"Ask a Christian!"

[Stevil]

It seems the biggest presumption you have that I am disagreeing with is that because something is "conceptual" or "abstract" or "not physical", does not conclude it doesn't exist. If both you and I saw a circular clock in my kitchen, we both would agree the shape of the of the clock is that of a circle. It wouldn't be our consciousness creating the same consistent shape, it would be because such an object actually exists. If we both decided to measure the width of the clock (or any other measurement), chances are we would gather the same results (lets just say the clock is objectively 10 inches wide).

While you are concluding such measurement would not exist without the tools of human sapience, I am concluding the other way around. Quantity, space, structure, and shapes are a part of the natural world, independent of individual experience.

A circle is a concept, it does not exist of itself. It is a concept where each point is equal distance from the centre. The properties of this concept are that the diameter fits into the circumference exactly 3.14159265358979323...., its area is Pi X r squared. These are conceptual properties which accurately describe a physical system build to these dimensions. Conceptual modelling is very useful, but does have its limits.

e.g.
When building a computer system or building an architect creates a conceptual model. This highlights the key aspects of a potential system without requiring the time and effort needed to go into the detail of what something actually is and how it works.
A conceptual model takes advantage of people's common understandings and allows a few quick iterations to ensure the design meets the intended requirement, at least from a high level.
It is only once agreements of understandings have been made, assumptions have been clarified and high level designs have been completed that a physical model is then attempted to more accurately design and model the physical system which is to be built.

When thinking of a person, the mind and soul are merely conceptual. Of course you will disagree because your religion teaches you that these this are metaphysical and actually exist, in the same way that you are taught that your god is metaphysical.
In my world of understanding, the mind is a conceptual model of the physical system, the brain, the neurons and the long running process that is your consciousness. The soul is also conceptual, describing your personhood, your personality, your memories, your drive, your ambitions, your personal moralities. To me these are conceptual properties of the conceptual mind. In a very simplistic conceptual way they describe aspects of the underlying physical system, the brain, the neurons, the long running process...

To me the god concept is an extrapolation of that person understanding of the mind, the soul, the metaphysical. It is conceptual, you will never see god, you will never observe, measure or test god, you will never have a personal relationship with god (although no doubt, you think you do). Just like that clock, it is not a circle, it is shaped like a circle. Your relationship is not a relationship with god it is a relationship with the thoughts you have about your idea of god. (IMHO)

[Tristan Jay]

What are you searching for at the moment Tristan Jay?

Are you looking for a higher authority, a purpose, an objective morality, a group to belong to?
Are you searching for some answers/explainations with regards to your lost faith?

Do you feel something is missing in your life right now?

"Need input Stephanie, more input!" - (sorry, vague reference to a very old movie)

I found these questions to be very helpful for drawing my attention to what I am looking for.  Thank you.    I have delayed in posting back here, because I wanted to let it bubble about in my mind.  I would say at this point, what I understand about myself is that I am looking for a way to understand/deal with/interact with the Universe in an effective, constructive way.  My personality type predisposes me towards loathing authority and authority figures, or at the very least review their performance and activities highly critically.  I feel that the world is spiritual, and I believe in God, but I've been coming to the conclusion that religions are going to fail someone like me.  I'm too much of an iconoclast, and religious doctrine and practices designed for mass consumption, are homoginized in a way that diminishes the wonder of spirituality at an individual level.  Each person, coming to their own understanding of how they're going to act and interact with the Universe, without being told; this feels very important to me, for some reason.  That really is a noble exercise of Free Will; and religious intrusion on that gift seems like the seems close to the complaint that sin is in the world when Free Will becomes to selfish and violates the space of other people's Free Will.  It feels like religious infrastructure has fallen into a trap of selfishness.

