Even better news : You can have all that and more, without the religion.

I certainly wouldn't deny that you are honestly reporting what you experienced, at least what it all felt like.

But there is no reason for either you or I to take that as proof that you accurately interpreted the ultimate origin and 'meaning' of that experience.

My first reaction to accounts like this is that if there really was a loving, all-knowing, omnipotent being watching over us, the bad things that lead you to such a low point should not have happened in the first place.

I can personally testify that I have had low points in my life, and have emerged with a solid feeling of realistic confidence in myself, while recognizing my failings, but able to face everyday life and hope for the future in a self-aware and un-stressed way, enjoying what high-points come my way.

All on the basis of a life-long and total rejection of any religious or other 'woo' style philosophy.

So if you feel your faith is the only way to resolve your own personal issues, I won't argue with you, but just would like you to be able to acknowledge that it is not the only way to cope with the problems we encounter in life.

Heavy drinking and no belief in god = life sucked. No big surprises there, heavy drinking has a way of messing up your life.

Less/no drinking and believing in god = better life. 

Perhaps you should try less/no drinking and believing in reality. You might find that life can indeed get even better. 

I think it is odd that you attribute the improvements in your life to your religion when there is a ton of evidence that heavy drinking can fuck up your life regardless of your religious beliefs while you are drinking. 

I have to hand it to you though, you are a survivor- surviving being raised catholic, the navy, alcoholism, and being married, then saying to the god you believe set it all up "thank you sir, may I have another", you are one tough guy. I would have told him to shove it.

Anyway, welcome to the forum. Stick around for awhile and don't mind the teeth, we don't bite.......too hard.  

  " I know I wont be able make my points against Atheism on this board with the Theistic knowledge I have. (paraphrase) "

  OMG  This says to me you have not read any of the threads on this forum. I d seriously start with the introductions area. Others have introduced themselves as you have. Please read some of that before you think to continue.

Hi Keith, welcome!

If at any time you feel like we're coming on a little too strong, you can always post messages in the Kill 'Em With Kindness forum, where we have special rules to keep the conversation more polite (but we will still ask lots of tough questions, though, just with a softer voice ).

Sorry to hear about your tough life experiences. I don't deny the experiences you had, only your interpretation of them. I'm glad you found some help from the people around you, and perhaps with some comforting ideas from Christianity.

But how do you really know that it was Christianity specifically that helped you? What I mean is that, isn't it possible that if you had been raised Jewish and had Jewish friends and family, that you probably would have found the same kinds of help and comfort from those around you? Are you absolutely certain that only Christianity could have helped you out? Isn't it possible that some other religion could have done the same thing?

And, if you really are absolutely certain that only Christianity could have helped you, then doesn't it seem strange to you that people from other religions, and indeed people who have no religion at all, are able to deal with their life problems in their own ways, without Christianity? How is that possible?

It seems to me that if only Christianity can help people with serious life problems like you were experiencing, then it would make sense that only Christians could recover from equally serious (and sometimes far far more serious) life problems. I know it might be hard to imagine this, since you are probably surrounded by mostly Christians, and so you probably don't hear a lot of stories from non-Christians about how they overcame their life problems (either with faith, or without it). But if you just imagine, for a second, someone living in China (probably Buddhist) or India (probably Hindu) or Sweden (probably atheist) experiencing similar problems and overcoming them. It seems reasonable that Christianity can't be the only way to handle life's many challenges, right?

The problem with testimonials like this is that, while they may be emotionally powerful, they're entirely fallacious.  There's a laundry-list of objections to this sort of "my personal story." 

How do we know you actually experienced the events you describe?  I don't mean to be rude, but we must consider whether it is more probable that a man is lying (or simply mistaken), or that nature has been superseded by an entity outside of space, time and limitations (thus, completely alien to everything we know). 

How do we know, how do you know for that matter, that your experiences reflect objective reality?  Assuming you're telling the truth about your experiences and are not mistaken, what reason do you have for extrapolating a description of fundamental reality from them?  In other words, what was the process of inductive reasoning that lead you from your experiences to God, and how can you be sure your reasoning was valid? 

How can you be sure that your experiences reveal the existence and desires of a specific deity? Bear in mind that to answer that, you're going to need to come up with a definition of God, and if you want us to take it seriously it's going to have to be self-consistent and comprehensible.  You need to resolve the questions of free will vs omniscience vs omnipotence; you need to address whether God exists within the framework of reality or "outside" it (and, if outside, what that even means, divorced from all human experience); whether God can be understood by humans (careful not to make knowledge claims about the unknowable!); etc.

