- Joined
- Jan 29, 2013
- Messages
- 8,018
- Reaction score
- 57
- Points
- 48
I never mentioned God. I won’t spill any more ink, but that should say something to you.Me and my conscience? I no longer need to live in fear of God, uncertainty, of guilt, of the need to live up to the "righteous desire" of others, of interpreting the Bible "correctly", of accidently slipping into sin, etc.
It allows me freedom to live according to my ethics and love for my neighbor as I interpret it. This allows my "belief structure" the freedom of metamorphosis, of change and adaptation.
I am free to be wrong and I no longer need to worry about having to be right. I can live for the here and now, not for eternity. I can put aside the filling of the void in my life, trying to paper over that hole with a God of condemnation and personal/religious piety.
No doubt others will see it differently and even more so will condemn me but this freedom of grace is greater than the bondage that (in general) religious belief systems bring.
This is the paradox; accepting the void instead of trying to fill it with "god" or a religious faith is actually freeing unless we choose to live in the guilt causing said paralysis. Being uncertain means options and more opportunity for learning, for loving, for living. To say putting off the shackles of a religious faith is a paralysis is naivety at best and gaslighting at worst.
I never mentioned God. I won’t spill any more ink, but that should say something to you.
Gotcha.You said "belief structure" so I pointed out the origin of what I used to believe to how I see it now. God was and still IS a part of the spiritual essence of who I am, of what I believe. It's just not the "god" of Western Christianity, particularly Evangelicalism..![]()
Whatevs.Belief structure? Shouldn't someone who has "deconstructed" have a belief poststructure? And live in between the dots of the umlaut, and all that?
Gotcha.
It just seems like the sort of relativism that you’ve espoused, if you really believed in it, you would let other people practice what they believe as well, in a more laissez-faire manner. Again, no offense intended, but you seem to be an evangelist for your own version of religion, as if you feel the need to give to other people your version of religious and ethical ideals or dogma . I just don’t understand why you don’t let them figure it out on their own. Maybe they’re on their own journey, and what works for them is diametrically opposed to what works for you and you will be harming them by proselytizing. Just a thought.
I look at it like this: I deconstructed the belief silo and whatever reconstruction I begin to work on is more horizontal than vertical.
I read very little from these sources and none of them tell me how to read the Bible. The scriptures say what they say and seeing that all those listed in your meme largely agree on what is written therein should tell you something!
You will stand before God for what is plainly written and you will be without excuse!
You truly are the poster child regarding the fruits of the "Quick Prayer, Easy Believism, Cheap Grace" method of evangelism taught and promulgated by HAC/FBCH! I am truly saddened at what you have become and pray that God will open your eyes and grant you repentance and faith to believe.
Even the flamin' Arminys have more in common with those listed than the nonsense you are spouting off!
When I deconstruct my belief, whatever reconstruction I work on will be more effervescent than steatopygous.
Which is your choice.
Giving personal testimony is not evangelism. It isn't trying to create a (de)conversion or recruit to a system of (un)belief but rather gives evidence for those who are questioning a source of experience from one who has gone before them. Most of my good friends are Christians and I work hard to specifically make it a point not to pee on their faith. It gives them strength and hope and if it makes them better folks, I have no desire for them to change what makes them who they are.
How are you reading into my thoughts as proselytizing? Not criticizing, just curious because this is what I am NOT trying to do. I want to be as real as I can be, show folks who I am but not expect them to come to the same conclusions. Feel free to point out where you feel I am trying to convince others to convert to my side and maybe I can clarify my intent for you.
*Edit for one more thought:
Let's use baseball as an example. Being a Cubs fan, I'm hyped that Counsell is now the new manager of the Cubs. I can talk about the direction the team is going, about how I think this could make them a playoff team, about how this is the best move made in the MLB offseason. I may or may not be right in any/all of those things but my expression of those "beliefs" doesn't mean I'm trying to recruit you or anyone else into Cub fandom. This is how I view my deconstruction; it's not about recruiting one to lose their faith but rather the relaying of my personal opinions/experiences.
Unless you're arguing that living for the here and now involves the freedom to lie, steal, and kill, I would venture a guess that the freedom is all about with whom or what you want to have sex.It allows me freedom to live according to my ethics and love for my neighbor as I interpret it. This allows my "belief structure" the freedom of metamorphosis, of change and adaptation.
Rest assured that I do care about you my friend!Feelin' the love here! LOL!
I'm not worried because the Scriptures are NOT clear. Never have been. What they say may not necessarily be what was initially said and certainly not portrayed in the original context to whom it was originally written. Hence, we accept based on personal bias. ALL OF US do.![]()
LOL!Unless you're arguing that living for the here and now involves the freedom to lie, steal, and kill, I would venture a guess that the freedom is all about with whom or what you want to have sex.
Cubbies <blech>
Go Reds!
Advocating for your favorite sports team or flavor of ice cream aint exactly in the same moral category as the (non) existence of God and/or morality. Your argument consist of an atlas by virtue of the fact that you are making a moral claim of right and/or wrong, even if it is relativistic.