I want to not hate God.  God is defined for humans by religions.  I hate him as he is defined by religions.  At college I was exposed to the notion that defining something lessens the object that is being defined.  Definitions are restrictive, simplified, they make their object smaller, lesser than all that they really are.  So I guess I would say that right now it is important to strip away the way God is defined, because I would speculate that religions are diminishing something that could be so much greater.  So I guess right now I'm trying to Un-Define Re-define God.

I am not looking for a group to belong to.  The more I think about it, the more worthwhile an endeavor it seems to just go it alone, to take the hard, worthwhile road.  It would kill the passion to sit in a church, and listen to a sermon that's been prepared for me, and worry about the politics or the potential flawed individual that conceived of it.  If I find knowledge, it will be because I am personally motivated to seeking it out.

I'm afraid I've only got impressionistic answers to your questions, Stevil.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled "Ask a Christian" topic.  I'm still thinking; I'll ask when I figure out what I'm trying to get my head around, so to speak.

[Stevil]

Tristan, I think you could benefit from some structure to your thoughts. This might help you concieve a way forward.
I've had a go at structuring/disecting your last post. I hope you don't mind.

The Goal
* I am looking for a way to understand/deal with/interact with the Universe in an effective, constructive way.
* I want to not hate God.

The Strategic approach
* Un-Define Re-define God
* It's important to me to come to my own understanding of how I'm going to act and interact with the Universe (I reworded this phrase - Stevil)
* The more worthwhile an endeavor it seems to just go it alone, to take the hard, worthwhile road

The Tactical approach
* Noble exercise of Free Will
* ???

SWOT
Strengths
* Review performance and activities critically

Weaknessess
* My personality type predisposes me towards loathing authority and authority figures
* Religions are going to fail someone like me

Opportunites
* If I find knowledge, it will be because I am personally motivated to seeking it out
* The world is spiritual
* I believe in God

Threats
* Religious doctrine and practices designed for mass consumption, are homoginized in a way that diminishes the wonder of spirituality
* It would kill the passion to sit in a church
* Politics
* Religious Intrusion
* Selfishness
* Potential flawed individual that conceived of it

I would say, given the above it would benefit you to flesh out your tactical approach more.
Maybe explore your opportunities more. Seek knowledge, try to work out what it means to be spiritual for you and the world and how you interact with it. Maybe explore what you mean when you say that you believe in God. What does god mean to you? I understand you don't want to define god so this will be a challenge.
Possibly be conscious of your threats, don't let them hinder your progress but use them as a tool to validate your journey. When you gain some knowledge filter it through your threats. Has this understanding been tainted by selfishness, by religious intrusion etc?
Mitigate your weaknesses, don't waste too much time looking to others for answers, it seems you might be reluctant to take on board what they have to say.
On your search for spirituality or an understanding of god are you simply defining your own personal religion? Why would this not fail you?

Anyway, hopefully just some food for thought.

With regards to your statement
"God is defined for humans by religions.  I hate him as he is defined by religions"
You need to change this.
"I hate the definition religions put on god"
I think this is more honest.

And with regards to
"The notion that defining something lessens the object that is being defined"
I actually find that sometimes a definition or a story about something or someone can actually put that person or thing into legendary status. It can build it up beyond what it was. I think if you look at the "27 club - Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Kurt Cobain" you will find that idea of unfinished potential could potentially  improve what reality may have brought about.

[Davin]

Or that weird Catholicism stuff. One problem in your description is that many of the odd things in it are based around misconceptions of the Mormon religion instead of what they actually teach. I know you're trying to make it appear more silly than your own particular flavor, but even with all that, it's no more or less ridiculous than any other version of Christianity (or any other religion for that matter).

But please, don't continue the misrepresentations of their religion just as you wouldn't want someone making things up about yours.

Davin, I have no intention in misrepresenting any religion, nor am I on here with an agenda to misrepresent nor offend anyone's beliefs. If you find Mormonism, Christianity, Islam (theology at large) all "ridiculous", those are your words, not mine. Please, by all means, tell me what beliefs of Mormonism have I misrepresented? The Mormon president (past and present) has fully acknowledged their substantial differences from that of universal Christian doctrine. If you have done much more extended research into Mormonism, I will be more than happy to revise my understanding on their doctrine and what they teach. So please don't be judge me with an agenda that only exists in your presumptions.

