Let me preface this by saying that I'm a former Mormon, now a Born-Again Christian. I'm not trying to impose my religion or beliefs on anyone. I simply think that this might be helpful to some people. My choice to be Christian is probably not right for everyone. It was the right decision for me. Everyone must find their own path is my philosophy.

My Pastor said the first thing to realize when you become a Christian is that you're never worthy and never will be worthy, but it's okay, because God sent His Son to pay that debt.
I told the LDS Bishop the part about never being worthy and he vehemently disagreed with me. I didn't get to the part about that's why the attonement was necessary. I wish I'd seen this scripture before I told the LDS Bishop that.
Romans 3:9-20 explains what the Pastor was explaining to me. I don't want to type it out or copy and paste it, but look it up, if you would like to.
I apologize if I sound like I'm bashing on the LDS church, I'm really not trying to. It's upsetting to me that the Bishop was so dismissive of me and treated me as though I was an ignorant child coming to him with an agenda and not having any facts or research to back my claims. I sincerely wanted him to come back with scriptures to prove me wrong. Instead he pulled out the whole Joseph Smith having doubts about religion story.
The more I learn about Christ, the more I realize what the Pastor is teaching me is correct and what I learned in the LDS church is either completely false or a half-truth. It's interesting that as a Mormon I had feelings but not a lot of facts to back up those feelings. As a Christian, I have both the facts and the feelings. In that, I have two witnesses.

It is NOT okay. If you get deep into that bullshit, you're going to end up just as fucked up as you were in Mormonism.

You ARE worthy! Original sin is BULLSHIT! Sins of the father being visited on the son?

Exodus 34:7
English Standard Version (ESV)

keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children's children, to the third and the fourth generation.

THAT'S JUST WRONG! If you were God, would you do that?

And Romans 3:3-19 (NIV)

What shall we conclude then? Do we have any advantage? Not at all! For we have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin. 10 As it is written:

“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands;
there is no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”[a]
13 “Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit.”[b]
“The poison of vipers is on their lips.”[c]
14 “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”[d]
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 ruin and misery mark their ways,
17 and the way of peace they do not know.”[e]
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”[f]
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God.

If you were God, would you treat people you loved in such a way? Would you say this to you children? If you wouldn't, think twice about believing it about yourself. This is a hymn we used to sing in church. It sinks into every facet of your life.

TRUST ME, YOU DO NOT NEED THIS CRAP IN YOUR HEAD!

It will fester and be in the background of everything you think and do. And they day you realize that this is bullshit, you're going to be recovering from a DOUBLE mind fuck.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 06:35AM by Beth.

Beth, I understand where you're coming from - however, I don't view it that way. I don't want to get into a flame war over it. Let's just agree to disagree on the topic. I think the moderators will probably delete this thread. Thank you.

Original sin ---> everyone, even newborns and people who never heard of Jesus go to hell. Fire, brimstone, torture, horrific pain for eternity

The temple sacrifices of animals without blemish and all other types of offerings no longer pleased God, because he was bored with them and can change the rules as he pleases because he is God and kind of a dick in that way.

Along comes his only son, Jesus. Jesus lives a perfect life. He didn't do anything wrong. So what happens? He is tortured and killed (fundies say "died" because is was a choice on his part) because God needed something better to wash away our sins. <--- there is something fundamentally wrong there. It's not fair. It scares the crap out of kids because it's not fair, and they hate it when that happens. "Life's not fair," is a friggin' cop out.

The whole concept of a whipping boy isn't fair. No one would go for that now, so why is it okay for God to have one?

You ARE worthy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 06:49AM by Beth.

unless their path leads to hell. Born agains believe that it's their way or the hellway. It's just as rigid as Mormonism.

So, your preface is either a lie or a misunderstanding of "Bible-Believing" Christians who read the Bible literally yet don't realize that they are actually interpreting it.

When I was a kid, I say, "The Bible says X...," and I'd be told, "Well, that means Y." How on Earth is that a literal interpretation?

Methuselah lived how many years? 969?

Me: I thought people are living longer and longer now? How come he lived so long?

Pastor: People lived longer back then.

That. Makes. No. Sense.