Hi Bob,

To the extent of my past life, there was more than just the addiction to alcohol. I'm not going into a confessional here but the lifestyle I was in was much worse. No matter how hard I tried to get out of it on my own, I simply couldn't. No amount of my willpower could. It's not that I'm weak willed either. Do you know how much will it takes to endure for year after year the pain I was in? I'd argue that I'm stronger willed than most. So I'm not sure how I see I'm still living in a destrcutive way. In my ability to perceive and pursue 'real' truth? Good sir, I believe that we were created by a loving God who is there for those who seek and want Him. You think we all came from a speck of dirt that exploded. And my thoughts are destructive?

A common saying I see by Atheists is "Know God, no Peace/No God, Know Peace" but that account doesn't hold up to history. Were Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and countless others peace loving Atheists? There are tens of millions of their dead countrymen who would have gladly accepted what I have over what they given by these dregs.

Keith wrote:

Were Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and countless others peace loving Atheists?"

Did they kill in the name of their atheism the way others have killed in the name of God?

Hitler hated everybody. He was a New Ager and mystic. Muslim Terrorists don't worship Jesus. The Spanish Inquisition was composed of Catholics, not Christians (a discussion I will gladly have with you in a phone call or in person as it takes more detail to cover than I care to type). I certainly don't hate those who are in a "wrong doctrine" but will correct them quickly if/when I see it. Since they have (or claim to have) the Word, they are held to a higher standard than someone such as yourself who claims no Word even exists. And I certainly don't hate you or any Atheist. There is nothing more unappealing to an Atheist than to see someone claiming the Love of God just to turn around and see them acting in a hateful or uncaring way. Not to say that sin shouldn't be exposed but the Bible teaches that the Word should be spread with gentleness and respect (which hopefully I am doing). When you read about how Jesus dealt with the average, everyday Jew, it was with love and caring. But when he dealt with the Jewish leaders (the Pharisees and Scribes), His tone was totally different because they, being in a position of authority, abused it and put their own traditions above the law of God.

Hey Keith,

I find it interesting that you would mention the rapture. Did you know that the rapture is not taught in the bible? It was invented by John Nelson Darby. Let me ask you this...how many times does Jesus come? His birth (first coming). The rapture (second coming). Rides on the white horse (third coming??). A third coming is never taught. Do you also realize that if you are raptured you are coming back to this very same earth to reign with Christ for 1000 years? This world will be mixed with heavenly and fleshly people. My point is that you are being taught wrong doctrine by those you trust. Those type of mixed doctrines began to open my eyes.

You my friend are brain washed. You do not see if because you are “in” it. Everyone goes through bad periods of “finding who they are”. It’s part of life. Why stop your journey with some magical daddy? You are going to stunt your growth.

Let me ask you this...do you struggle with lust? If you have god living inside of you “the holy spirit” then why do you struggle with something like lust daily? When i was christian i saw what was really going on behind all the fake smiles at church. It is not what it appears.

Hello Keith, welcome to the forum.

I don't doubt for a moment that what you perceive as religion has helped you through your though times.  I have had similar tough times and have gotten through them on my own, but some people are more independent than others.  The fact that you believe an irrationality very strongly doesn't make it any more appealing.  The logical arguments against your position are many, and your tangible support is non existent.  

Relating to your above paragraph, I'm personally not annoyed that you believe in the 'Word', I have the same feelings as you do regarding someone wasting their life away for Scientology, or some other New Age cult.  I'm saddened and I feel the need to point out the irrationality, in the hopes that said person develops some critical thinking.

Some criticism to your previous comments.  The notion of yourself being strong willed is laughable in light of the story you have narrated, yourself wallowing in self destructive pity is by no means a show of character strength.  Don't get me wrong I don't think I'm any better than you, I have many failings.  I just don't want you to claim strength in weakness, because ultimately, you are doing just that trusting an irrationality. 

Also the claim that the inquisition was carried out by Catholics and not Christians is such a narrow minded excuse of the bible derived atrocities as to be amusing.  What about the Crusades?  All Christians agreed to those.  The minor doctrinal differences between biblical interpretation (and I include Judaism and Islam), are inconsequential to the underlining irrationality that is religion.  The fact that more atrocities were carried out by one faction versus another is just a matter of circumstances and politics. 