I can both find something ridiculous and not misrepresent it. My understanding of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormonism), comes from previously being a Mormon.

Actually he's quite accurate. On our Pagan forum we have a former Mormon (now Pagan but still tied in to the Mormon way of things for the time being). She's had an ongoing Ask a Mormon thread there. And it's quite kooky (she will attest to this) they do in fact believe that stuff. And so so so much more...enough to also agree with Sweets, the scare the bejeesus out of me.

I was a Mormon myself, and it's not very accurate. There is indeed many a kooky thing just like every other religion, so I don't see the need to bring in misrepresentations. I don't know who the woman you mentioned is or what she said, but if you think that what was said here is accurate based on what she said, then there is a problem with what she said. Not only am I an ex-Mormon who studied it extensively, but most of my family is still Mormon.

While I can't argue whether a Mormon actually believes that stuff or not, I can say that that stuff is not taught and is not doctrine. I.E.: I know a lot of Southern Baptists that believe in aliens abducting people, but that doesn't mean that it's taught in their church.

[xSilverPhinx]

Tristan Jay, have you tried focusing more on the personal and individual growth aspect of spirituality and philosophies based more on introspection and knowing that you have the free will to deal with adverse situations in the way you see fit? I don't know how much you would have to distance yourself from mainstream religions however, and especially the bible, which contains one of the best examples of a leader (god) not living up to the standards he wants his creations to live up to. Take it back to basics, maybe. Christian theology has already been around for many years trying to make sense of the world in a way that doesn't make sense at all, and so either you compartmentalize and choose which parts you think are relevant and practically ignore the rest and inconsistent contradictions or you throw it all out.

[Too Few Lions]

hi Tristan Jay
You do sound like you need to believe in a deity, and feel that your life and the universe has some meaning, as well as feeling there is a spiritual dimension to existence. Personally I don't feel the need for those things, but I can understand how you or others might.

You really don't have to be a Christian though, or even assume that theirs is the only god, or the only way of defining a god. It does seem like you've been heavily indoctrinated into thinking that way (I'm assuming you were raised a Christian). Their god is one of thousands and is no truer or more valid than any other. To me your anger at the Christian god seems pointless, you're angrily shaking your fist at the clouds in the sky.

Why don't you just have your own personal spirituality / belief in god, and do without all the mythology, dogma and doctrine of organised religions like Christianity. You can take good philosophy on how to lead your life from both religious and non-religious sources, there's plenty out there. Plus pretty much all of us have a basic agreement of what's right and wrong in life. I'm an atheist but I've always quite liked the sentiments of the Desiderata, particularly the ending that one should strive to be happy.

You sound to me like you could be a deist of sorts;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

[Tristan Jay]

xSilverPhinx, much of what you say gells with the frustrations that I feel, and the new approaches I'm angling for.  Right now, I'm trying to focus on personal, introspective spirituality.  Wisdom that can help with benevolent perspective, an attitude toward the world that is health and constructive while also being realistic about the stupid or undignified stuff so I don't take it too personally; these are the kinds of things I'm going for.  Subject matter pertaining to punitive measures (on any scale), or talk of "enemies" and "allies", that stuff is poison to me. 

Christianity has some stuff that I like; a great random example that I recall taking out of it is anonymous charity: by not taking credit for certain good works, I hope to move closer accomplishing "true" altruism.  Non-judgementalism is something I got the impression is strongly encouraged in Christian circles, this, too feels helpful in peaceful living aspirations.  What does offend me is the self-inflicted guilt that is encouraged as a mindset; I had enough self-confidence problems before getting into all that.  I'm hard enough on myself as it is, and I've had to learn some important lessons about being realistic about when guilt and remorse is instructive for personal interaction with others, and when it can cripple me psychologically; it had to be done, and could only be accomplished outside of that Christian framework of "You are always sinning, all the time!"