Beth, you are forcing one to choose a straw man. Christianity is not fundamentalism or nothing. Consider a faith which accepts Christ and the gospel but does not require believing everything such as the Garden of Eden, Noah, and the Tower of Babel, nor believing David killing Goliath was a "miracle", etc. Clearly, much of the Bible is not literal. But one cannot believe in Moism without believing stories like the Garden of Eden - which JS says was in Missouri; the Tower of Babel - because the BoM says the Jaredites had their language not being changed with everyone else; the people of the Americas are descended from Lehi; that a document being an Egyptian Funerary text of early AD, was in the hand of Abraham, etc. The difference is striking, especially when compared with enlightened Christianity.

Congratulations on getting religion (I guess) and finding something that makes you happy. I sort of tend to agree with Beth, that you're replacing one screwed up belief with another, but that's not really my point. In Mormonism, the Christ figure is nearly edged out by Joseph Smith, the True Saviour in Mormon lore. Christ is said to be important. Mormons are always quick to point out, "Shoot fire! Of course we're Christians! We have the name 'Jesus Christ' right in the name of our church!" This impresses no one, since it is easy to see that this could be mainly just a sales technique. Mormon doctrine teaches, for instance, that Joseph Smith will be our advocate before God in the last days. Christians would rightfully call that belief "heresy." Without Jesus, there is no Christianity. Without Joseph Smith, there is no Mormonism.

I've always had some difficulty with the the LDS Church's over use of "worthiness".

Worthy = of worth

Unworthy = worthless

The LDS Church has an obssessive compulsive disorder when it comes to worthiness. Are you worthy? Are you worthy to partake of the sacrament? Are you worthy to go to the temple? Etc. Practically the entire church membership is crapping on themselves hoping that God doesn't think of them as worthless.

What kind of mindfu@k organization masquerading as a church would do this to people (let alone the children)?

There is a difference between being worthless and unworthy. Worth and worthy are not exactly the same. Why would God sacrifice his son if we were "worthless"? Rather, no-one is worthy - meriting by one's own actions forgiveness for sin. Any worthiness we have comes only by grace.

Moism basically says that by our actions we not only get to heaven, but EARN our reward and especially can EARN the celestial Kingdom. I don't think anyone on this board believes we can be good enough to EARN such a reward. Yet, I know TBMs who think we can. The doctrines make one either a snob or depressed, either deluded into thinking they deserve such a "reward" or a feeling they can never be good enough.

Unworthy of being in the presence of the one who created us unworthy to be in his presence?

Exact-a-mundo. Another Christian splitting hairs on worthiness vs. unworthiness vs. worthless vs. Mormons-are-not-really-Christians vs. ...

Telling someone any of the above is pointless. If you do not value your own life separate from a belief in God, no one else will. And if they do, I'm not sure why they should.

What amazed me is that when I stopped believing, threw out my garments, and became sexually (hyper?) active, there was no deletion or diminution of "spiritual" help. It's in the mind, baby. The human mind is a fascinating and highly valuable thing all by itself.

The only useful thing Christianity teaches is the Golden Rule. The whole worthiness debate can be junked for all I care.

I like quite a few teachings in Christianity actually:

- Who is my neighbor? (Good Samaritan)
- Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
- Neither do I condemn thee
- Love is the great commandment
- Someone having a malady is not evidence of a curse from God
- The needs of the individual are more important than silly rules

Christianity was quite morally progressive 2000 years ago. Unfortunately nearly every organization that professes Christianity does a horrid job of practicing what they preach.

I also like most of what you listed here, but I see most of it as falling under the heading of The Golden Rule, anyway. Or maybe all of it.

Part of the tragedy of moism is that when people realize they have been deceived they throw out all belief. In my case I never ceased believing the gospel of Jesus Christ and so, leaving moism, still have faith. Part of the problem for family members left in moism is that they see so many who leave losing all faith, they stay in TSCC. Rather, the alternative is not just throwing out all belief but throwing out the deceptions added by TSCC. A good bible translation with notes showing and discussing translation questions and questions of authorship of books of the Bible and explanations of insertions such as the Tower of Babel, is the New American Bible. This also includes the apocrypha which helps explain the evolution of religions. If I did not have the background in Christianity I have, I would, unhappily, have stayed in TSCC. Instead, I have the way out to lead my family - fifty just counting myself, our children, their spouses, and grandchildren. It is not easy. But at least there is better way to salvation, the acceptance of the atonement as full and complete rather than only partial, and grace instead of works. Moism not only stresses works generally but includes such things as "temple work". Indeed, it claims to make us "saviors" when there is only one savior.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 09:31AM by rhgc.

