My pastor is a secret Atheist

Originally posted by googlefudge
I can fully accept that your belief in god was real, and now isn't.

This is what it means.

Originally posted by googlefudge
So how about...

'C. I believed god was real, Now I don't believe god is real, But I certainly used to believe god was real.' ?

That is what c. means, but it was just copy/paste & fast typing, that's all.

edit: actually, I meant "Jesus" rather than "God".

Originally posted by FMF
The question you have skirted round now for the third time is not about "the devil" but is about one of the world's most famous Christians, at least in recent times, and that is Mother Teresa. Here it is once more:...

...If, for the sake of argument, Mother Teresa did lose her faith in her final years [as has been suggested in an earlier post, although not everybody accepts it, so IF she did...], would you look at her and say she was never a Christian her whole life long?

BUMP for KellyJay

Originally posted by googlefudge
That is a no true Scotsman argument.

Basically you are saying that nobody who has ever left the Christian faith can ever really
have been a Christian because no true Christian would ever leave the faith.

Well if you have an encounter with God or not is the real question now isn't it?
If you've not had one all claims to have been in His care are false, true?
Kelly

Originally posted by FMF
Mine is c. God was real, now God is not real, but God certainly used to be real.

Edit: What I mean, actually, is

c. Jesus was real, now Jesus is not real, but Jesus certainly used to be real

So the reality of God depends on you? If that is the case once again, you never
really had a real relationship with him, you've only had your world view change
not the reality of God.
Kelly

Originally posted by FMF
[b]...If, for the sake of argument, Mother Teresa did lose her faith in her final years [as has been suggested in an earlier post, although not everybody accepts it, so IF she did...], would you look at her and say she was never a Christian her whole life long?

BUMP for KellyJay[/b]

You missed my answer, bottom line, I don't care what name you apply to your
test and how well the world thinks of them....it only matters that did they or
did they not walk with Jesus Christ.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Well if you have an encounter with God or not is the real question now isn't it?
If you've not had one all claims to have been in His care are false, true?
Kelly

Well there are two points to this.

First is that as far as I am aware there is no requirement in Christianity to have any
'personal' experience of god until you die and get judged.

There are many people who are Christian and believe in god and JC but who don't claim
to have ever had a personal experience of or from god.


Second is the question of how anyone could possibly ever tell if they had had a personal
experience of god or not.

As I said in another thread, You can hallucinate anything you are capable of experiencing,
and you tautologically can only experience what you are capable of experiencing.

So how can you possibly know if any 'experience' of god is really god and not a hallucination?


Absent that knowledge, it must be possible to have a real experience of god, and then
subsequently conclude that it could have been a hallucination.

So it must therefore be possible to have a real experience of god and then still subsequently
loose your faith.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You missed my answer, bottom line, I don't care what name you apply to your
test and how well the world thinks of them....it only matters that did they or
did they not walk with Jesus Christ.
Kelly

And how can you possibly tell?

You can't possibly tell if someone has had a real experience with god/JC or not.

Thus as a test whether or not "They did or did not walk with JC" is utterly useless
because you can't tell either way.


And again, there are many versions of Christianity that do not require believers to
have a personal experience of god (while alive).

In fact usually the only people expected to have any sort of personal contact with god
are usually clergy (and high up ones at that) or saints.

The rank and file believer is not expected or required to knowingly have any contact
with god prior to death.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You missed my answer, bottom line, I don't care what name you apply to your
test and how well the world thinks of them....it only matters that did they or
did they not walk with Jesus Christ.
Kelly

You reckon Mother Teresa didn't "walk with Christ"?

Originally posted by KellyJay
So the reality of God depends on you? If that is the case once again, you never really had a real relationship with him, you've only had your world view change not the reality of God.

So, if say for the sake of discussion, 1960-2000 I was a devout and committed Christian. And then in 2000 I lost my faith. Are you saying that I was not a devout and committed Christian in, say, 1988, 1993, 1997? I know that I wasn't one after 2000, and I can understand if you are dubious about 'what I was' in 2000 because it was transitional. But you insist that your denunciation is retrospective?

Originally posted by KellyJay
So the reality of God depends on you? If that is the case once again, you never
really had a real relationship with him, you've only had your world view change
not the reality of God.
Kelly

So, to explore your stance a little further. If my life as a Christian was retrospectively declared 'not Christian' because I lost the faith, does it not then follow that you cannot yourself claim to be a Christian, for sure, until you die and it can be established that you were 'always' a Christian? Right now, it is still possible that you could lose your faith at some point in the future between now and your death, in which case your claim to be a Christian right NOW will - retrospectively - have been shown to be false, right?

Originally posted by googlefudge
And how can you possibly tell?

You can't possibly tell if someone has had a real experience with god/JC or not.

Thus as a test whether or not "They did or did not walk with JC" is utterly useless
because you can't tell either way.


And again, there are many versions of Christianity that do not require believers to
have a personal experience ...[text shortened]... eliever is not expected or required to knowingly have any contact
with god prior to death.

Indeed, in the Books of Moses I am reading at the moment, personal contact with God to any but a select few appears to be actively discouraged.

Originally posted by divegeester
My reason for asking was that in your first response in this thread to swissgambit you said:

"So why did they lose their beliefs? Were they false, empty, held no future, misleading, not in the Bible? "

Indicating that you belived their loss of faith was due to them being part of a non-biblical religion, and therefore by implication that the JWs would not be affacted by such loss of faith, which obviously they are.

So it must depend on ones faith and the amount of it and how strong it is. If one goes to some church down the street that sings feel good songs and do their usual food drives and has their car wash parties, that's all good and sweet and makes everyone feel good. But what does that to strengthen ones faith and prepares them for the coming days that the Bible describes as not survivable unless "God cuts them short"?
In fact not many will survive according to the Bible. So what does one need to do to know how to survive that day when most won't? Please tell me....

Originally posted by galveston75
So it must depend on ones faith and the amount of it and how strong it is. If one goes to some church down the street that sings feel good songs and do their usual food drives and has their car wash parties, that's all good and sweet and makes everyone feel good. But what does that to strengthen ones faith and prepares them for the coming days that the B ...[text shortened]... what does one need to do to know how to survive that day when most won't? Please tell me....

I'm not sure what you are going on about, but my point (which you seem to be deliberately missing) was:

...that you suggested that people who lost their faith did so because they were in a false religion; I was pointing out to you that many JW's have lost their faith too, so they must also have been in a false religion.

Originally posted by divegeester
I'm not sure what you are going on about, but my point (which you seem to be deliberately missing) was:

...that you suggested that people who lost their faith did so because they were in a false religion; I was pointing out to you that many JW's have lost their faith too, so they must also have been in a false religion.

I answered you in my last post. Hard to understand it seems.