I never said the word Rapture wasn’t used. I said the Rapture doctrine was not taught. You should do more research. Although the bible is full of mixed up doctrines, so good luck.

Of course you do. You are no different then anyone else. You use your “ticket to heaven” as a reason to sin. When you are jerking your slong do you realize you are doing it with the Holy Ghost sitting there watching you? lol. When you are lusting after some chicks nicely shaped ass or titties, remember Jesus said “If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.”

Paul the apostle healed people as he passed by, what are you coming here to prove? That you couldn’t handle your booze. Can’t handle your lust. But it’s not “as bad” as before. Whoopty fucking doo. My life is much better without god. I would never go back to that powerless faith.

You know, you only have to get old to give up all that stuff.  If you are a guy, eventually impotence takes its toll.  If a woman, menopause will slow you down some.  Diabetic - you have to cut way back on the booze and yummy desserts.  Then arthritis sets in and you slow down physically.  So if you manage to live long enough, you get more moderate in your choice of entertainment - no god/s/dess required.

I don't know dude.  Once upon a time I drank too much and screwed around too much.  And I gave it up when life changed and it wasn't fun any more.  I know other people who could not just change their drinking habits without assistance from religion.  Some never seem to manage to turn it off, religion or no.  If you were capable of change with the illusion of religion, you are capable of changing without.  Because it was you all along - you are the one who made the change. 

Please stop using logical fallacies. Thank you.

Keith,

Why would a loving God create some people with a weakness for alcohol and others without that problem? I once believed it was intrinsically harmful and likely to lead to dire problems like you describe.

But after reading studies based on actual research and investigation, not dogma or doctrine, I tried it, found that small amounts of certain alcoholic drinks added a pleasant extra to various other drinks, and some were pleasant if sipped carefully.

I have found no tendency to go on any 'binges', and I do not like the taste of pure alcohol at all.

So I am able to enjoy it with no need to fight with myself to prevent over-indulgence. I have marginally more problem with some fancy ice-cream flavours...

I have never been tempted to find comfort in a 'sky-daddy'.

Why did God choose to afflict you and test you, by inflicting you with a weak will and/or an inability to resist the appeal of those things that obsessed you, and apparently still draw you?

Whereas I am allowed to carry on (mostly) quite comfortably, able to regulate my behavior pretty successfully, even while 'blaspheming' and insulting the very concept of God quite regularly, and so on? Why does he chose to make you suffer to drive you into his flock? Is it really that he likes you and wants you to go through this anguish and testing to qualify to be come to live with him in Heaven? Sounds like a bit of a sadist to me, perhaps more like a pedophile.

I could never consider a being as 'good' who behaved like that, who arbitrarily chose to torture and 'test' some of the playthings he allegedly 'created', while letting others who were able, like me, to resist those temptations without his help, to live more happily in freedom, pursuing truth, ie real knowledge and understanding of all aspects of reality. Am I destined to Hell to make up for being able to life a moral life, ie with consideration for others, and not get drawn into a cycle of self-destructive behaviour, without his help, IOW by having sufficient will to be able to control my behavior? Not 'perfectly', by any means, and there are certainly things I do which Christianity tends to disapprove of, despite them having no particular negative effects on me or anyone I interact with, and indeed may be positive for both my physical and mental health.

Do you not see the contradictions and inconsistency in this? Blind natural evolution makes such variation among people's nature and constitution quite understandable, it is far harder to fit such whims of fortune into the context of a 'loving' creator.

I have no desire to be tortured in some eternal afterlife by being required to share my existence with such a demanding and hypocritical being, who afflicted so many people with such tests, and with horrible diseases and disabilities. I would far rather have my life end in a sleep from which I never wake, and have come to terms with that.

I have far higher standards than the God of the Bible, and a far more solid base for my moral code, than the arbitrary rules that people imagined their particular imagined deity required them to follow. My morality is based on consideration for others, to not inflict unnecessary harm and suffering on them, unlike your God. Show people by example, and suggest positive rather than punitive therapy for those caught by the whims of chance and inheritance with life problems.

I am genuinely sad and sorry for the bad fortune of inheritance and circumstance that you seem to have been 'blessed' with.

I see religions, especially those like Christianity, faced with at least two problems (at least).

After decidng there must be  a God-creator being to 'explain' where everything came from, they assume this being also defines morality, what is 'ggod' and 'evil'.

Then the first problem is to explain why Bad things happen to Good people. Hence the idea of Original Sin.