Beth, I’m not a Christian, & I have never been nor ever will be, a Mormon. I have no wish to argue & I won’t be drawn into an argument, so this will probably be my first & last post in here.
I’m not going to resort to name calling, I’m not going to insult you & I’m not going to rubbish your beliefs as you do with rd4jesus, they are yours & I respect your right to hold them. However, why can’t you accord to rd4jesus the same respect that he gave to you? You quote from the Bible to make a point but like many people who are prepared to condemn the beliefs of others you don’t really understand what you’re quoting from & as an example of what I mean I’ll say a little about Hell & being tortured there for eternity.
There is no such place Beth, Hell, as you & many others understand it, does not exist, the word comes from Hella the name of the Norse goddess of the underworld & was unknown to early Christians or to Jews. Unfortunately “Hell” has been accepted by the mainstream churches, but thankfully not by all. As for eternity there is no word for it in the New Testament, the word translated as “forever” is from the Greek word aeonis from which we get the English word Eon, it simply means a period of time, long or short. In other words people will be punished for a period that is dependent upon whatever wrongs they have done. Isn’t that exactly what our much lauded justice system is supposed to do?
Incidentally, All people have worth but you misuse the word (inadvertently I’m sure) by attaching to it a meaning not given by Paul, as for “it will fester” are you sure that something isn’t festering in you?

I’m quite sure that certain people in here will savage me for my views, I expect nothing else but when/if that happens they wont be proving me wrong they will simply be showing their own confirmation bias, something they are happy to accuse Mormons of. There’s a word for that kind of thing, it’s known as hypocrisy.
I would guess that I’m talking to a very angry woman & I can certainly understand anger directed at the Mormon corporation but why be so antagonistic against people whose beliefs hurt no one? Please Beth, let’s have a little live & let live.

Actually Christianity is nothing like Mormonism. I am in the same boat as rd4jesus in that I feel pretty confident that there is a God. Most of the arguments made on this forum are very one-sided, and the leading atheists of our day (Richard Dawkins) have admitted that they believe in some sort of god.

However, this is an argument that I don't feel is necessary. I wanted to point out there there are Christians on this forum, and we don't feel oppressed, brainwashed, or taken advantage of. In fact it is the complete opposite, we are encouraged to ask questions and seek after knowledge both secular and spiritual. If you leave a church, you don't lose friends or have people question your motives. Most importantly of all it give us purpose and family/community.

No matter what someone decides after mormonism, there are people who are there to support you.

Does God love us because we are good?
No, it is because He is good.

Jesus did not wait until all of mankind had its act together before submitting himself to the cross. Nor did he withhold a healing touch until a person in need had met certain criteria.

Maybe people should put less emphasis on the selfcongratulatory opinions of Paul, and try the other stuff in the New Testament.
Paul had an idea that because Abraham was blessed by God before he recieved the Law of Circumcision, that like Abraham, man could do nothing of his own (works) to earn Gods approval.
Calvinism (as I understand it) takes it even further to where we have no control over whether we are saved, since our lives and salvation are already predetermined.

I always thought that Christs message was one of Hope, but worthiness judgements take that away. Instead, our hope is placed in the SAME hands that take our money.

It's just two sides of the same coin - only a difference in semantics.

Any Christian based religion, including Mormonism, teaches you can't enter heaven except through the atonement of Christ.

How they define "worthiness" is just an I say potato you say pahtato minor difference.

bc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you can't enter heaven except through the
> atonement of Christ.

An atonement that the Creator made necessary when He created things the way they are. And which we're supposed to thank Him for.

And, of course, none of this would be a problem or bother us if we didn't exist in the first place. But the story goes that God made us because God wanted to make us. So now we have to suffer and be saved from our suffering, or be punished for not being saved from this Kafka-esque situation we've been dropped into.

We exmos jump out of the frying pan of Mormonism, only to see ourselves land in the fires of atheism/agnosticism. That is really unfortunate. It only goes to show how deficient Mormonism is when it comes to answering some of the nagging issues of our day.

Atheism is a depressing philosophy. Nietzche, Camus, Sartre and the great atheist thinkers have all described its logical outcome. Perhaps this is why there are agnostics. If atheism weren't that depressing, agnostics would readily embrace it.

But as the atheists correctly point out, agnosticism is nothing but a cop-out position. The easiest thing to say about God's existence is that it can neither be confirmed nor denied. This gives the agnostic an excuse to avoid the moral demands a belief in God entails while pretending he/she can avoid the atheist hellhole.

