While I have explained why I started to believe, I feel like I should expand upon it by explaining where I've been emotionally and philosophically in recent months, which has played a role in my enthusiasm for these things and may have spurred my shift in attitude in the first place. If anyone is interested I can post that.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on how you reconcile some of the logical and moral inconsistencies. Things like evolution, the big bang, free will, the nature of god, etc.

I don't claim to understand the nature of god at all, but I don't feel that evolution or the big bang conflict with the idea of a creator god. I believe in free will.

I have been searching for awhile now, too. [Though admittedly, for different reasons than you.] The biggest hurdles for me, if I was to convert, wouldn't necessarily be the "evidence" (I could see myself believing something about the world without evidence), but the general morality and realism of the Bible. For example, what do you think of hell? Who goes there, and for what? What happens there?

I really don't know if I even believe in hell. Even within Christianity, which I should clarify that I don't necessarily consider myself a part of right now, the notion of hell is very diverse. I do think, if there is a God, that it isn't a good idea to assign human conceptions of morality to Him or it.
 

Personally, I don't think the "afterlife", as a concept, really works well with a logically and morally just God, depending on how you answer the above questions. And if it did work well, I couldn't help but feel most of it was simply the "interpretation of the reader" and not actual canon-based, which is something you apparently loathe about Protestantism. [Also, the fact that heaven didn't really exist as a concept until the Greek and Roman influence took hold of the religion doesn't really give it any credence.)

Not sure how I feel about the notion of heaven or not. As an atheist I found the idea of oblivion preferable to an eternal existence. I don't know if I can honestly say that I really care all that much. My consciousness dies with me? Okay cool whatever. I get to spend eternity in a comfortable place of bliss? Sounds alright I guess. Heaven being a oneness with god, some nirvana type shit? Neato, wouldn't mind that too much.

What about free will? Does it exist?

I believe it does. Calvinism is fucking gay.

If not, then how are we truly in control of our faith? I'd really like to believe, myself, but I just don't see a way that I could possibly reconcile a few of my current philosophies (which I consider to be correct) with that of the Christian faith. But my worldview isn't that different from that of your generic Christian (for example, I believe in objective morality, I don't think free will exists, I'm against drugs, I think people are born "sinful" i.e., shitty or evil, etc.)

You do you, fam. Just because you share ideas with Christians doesn't mean you should or shouldn't get closer to Christianity. Also, don't make the mistake of associating atheistic objective morality with christian objective morality. As an atheist, if you believe in objective morality, you are either a utilitarian of some form, or you have a personal notion of right and wrong on the basis of "i dunno lol its just how i feel". Christian morality is dictated by God because He's God. These ideas might have the same result ie you believing in objective morality, but they are coming from very different places. Christian determinism is also very different from determinism based on one's understanding of the laws of physics. Just because they have the same result does not necessarily mean they are compatible.

Is this good or bad?

for who?

rad

would be fucking hilarious if Russia ends up cucking the US and wins over Kurdish support.

Quote from: Cyrus on November 30, 2015, 01:20:20 PM

Quote from: Mr. Psychologist on November 30, 2015, 10:50:06 AM

Quote from: Cyrus on November 29, 2015, 07:00:41 PM

I consider protestantism a shit meme and I don't see myself stopping my criticisms of it.

I'm kinda curious as to why you think this, it's never struck me as all that bad as compared to catholicism.

Sola Scriptura (which ironically has no scriptural basis), and an excessive focus on individualism that leads to schismatic tendencies.

Sola Scriptura is one thing, but without an adaptable semi-central authority you wind up with a million interpretations of a two thousand year old text. And instead of debating and working with other theologians to work out how best to interpret the scripture, you have people treating a millenia-old book with seemingly contradictory messages as infallible, with every single one convinced his interpretation is totally right. It's a similar problem to the treatment of the Quran in Islam, only compounded by the fact that the Bible, unlike the Quran, has been through a dozen translations in dead languages before it reaches the modern reader, and even then varies somewhat depending on what version you get in your language. There isn't even a universally recognized canon in protestantism, so some branches omit books and include some that other branches omit, and you get shit like the Mormons writing new fucking books. Without apolistic succession and respect for thousands of years of Christian history and tradition, focusing on scripture alone will get you into a fucking mess.