The second is to explain why 'Bad people', and people who don't worship this God, or even insult (blaspheme') him, can often seem to have a generally happy life, even better than what many believers go thru. Hence we get Hell where it will catch up with them, and/or Heaven, where the 'Good' people will be compensated for the crap thrown at them by mortal life.

Now that we realize that the God-creator story doesn't really explain anything, and we now have ideas which better fit what we observe, we can throw the whole house of cards out.

But so much culture and practice has been built up around the God idea, they are unable to appreciate the fundamental flaws in it. So we get the endless nonsense of Theology, trying to bend logic and invent new 'arguments' to try and explain away all the inconsistencies and contradictions.

Darwin's 'Dangerous Idea', as Daniel Dennett described it, was the biggest 'crack in the wall', providing an alternative and more comprehensive natural mechanism for why life in general is as we see it.

We are the ones with open minds and you are the one who is incapable of existing without a crutch, whose mind is clouded.

If you have anything to say that includes proof that is not contrived, circular, based on fallacies of complexity or naked assertions please serve it up. 

That's right, actual proof. Don't bother coming back with another grab bag of personal opinions and false humility. 

Is that I am prepared to admit there are things unknown, including the process of abiogenesis, which does not derive from the silicate of rocks as you suggest, nor from the existing biomass of dirt life has created, but from nitrogen and carbon blown out of exploding stars. While there is plenty to learn, we can say with certainty that life is formed of neutrons, protons and electrons arranged as molecules and compounds to form a biochemical process that can be observed. 

Now, you on the other hand, claim to know with certainty that a supernatural god exists outside this space time, who made everything by magic. So give me some absolute proof of absolute god or admit that you, too, have unanswered questions. 

Keith, most of us here do not have absolute faith in the hypotheses and theories that constitute scientific data. But we do believe the process of testable explanation is the best method by which we can ascertain what can most closely be proven true. 

It's what each of us is prepared to accept as evidence that sets us apart. If I am not certain then faith does not cut it. I await further data. What about you??

Ok, fair enough. We are held to the standards we attest to. I approach this not from as scientific standpoint as you do. Your standard is scientific, therefore I expect a scientific explanation for the origin of time, space, matter and ultimately life. So a scientist was able to create an amino acid in a lab environment. Big deal. It wasn't life. There are over 200 amino acids and only 20 of those are found in life. The one created was not one found in life. It contained 50/50 "left hand/right hand" acids versus straight "right hand" that is only found in life. So he in essence created death, not life.   Furthermore, it was created in the absence of oxygen. It could not and cannot be created in an environment containing oxygen. Therefore, if no oxygen could be present in your view on life creation, how could it survive without an atmosphere (ozone) to protect it from the sun? Any life form would have been fried instantly.

My faith based "theory" explains it for me. I have a faith already. I don't need yours that contains nothing, originated in nothing, and goes nowhere.

Again you are missing the point, the point is not that we have not created life yet, therefore you're right and we're wrong.  We're not even debating the the origins of life because we're speaking completely different languages when it comes to logic and the extent of research that goes into evidence.  What we need to debate is the fundamental epistemology, what you constitute as knowledge.  You claim to have a different standard other than scientific.  But what is a scientific standard? What is science?  To me, science is just an attempt to explain natural phenomena.  Carry that back a step, how do you interpret natural phenomena? I, myself interpret it purely empirically.  In my mind's eye I have formed a self narrative that is based on symbols and concepts I have interpreted using my sense since birth.  I hope we agree so far, if not please enlighten me.

Ok, so now, we agree that science is nothing more than an explanation for stuff that is happening around you.  For you to state that you have a different standard of approaching space-time, matter and ultimately life, you must first explain to me how you arrive at such a standard without using your sense.  Do you get this information via telepathy? or are you endowed with more sense than us atheists perhaps.  If you only have your five sense to rely on, than everything that you use to create your standard is of nature, and hence scientific.  

Now we're using the same language.  You just pile naked assertions on top of logical fallacies and sprinkle a generous amount of wishful thinking to arrive at your conclusions.  As for us, we tend to be more intellectually honest and admit that while we don't know everything, we realize that someone that CLAIMS to know everything is full of poop.  

So unless you can tell us how you arrive at those standards which are superior to science, I will say that you have nothing but bad science to offer. 

As I say, abiogenesis is mysterious and extremely complex and we do not fully understand it but it remains a biochemical process that will one day be explained.

