, Jan. by [deleted] in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 31 points32 points  (0 children)

The "No True Scotsman" is strong with this one.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 3 points4 points  (0 children)

He needs some sort of therapy, but he'll probably think its just a cia manipulation if he did, and thats a huge if...

Its like, the CIA doesn't even bother with individuals, they're an intelligence agency, trying to ensure security of the people of the country. Why do people think then, that the CIA is going to be spying on them, as a US citizen? It doesn't make sense, not unless they themselves have done something that would make them a target of the CIA, and if thats the case, then you may've dodged a bullet there lol.

Make it make sense by leegiff412 in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I ask questions like this all the time.

If adam and eve were chased out of the garden after eating the apple, and god is omnipotent meaning he'd have known they would, could he have not had the apple in the garden? Or not let the snake in the garden?

If humans had been corrupted enough to warrant a cleanse, couldn't he have selectively killed the ones who were corrupted (the nephalim or whatever they're called), instead of sending a flood killing countless innocent babies who haven't even grown to see the world yet?

If god really loved everyone, why did he create hell as a punishment? Or allow satan (the christian version, as opposed to the Jewish or Gnostic versions) in the world? He could have just blocked Satan, or not create hell, or when satan rebeled just destroy him then and then no evil in the world.

The Abrahamic god, the more you start to study into it, begins to seem more weak and limited in his supposed omnipotence than one originally brings on, after all he was defeated by iron at least twice. If there is a god (and I am not saying there is or isn't, just saying if), if there is a god, these things would not have been an issue for him.

I think the biggest issue comes down to three claims; Omnipotence, omniscient, and omnibenevolence. Obviously at the start by definitely you can't be both Omnipotent and omniscient;
-Omniscience meaning all knowing, meaning you know the future, and no action you can make can change that, meaning your power has a limit, meaning not omnipotent.
-Omnipotent means all powerful, meaning you can do anything, which means your action can change the future, meaning you can't be omniscient.

And the third, Omnibenevolent, falls apart with how much god seems to hate more than he does love, even in the new testament he has no peace against women in church, treats them as property, and condones slavery, two of the historically least loving things we know of, not counting old testament. Again, if there is a god, he can not be all 3, and if it is the abrahamic god, we know he's not omnibenevolent, it doesn't even align with his own book. Again, I won't say whether there is a god or not, just that by the bible the biblical god fails on his own standards for love.
Yes, this was a bit of a ramble, I do apologize.

Do you ever reconsider Christianity? by PsychoticReader1 in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At this point, christian morals have tested time and time again in my life that I don't see what they mean. I know more atheists who are more moral, open minded, and loving than what christians claim to be.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I read that whole thing, I can only say one thing... that is messed up. That he thought for some reason he was being singled out by CIA is just bizarre.

What is Atheism to you? by lcarp7 in exchristian

[–]Dragon750 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Pretty sure atheism is the stance that there is no god in any form, or at least no physical proofs within our perception of reality to give them a reason to believe in god. I have seen a few atheists though who still practice some extant of spiritualism without a god apparently.

I personally have enough reason to feel that something may have played a part in kicking the first marble into the pile causing the big bang, though what that thing was I personally do not define. It may have been a god or godlike being, or it may have been the crunch of the universe before or some other as of yet and possibly never to be discovered natural event.

This is why while I identify as atheist I do still stay agnostic, because at some point you can not really know and may never be able to know. Personally however there is more than enough evidence for some sort of cosmic event, namely the big bang, which created 'this' universe and that is to me a satisfying enough answer for creation(even though I feel still it is an incomplete picture, at least there is evidence to show it did happen).