With atheists denying the existence of God, it doesn't really matter whether man is worthy or worthless. There is no such thing as human well-being, just as there is no such thing as a rat well-being, or a cockroach well-being. Man is nothing but an accident in a speck of dust inside a mindless and hostile universe.

Man's worth only means something in a philosophy that affirms God.

BS

Mankind can find meaning and have purpose without God. Humans can still be humane and have well-being. Morality and ethics still matter.

I have found more peace and meaning in atheism than I even did in religion. I value the same things and love the same people.

My path is not unfortunate. It may not be your path, but you completely fail to comprehend what the path is like for someone who travels it.

You can describe your journey and path but please don't be so arrogant as to attempt to describe mine which you know nothing about.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 10:24AM by bc.

katuwiran Wrote:
> Man's worth only means something in a philosophy
> that affirms God.


I think you fail to understand the meaning of being a creation of a god. If we were created by a god, and in the image of a god we would truly be offspring of a god. If we are the offspring of a god wouldn't our worth be determined solely by our parentage, and not by our affirmation of our parentage?

My other question would be how do you define the worth of people that you encounter, by your impression of them, or by their belief or lack of belief in your god?

Really?

First, there isn't a set of approved Atheist beliefs that are ratified and everyone agrees on. The only thing that you can truthfully say about all atheists is that they do not believe in any diety.

Some, are anti-theist, insisting that there is no god, but most are perfectly comfortable saying that they simply don't believe in any of them.

As for atheist "philosophy". Being an atheist does not box you into any single philosophy, so you can't, or at least shouldn't make the blanket statements that you're making. on this board, you will find a wide variety of atheists that each have their own philosophy that they live by. Some are structured, some aren't.

As for "Man's worth only means something in a philosophy that affirms God." What a horrible way to live. You only find worth in the service of a creature that created you to basically torture you, or at the very least that creature is so self involved that he created you for the sole purpose of worshiping him? How sad.

I have found that once I let go of God and stopped believing in things that aren't there, that I have more happiness and more self worth. I am more honest in my dealings because I'm honest with myself.

What is sad is that you have such a horrible outlook on life that you look at the people who are happier than you and can not see it.

katuwiran Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This gives the agnostic an excuse to avoid the moral
> demands a belief in God entails while pretending
> he/she can avoid the atheist hellhole.


Oh, please. This implies that there are no ethical atheists and no intellectually honest agnostics. Being an atheist myself, with agnostic leanings in that I have open-ended questions that I find fascinating but do not need answers to, I take offense at this abrupt conclusion.

Yeah, I've sucked a lot of c*ck since leaving Mormonism. There is no proof whatsoever of eternal punishment for following my selfish desires to whatever end. There are, quite simply, consequences. They are mine, both positive and negative. Any god that conceals proof of eternal life and other-worldly consequences for the silliness we all like to engage in is NOT a god with whom I want to spend an eternity. Send me to hell where we can all bitch and moan together, I say.

I left the church like everyone else here. Like most other BIC's, I looked at the Bible and realized it failed the same tests as the BofM. It's only advantages are being older and more widely accepted.

I do not see a huge difference between the Hebrew Old Testament and its contemporary religions: Egypt, Greco-Roman, Nordic, Hinduism, etc. They are all obviously mythologies created by pre-science cultures to explain the world.

Atheists take these evidences against religion and declare: There is no god. This life is it. Any belief in god is foolish.

These declarations seem to me as unfounded as believing in those same silly religions. We have many unanswered questions that science will not even touch. The Big Bang Theory really explains nothing about how life began, where the universe began, and whether it will end. Even if it did, it has changed so much in my lifetime that it's not a sound basis for understanding the universe.

Agnosticism is the only honest position: I don't know. Sure, I could declare God is dead, but that would neither kill God nor prove he never existed. Atheism seems like an attempt to close the discussion, based on no evidence other than current religions are wrong.

As I said earlier, we simply lack the evidence to make any such statements. A 15th C European could neither declare nor deny that there was another hemisphere filled with strange animals, plants and people. He simply lacked the ability to know if anything was out there. A 21st human who lives on a planet where no human has gone further than the moon and where we barely understand our own solar system is in no position to declare what the state of the universe is, and what, if anything, happens after life.

Our understanding of science is so primitive. We know less about the universe than the caveman understood about the atom. For someone to state that he knows what happens after we die is a silly, arrogant statement based on pure ignorance and no evidence.