Your position, as I suggested earlier, is an argument from complexity. You say there is something that's not understood and imply it can never be understood and go on to claim the only way it can be explained is by an inexplicable process that no one will ever understand. You can imagine how this sounds to me. I certainly do not argue there is no mystery in the universe because there certainly is but I do say that one mystery does not justify unshakable belief in another inexplicable mystery that is asserted to explain the first mystery some way that can never be described.  

If your faith position is based on a conclusion you feel is logical, first cause or apparent design, etc; when it comes to what can be known, I contend that there are three conditions for true knowledge. The first being that I have a belief in an object, the second being that the existence of this object is true, and the third condition being that I can justify the belief that such an object can be shown to exist. For me the third is the most important element of what could be called true knowledge, as compared with opinion or assertion.

Your final comment is rather passive aggressive and simply suggests honest questioning threatens your worldview and it's really quite unnecessary. Consider that the empirical method is what keeps planes in the sky, shaves cylinder heads and explains all that we can say we know about the nature and processes on this earth. To say empiricism contains nothing, originates in nothing and goes nowhere is to reject everything you know about your existence in this space time. 

In any case, you are obviously in awe of the universe and the world in general and so am I. Standing under the Milky Way and sensing the hundred billion strong colony of me, a barely comprehended association of prokaryotic cells at work, and behind them an arrangement of atoms who physical existence may be no more than vibration, I am part of the self awareness of the universe and this is a magnificent, warm and connecting experience. 

Still, Keith, you may be right. Given the dearth of matter in the universe we may one day discover after all, that nothing really is everything. 

The hardest part about being an Atheist is that we'll never get the opportunity to say "I TOLD YOU SO, SHOULD HAVE LISTENED TO ME". 

Ok, I'm going to try to address the posts between my last one and this one. I hope I don't miss a point because you all made some good ones that I would like to address.

With regards to faith: I don't think there's anyone who disagrees that some people are more understanding of complexities than others. I'm sure many if not all of you assume I'm just some dumb ol' Jesus freak who does not believe in science at all. Not true in the least. Science has made some of the most valuable contributions to the planet and I would never say that. I can and do believe the observed and tested evidence that I see. Next step, who on this board has the mind of Hawking and can computate the things he does with the speed and accuracy he does? I'm willing to bet that there are none. The thing with faith is that it completely levels the playing field. There are some things that science can never answer. God purposely puts these stumbling blocks in front of us. How good would that be of Him to allow some to understand but not others?

With regard to empirical science, I'm all for that. It's not what we see however, that we disagree about, it's how we fill in the gaps in the information we don't know. The Evolutionist/Big Banger starts out by totally elimintating the concept of a creator. When I see a system of systems working together with such order I cannot help but assume that there was a creator behind it. Here's an example: I go out to my car in the morning and drive to work. I see my car and its design and think "The guys at Ford did a good job making this". The evo/big banger cannot have a designer/creator behind it so he's left to assume that a tornado or other major event happened to a junk yard full of auto parts and, by chance, assembled the pieces and gave it the gas it needed to go all the while never able to explain how the junk yard came into being in the first place. To say that Science can't explain it now but one day it will is nothing more than a hope. You hope it does because the alternative for you is unthinkable. That there is a Creator and He has laws. The fear of changing your life, giving up on things you want to do that are contrary to His law, and fear of ridicule by peers keeps you in your present mind state (I've been there. I know what I'm talking about) . Do you see where I'm coming from now?

Welcome!

It looks like you experienced sudden helpful circumstances in your life that saved you from ending up badly. Congratulations.
But tell me, what led you to conviction that there was this Judeo-Christian god behind this all? What if it was Allah? You know how Islam feels about alcohol. 

Yes, you had a bit too many odd coincidences, I don't deny that. But did these coincidences speak to you specifically about Christian doctrines and dogmas? Why should you swallow whole Bible, if your experiences did not outline this particular ideology? What if you just happened to be around a charitable Christian group that needed another devotee? They are well-estabilished in this addiction recovery business, no wonder you ended up with them. 

Was it necessary for your recovery to believe in people risen from the dead, upcoming Apocalypse and talking and mythical animals described in Bible?

Ok so assume that it happened as you said with no atmosphere and in shaded pools or ocean for UV radiation not to be a factor. How hospitable of an environment would the ocean or a shaded pool be if there were no atmosphere? A step further, could you even have an ocean or pool without atmosphere?