  At this point, I'm interesting in wisdom that helps me live a peaceful life and contribute to the world and help others; and I have come to the conclusion that religion does not offer peace for me, only confusion.  Too many people obsessed with trying to persuade others about what is "right" and they end up arguing about the structural semantics that are nebulous and not as profound.

Too Few Lions, I sense the pointlessness of shaking my fist at the sky.  I suppose in the end it is humans that I am disappointed with, and that's more honest.  I think the promise of a God who is personal and active in the world has left me with a crushing, agonizing disillusionment.  I don't think anyone can try and persuade me that God is like this anymore without making me very angry and resentful.  I admit, it's my own fault for putting too much trust in what I've been told, a recurring problem for me is that I've been easily impressionable.  As I peruse Buddhist text, I do so with a critical eye; the wisdom and mentality may help, but the miracles and the outlined structure of the Universe, Life, the Afterlife and all that other cosmic stuff is a distraction from usefully and peacefully living through the life we can clearly see in front of us.

Sorry for being off topic; but this is helping me on a personal level.  If it's distracting, perhaps it might be desirable to take some of my own posts and those of people responding directly to me into a new topic?  Whatever works best for the forum.

Sorry for the intrusion, Christian members.    I return you to the "Ask a Christian" questions.

[xSilverPhinx]

xSilverPhinx, much of what you say gells with the frustrations that I feel, and the new approaches I'm angling for.  Right now, I'm trying to focus on personal, introspective spirituality.  Wisdom that can help with benevolent perspective, an attitude toward the world that is health and constructive while also being realistic about the stupid or undignified stuff so I don't take it too personally; these are the kinds of things I'm going for.  Subject matter pertaining to punitive measures (on any scale), or talk of "enemies" and "allies", that stuff is poison to me.  

Christianity has some stuff that I like; a great random example that I recall taking out of it is anonymous charity: by not taking credit for certain good works, I hope to move closer accomplishing "true" altruism.  Non-judgementalism is something I got the impression is strongly encouraged in Christian circles, this, too feels helpful in peaceful living aspirations.  What does offend me is the self-inflicted guilt that is encouraged as a mindset; I had enough self-confidence problems before getting into all that.  I'm hard enough on myself as it is, and I've had to learn some important lessons about being realistic about when guilt and remorse is instructive for personal interaction with others, and when it can cripple me psychologically; it had to be done, and could only be accomplished outside of that Christian framework of "You are always sinning, all the time!"

At this point, I'm interesting in wisdom that helps me live a peaceful life and contribute to the world and help others; and I have come to the conclusion that religion does not offer peace for me, only confusion.  Too many people obsessed with trying to persuade others about what is "right" and they end up arguing about the structural semantics that are nebulous and not as profound.

If I may make a few suggestions, when you have the time, look up cult tactics and how cults operate and manipulate. Whether free will is real, partial or a pure illusion is irrelevant, religious authorities know that they can only persuade people up to a certain point. From my perspective, it explains a lot of the bad in religion, especially when it has to do with control. Making people feel worthless (sinners) without the cult is one of them. Punitive measures, and an "us versus them" mentality too. It keeps people in line and makes "spiritual property" out of them.

Of course it wouldn't be fair to compare modern Christianity and all its forms to what it was in the Middle Ages and earlier. The more liberal a religion gets, the further it distances itself from what cults do, especially since less and less people grow up already heavily indoctrinated environments and into that way of thinking. They see through the bullshit.

Maybe you can find some answers that you might find helpful.

One of the downsides of Christianity IMO is that it's not a religion that really empowers people, and it's too easy to twist it into a comfort blanket and false sense of security that will only disappoint you again in the future. Unless you cherry-pick the parts that you feel will be constructive and not worry about the rest of the philosophical package that comes with it that isn't. The good thing about being more independant is that ultimately you're responsible for your choices. One more rather negative aspect that can come from organised mainstream religions, where people base their opinions on whatever their book or Church/Temple/Mosque ect. tells them, and when things go wrong, there are other entities to blame such as the devil or evil spirits, the church, god or whatever.