It's also developed ridiculous levels of individualism that lead to new schisms literally every day. First ol' Marty Luther broke off from Rome with the backing of power-hungry European kings, then Henry VIII decided that getting a divorce was worth breaking off from the Church. So you have this historical precedent for taking your ball and going home when someone disagrees. While today you have Oriental and Eastern Orthodox finally wrapping up a millenia-old issue on the nature of christ and working to come back into communion, and people constantly looking for ways to bridge the deep divide between Roman Catholic and Orthodox christianity, new Protestant denominations pop up left and right. It's absurd. Instead of working to reestablish communion amongst themselves, Protestant leaders bail on their current church and take their followers with them at the first sign of disagreement because "lol i read the bible this way and its infallible so i must be right". There's no collaboration or cooperation at all. That's how you wind up with the same holy book spawning "God hates fags", "The bible says no h8 so pls allow transgender lesbian clergy", along with inane cults like Mormonism. This is not a problem for Catholicism or Orthodoxy. And today you see the schismaticism reaching it's logical conclusion, the "I love Jesus but hate religion" types who never set foot in a church and decide for themselves that the Bible is somehow only subject to their personal understanding. This attitude completely destroys Christ's Church and makes communion impossible.

TL;DR Martin Luther is a fag

Hmm, all fair enough criticisms really.

The only thing I'd question there is the whole bit about christ's church, he never made a church it was his followers that did. His whole deal was reaching out to the downtrodden and condemning those who sat up high on the altars to look down on the non-clergy (I forget the opposite of pharisee), unless of course as you've pointed out the thousands of different versions of the bible tend to get a bit prone to personal tweaking and the one I read as a kid skipped the part where he laid out the plans for a pope.

Papacy is essentially a Roman attempt to take Christianity by the reigns, so you really won't find it backed up by scripture unless you jump through a lot of hoops and REALLY overemphasize Peter's importance.

He did, however, establish a Church in the NT.
 "You are Rock and on this rock I will build my Church." (Matthew 16: 18) -Jesus is building his church, on the rock that is the apostles
"Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven."(Matthew 16:19; 18:18)
"Receive the Holy Spirit, whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven, whose sins you retain, they are retained."(John 20:23)
"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," (Matthew 28:19)
"if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth." (1 Timothy 3:15)

I guess the reason I prefer(*?) CoE/Protestant branches over catholicism is it seems a bit more focussed on the teachings and community rather than a lot of the traditionalist things that go with Catholicism.

The problem is that without tradition, you can make a mess of the teachings.

This is obviously only what I've seen in the UK, but your typical protestant church isn't adorned with gilded furniture and expensive as all hell architecture. There isn't money pouring out of every part of the church, with the money that would be spent on that sort of excess going into community projects instead.

While I agree wholeheartedly with religious institutions being active in the community and helping those in need, I think it's silly for an organized religion to overemphasize modesty when it comes to places devoted to their god. If you can build a Church, God's house on earth, why wouldn't you make it as ornate and grand as possible? He's God, he's far above modesty.

Catholicism always seemed a lot more removed from this, with the division of clergy and congregation a lot more defined.

Well yeah, you don't want just any idiot representing the church. Clergy should be well-trained, although they are just people and should be treated as such. I don't know how catholicism is with laypeople but in orthodoxy members of the congregation carry some weight. It is crucial, though, that the people running the Church know what they're talking about and the history of what they're talking about. Some guy off the street just won't do.

You have abbeys and convents where the pious remove themselves from the world to pray all day,

A good thing, for them. The world is corrupt and dirty, why would you want to be close to it?

services in a language next to nobody speaks anymore and the ritualistic stuff that goes on with incense/Eucharist etc.

Tradition, which is important not only as it ties into the theology, but also as a way to fortify community and identity within the church.

None of that really appeals to me, it always struck me as the people being more important in the faith than the traditions.

*?
Prefer isn't really the right word, since that would imply picking one over the other but I'd say I find it more agreeable for the reasons above.

different strokes

Quote from: Cyrus on November 29, 2015, 07:00:41 PM

I consider protestantism a shit meme and I don't see myself stopping my criticisms of it.

I'm kinda curious as to why you think this, it's never struck me as all that bad as compared to catholicism.

Sola Scriptura (which ironically has no scriptural basis), and an excessive focus on individualism that leads to schismatic tendencies.

Sola Scriptura is one thing, but without an adaptable semi-central authority you wind up with a million interpretations of a two thousand year old text. And instead of debating and working with other theologians to work out how best to interpret the scripture, you have people treating a millenia-old book with seemingly contradictory messages as infallible, with every single one convinced his interpretation is totally right. It's a similar problem to the treatment of the Quran in Islam, only compounded by the fact that the Bible, unlike the Quran, has been through a dozen translations in dead languages before it reaches the modern reader, and even then varies somewhat depending on what version you get in your language. There isn't even a universally recognized canon in protestantism, so some branches omit books and include some that other branches omit, and you get shit like the Mormons writing new fucking books. Without apolistic succession and respect for thousands of years of Christian history and tradition, focusing on scripture alone will get you into a fucking mess.