Yeah...I'm also not a big fan of religions.

[Too Few Lions]

Tristan Jay, I can understand your disappointment with humans, there are plenty of bad egotistical self-centred ones out there, but there are also plenty of lovely genuinely nice people. I always try and surround myself with those kind of people.

From my experience of religions, at their basest they're a mix of mythology (like virgin births, miracles, resurrections etc) and philosophy (don't be too materialistic, do your best by others etc). On top of that you have all other manner of dogma that builds up over the centuries. I think you can take the good philosophical bits from Christianity, Buddhism or any other religion and dump the bad stuff like all that crap about sin, or intolerance towards homosexuals or non-believers, heaven and hell, or blindly stating what's 'right' or 'wrong' and trying to enforce their beliefs on everyone else.

It sounds like you need to feel like you're doing good and making a difference in the world and that's a good thing. You sound quite a lot like me in that you seem to have a natural inclination towards humanism, but also experience tells you that people aren't always that nice and society / government / authority can be full of shit therefore there's also a level of alienation and misanthropy. I wonder if there's such a thing as a misanthropic humanist? I think it's a good idea to read all religious texts with a skeptical eye, but take any small pearls of wisdom out of them while discarding all the rubbish. I hope you find what you're after, and that it makes you happy and reasonably content with the world.

[Cforcerunner]

Interesting response, though I don't see how a prayer could not be "legitimate", could you explain what you mean by that?

It's the level of sincerity, the condition of your heart. That's truly the way of finding God. I'd say there's a vast amount of people claiming to be a Christian, but have nothing to show for it. Many pray when they are out to dinner with Christians or after finishing a bible study, but not so often after that. Finding people who are as much of a Christian behind close doors as they are in public is not very common.

You also seem to be hinting that I was never really a true "believer" to begin with and I'm not sure why, because I did explain that I was. I understand that "belief" is a subjective thing, but for several years of my life I had, what I believed to be true, religious experiences, I went to church, I went to church camps, I read the bible cover to cover, I had the "personal relationship with God". I even got a cross tattoo.

You not being a "true believer" would be my first assumption off hand, but honestly I just don't have enough information regarding your spirituality. There are several students at our church who were heavily involved in the church, but when college came around or some event in their life came up, all of a sudden God/church became less of a priority. I'd assume if you felt you really believed, it was likely a very slow and thought out decision to dismiss your faith and I'd like to know more details as to what caused you to become an atheist.

Or would you consider someone that comes to consider themselves an Atheist, by definition, someone who could have never "really" believed (because "real" grace of God would never allow it or something of that nature?) If that is the case, I'd be interested in hearing you elaborate on that (though I don't want to put words in your mouth, maybe that's not what you meant)

No, I wouldn't consider myself a believer in a predetermined destination, especially on a micro-level of our personal lives and beliefs. I believe we all personal beliefs based on what we have experienced and the world around us, but it is ultimately up to us to decide how we choose to react (those who don't agree with me, please just feel free to disagree, this is just part of my worldview). I would of considered myself an agnostic/maybe deist during highschool, and became a Christian around my junior/senior year.  

Jesus' parable of the sower would best explain how people have chosen to react to His gospel. For example, many committed atheists/secularist who are avidly against religion as a social intuition (or perhaps just Christianity)  would represent the birds or the stony ground, those who simply shut the door when any evangelist comes their way and are not even willing to hear what they would of had to say. (important to note that this example is not in reference to all atheist, but to simply illustrate a point)

There were the seeds that fell and were scorched by the sun because they had no root and withered away, and those who had fallen into thorns and were choked away. The former would represent believers who really did not truly believe in the first place, the latter representing believers who have since fallen away from their faith.