It's also developed ridiculous levels of individualism that lead to new schisms literally every day. First ol' Marty Luther broke off from Rome with the backing of power-hungry European kings, then Henry VIII decided that getting a divorce was worth breaking off from the Church. So you have this historical precedent for taking your ball and going home when someone disagrees. While today you have Oriental and Eastern Orthodox finally wrapping up a millenia-old issue on the nature of christ and working to come back into communion, and people constantly looking for ways to bridge the deep divide between Roman Catholic and Orthodox christianity, new Protestant denominations pop up left and right. It's absurd. Instead of working to reestablish communion amongst themselves, Protestant leaders bail on their current church and take their followers with them at the first sign of disagreement because "lol i read the bible this way and its infallible so i must be right". There's no collaboration or cooperation at all. That's how you wind up with the same holy book spawning "God hates fags", "The bible says no h8 so pls allow transgender lesbian clergy", along with inane cults like Mormonism. This is not a problem for Catholicism or Orthodoxy. And today you see the schismaticism reaching it's logical conclusion, the "I love Jesus but hate religion" types who never set foot in a church and decide for themselves that the Bible is somehow only subject to their personal understanding. This attitude completely destroys Christ's Church and makes communion impossible.

TL;DR Martin Luther is a fag

>utilizing literally the very same skull model used in Skyrim, without even an attempt to hide the recycling

10/10 GOTY TRULY A MASTERPIECE

FALLOUT 4 SETS THE STANDARD FOR MODERN GAMING

Quote from: Verbatim on November 29, 2015, 11:43:12 PM

How can you respect a decision like that? It might have just been gas, and he's calling it "god" for some reason.

i mean, whatever

I don't consider small-scale things like this very important. It's pretty much harmless, and religion is dying, so I could care less if a spattering of people convert back to theism here and there. So I guess I don't really "Respect" the decision as much as I do "Tolerate" it, I'm just trying to be polite.

Theism is hardly dying, per se. Islam is growing fast and will likely catch up to, and possibly outnumber, Christianity within our lifetimes. Hinduism and Judaism are growing. Atheists and agnostics are actually going to shrink, relative to other groups- largely because of their presence in wealthy countries, tendency toward smaller or no families, and lack of issues with birth control. Kinda funny how the groups most accepting of natural selection are the ones losing Darwin's great game. Christianity is declining within most Western countries, yes, which is fine by me. It separates cultural Christians from serious believers. Christianity is projected to grow in Africa and the developing world, however. The only ones dying are tribal religions and, unfortunately, Zoroastrianism. Zoroastrianism shrinking makes me pretty sad, it's a really cool religion with enormous historical significance. When that faith dies out, humanity will really have lost something special. It has a chance to make a comeback if the Parsis would change their ridiculous stance on accepting outsiders, but I don't see that happening until it's too late.

Religion is declining as a dominant sociopolitical force in the west, something I'm fairly happy with.

Wow, and I thought I could not get any dumber.

me either

Why?

Did your mother finally beat you with the Bible so much you gave in?

Getting away from my religious family is probably a factor in me opening my mind, honestly.

Why?

Because I feel it in my heart. I feel something out there around me, something big. I can't exactly articluate it how I want to. I just believe.

This isn't too far off from how I came to recognize that I was an atheist in the first place- I just stopped believing in god one day, and tried to rationalize it later by co-opting arguments made by other people. I had all these reasons later on, but on day one I only had my gut.

I don't really know if that's a good or bad thing.

http://iranfrontpage.com/headlines/id/5687/

The North Korean leader has threatened that Turkey will be nuked by Pyongyang if Ankara takes action against Russia, Ad-Diyar – an Arabic language daily newspaper in Lebanon – quoted informed sources as saying.
Kim Jong-un has warned that if Turkey confronts Russia or lends support to ISIS in Syria and Iraq, it will come under nuclear attacks by North Korea, the Lebanese daily added. The North Korean leader has also promised to wipe Turkey off the map if Ankara takes part in the Syrian war and cooperates with the US and helps ISIS.
That North Korea has talked about regional conflicts such as Iraq and Syria which are battling a war [against ISIS], can be viewed as Pyongyang’s support for Russia in the fight against terrorism, sources say.

There doing meh with the Elder Scrolls story (Unlike Fallout)

only on the condition that they bring back Kirkbride

Nah. Geopolitics right now are far more complex than they were during the cold war.