Being from a evangelical church, I love missions and spreading the gospel and love using my own testimony. But I also understand this parable, and have never approved pushing my beliefs unto anybody, but rather letting the gospel speak for itself, let those who are considering believing do so like I did, and think it over and count the cost. I see success in genuine presentations, and not in the number count of conversions. It is up to the individual to react in the way they choose.

Also, what do you mean by a conversion being "emotionally based". What else would it be based on?

My conversion involved emotions, that's a very important aspect to a spiritual transformation, however, it was not "based" in emotions, or else it would likely not of lasted. I would say it took me a period of around 6 months to become an actual believer. It was after much thought, reading, research, and prayer to whatever maybe out there. And after all this, it wasn't just church attendance that changed for me, but a lifestyle, purpose, and a change in how I see people and the world around me.

Thanks for your honest response   I find this interesting  

Yes, I find this conversation very enjoyable!  

[DeterminedJuliet]

You not being a "true believer" would be my first assumption off hand, but honestly I just don't have enough information regarding your spirituality. There are several students at our church who were heavily involved in the church, but when college came around or some event in their life came up, all of a sudden God/church became less of a priority. I'd assume if you felt you really believed, it was likely a very slow and thought out decision to dismiss your faith and I'd like to know more details as to what caused you to become an atheist.

Actually, it was sort of the other way around. I attended religious groups, but I very rarely talked about it with other people. Ironically, the most I've actually discussed spirituality and religion has been here.

And I never really made a conscious decision to "lose the faith". For years, I just "had it" (like I assume most Christians do), and then, one day, for no particular reason, I just started doubting. That's when I went through the whole crisis of faith that I described, with the prayer and whatnot, which was a difficult time, but then I sort of came out "the other side" - what you would probably consider the wrong side, but what I would consider the right side.

I have to say that studying History in university and meeting my now husband, who is an atheist, most likely supported my transition.

I just feel as though some Christians think that Atheists are always people who just won't give the word of God a "chance". I gave it a whole-hearted chance, I was born and raised to give it a chance and consciously wanted to keep believing. I just, couldn't. I can understand your frustration in not being able to reach people the way you'd like to, so I have to commend you for how respectful you are here. Thanks for elaborating on the points I asked about

[Cforcerunner]

A circle is a concept, it does not exist of itself. It is a concept where each point is equal distance from the centre. The properties of this concept are that the diameter fits into the circumference exactly 3.14159265358979323...., its area is Pi X r squared. These are conceptual properties which accurately describe a physical system build to these dimensions. Conceptual modelling is very useful, but does have its limits.

e.g.
When building a computer system or building an architect creates a conceptual model. This highlights the key aspects of a potential system without requiring the time and effort needed to go into the detail of what something actually is and how it works.
A conceptual model takes advantage of people's common understandings and allows a few quick iterations to ensure the design meets the intended requirement, at least from a high level.
It is only once agreements of understandings have been made, assumptions have been clarified and high level designs have been completed that a physical model is then attempted to more accurately design and model the physical system which is to be built.

Sure, I don't see any problems agreeing with you on these points. But again, it lies with your conclusion. I understand your belief in human conceptual models as being nothing more than "handy tools" in understanding our world and nothing more, therefore they lack existence. I'd say you are strongly understating the significance of our cognitive faculties and our capability in understanding the abstract. Natural science is completely dependent on highly complex mathematical understanding and the ability to think abstractly. In fact, it has lead to the development of new physical elements which did not previously exist. Moreover, non-mathmatical conceptions such as culture, aesthetics, harmony/congruency, logical inference, fairness, moral values, human rights, social norms, politics, human economics/trade, human emotion, language, race, social liberty, as well as your entire personality, ect; are examples of conceptional models that go beyond being mere "tools used for understanding/painting a picture for the world around us". No functional human could reasonably deny the existence of these things in any pragmatic capacity. You have good reason to believe these very words you are reading as you review my post contains abstract, yet objective meaning beyond it's mere text formulation that does actually exist.

When thinking of a person, the mind and soul are merely conceptual. Of course you will disagree because your religion teaches you that these this are metaphysical and actually exist, in the same way that you are taught that your god is metaphysical.
In my world of understanding, the mind is a conceptual model of the physical system, the brain, the neurons and the long running process that is your consciousness. The soul is also conceptual, describing your personhood, your personality, your memories, your drive, your ambitions, your personal moralities. To me these are conceptual properties of the conceptual mind. In a very simplistic conceptual way they describe aspects of the underlying physical system, the brain, the neurons, the long running process...

Alright, I think this is a transitions of topics, but yes, I'd say the soul "runs" on neurologic functioning and capability. But that shouldn't define what the soul is purely comprised of. For example, my body "runs" on proper circulation of my cardiovascular arteries, and if I was to inject myself full of cholesterol, I would no longer be able to function. Am I, therefore, a circulation of cardiovascular arteries? Just because it is a needed component for a phenomena to sustain itself does not necessarily define the phenomena itself.

I think this. To me the god concept is an extrapolation of that person understanding of the mind, the soul, the metaphysical. It is conceptual, you will never see god, you will never observe, measure or test god, you will never have a personal relationship with god (although no doubt, you think you do). Just like that clock, it is not a circle, it is shaped like a circle. Your relationship is not a relationship with god it is a relationship with the thoughts you have about your idea of god. (IMHO)

Again, I disagree on your black/white view on what does and does not exist (if it's physical it's real, if not, it's a "mere concept"). So it's safe to say we will have differences in metaphysical standpoints as well. I, for example, believe something has bothered itself enough to drag me into the natural world, perhaps to bring some good to it, and become "more like Him" which (even outside of the Christian faith) would be seen as a fairly virtuous ambition.

I am not sure what your worldview is. But assuming it is naturalistic or somewhat closely related to naturalism, I don't see how there could be problem with my behavior/worldview (or anyone else's). As there is no inherit implications of meaning outside of human "conception", there is not too much of a difference between the day you are born and the day you have died. As you would simply be filling space and time for a short period, and any meaning beyond that is self-created.

[Cforcerunner]

You not being a "true believer" would be my first assumption off hand, but honestly I just don't have enough information regarding your spirituality. There are several students at our church who were heavily involved in the church, but when college came around or some event in their life came up, all of a sudden God/church became less of a priority. I'd assume if you felt you really believed, it was likely a very slow and thought out decision to dismiss your faith and I'd like to know more details as to what caused you to become an atheist.

Actually, it was sort of the other way around. I attended religious groups, but I very rarely talked about it with other people. Ironically, the most I've actually discussed spirituality and religion has been here.

And I never really made a conscious decision to "lose the faith". For years, I just "had it" (like I assume most Christians do), and then, one day, for no particular reason, I just started doubting. That's when I went through the whole crisis of faith that I described, with the prayer and whatnot, which was a difficult time, but then I sort of came out "the other side" - what you would probably consider the wrong side, but what I would consider the right side.

I have to say that studying History in university and meeting my now husband, who is an atheist, most likely supported my transition.

I just feel as though some Christians think that Atheists are always people who just won't give the word of God a "chance". I gave it a whole-hearted chance, I was born and raised to give it a chance and consciously wanted to keep believing. I just, couldn't. I can understand your frustration in not being able to reach people the way you'd like to, so I have to commend you for how respectful you are here. Thanks for elaborating on the points I asked about

Ahh...We would of loved you to be on team Jesus


I am happy to know that you had a meditated decision on the matter, and I hope for the best in your spirituality/worldview. I am not sure what exactly your view is from now on, but I hope you have left Christianity on good terms and perhaps taken some positive aspects of Christian values in your family life. You can still look at Jesus from a completely secular standpoint and still find inspiration!  

Good luck at vet school!
Dogs are awesome!