I don't believe in a God who would create imperfect people and then sacrifice his own son to save them. If he were really God, he would be able to accept us as we are, flaws and all. It's not necessary to kill someone to pay for our "sins". Define sin. There's no clear definition. Not even if you take the bible literally, there are too many contradictions. Sin, then becomes a man's interpretation of "God's Word". Un uh, nope. How about we just try not to be asses and take care of each other the best we can, and nobody has to die for any sins. That sounds like a better plan than "God's" plan. That guy sucketh at plans.

Twojedis, Though we both have come to the conclusion of the error of moism, we differ on the result to our faith. I hope that, in the future, you will again believe, not in TSCC, but in the need for forgiveness for sin, however one might define it.

In a Darwinian jungle where man is just an accident like rats or cockroaches, why should morality matter?

Isn't belief in God claimed to be some kind of mental illness by the celebrated atheist Richard Dawkins? In that case, so is morality some kind of mental illness.

I'm not sure what you are trying to get at, but in my mind morality is a societal imposition, you must display some level of morality to be accepted into the whole. Each society is responsible for deciding what their morality will look like, it isn't universal and it isn't right or wrong.

Religion's track record on defining morality = not so good.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 10:57AM by bc.

On the subject of man's worth, before the discussion strays...

Those who say that this whole universe came into being without God must come to grips with its implications. It means everything here is an accident. Rats and cockroaches are just accidents. So is man.

Why should man be concerned with morality when rats and cockroaches don't? When man dies, it's the end. There's nothing after that. Life is short, nasty, and brutal. So why not engage in a Darwinian contest of survival?

Like Joseph Smith, why not engage in as many adulteries as you can while you're alive? In the society he created, he made it possible even acceptable to do unload all the lust he can unload. His own people accepted it.

So is there such a thing as an evil act when people around you think it isn't?

katuwiran Wrote:
> So is there such a thing as an evil act when
> people around you think it isn't?


If a god defines good and evil, why would god so unevenly apply the principle across our different societies?

Is something good just because those around you and your religion say it is?

For example is slavery OK because your religion (and thus your God) says it is? Why did all Abrahamic religions support slavery for thousands of years? How about murder - e.g. stoning your own children to death for sexual deviancy?

There are reasons to be concerned with morality other than being punished or rewarded after this life. If you personally are too shallow to be moral without that fine - but quit imposing that morality on the rest of us.

Clearly it's not that great of a motivator - plenty of religious people do plenty of immoral things.

When Abrahamic religions start putting their money where their mouth is and start actually treating non-practitioners with kindness I'll be a little bit impressed.

I already get that it is "unfortunate" and that I am "immoral" from my TBM family because I left my religion. I don't need it from you.

Share your beliefs - fine. But quit implying that an atheist's existence is shallow and immoral. It's not. Mine isn't. Your straw man argument is dis-proven by counter example.

If God is how you derive your meaning - fine - go for it. But quit implying that one cannot find meaning any other way. You are wrong. Dead wrong.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 11:27AM by bc.

Another take on what you had to say:

Those who say that this whole universe came into being because God created it must come to grips with its implications. It means everything here is on purpose. Rats and cockroaches are just creation. So is man. So is the famine, disease, war.

Why should man be concerned with morality when God doesn't regarding all the elements in nature, for example, rats and cockroaches don't? Life is short, nasty, and brutal, God made it that way.

Like Joseph Smith, why not engage in as many adulteries as you can while you're alive? In the society GOD created, he made it possible even acceptable to do unload all the lust he can unload. God's own people accepted it all throughout time.

So is there such a thing as an evil act when god created us with an evil nature?

I am quite aware that many of us exmos here have made up our minds about atheism/agnosticism. I don't wish to change anyone's mind.

To the atheists, I will concede the idea that God may not exist, but then please explain what else stops you from inflicting every imaginable cruelty you can to those who you think deserve cruelty?

Christopher Hitchens, my favorite atheist, used his verbal talents to assault the charitable works of Mother Teresa. But he didn't mind using them to support George Bush's invasion of Iraq that claimed thousands upon thousands of human lives. Since he is an atheist, I can understand the moral void by which he chose to use his talents.

The worth of man is a concept that arose as a result of the Christian faith's 2,000 year existence. I am not aware of any other philosophy that affirms man's worth and significance. At least significant enough for God to send his Son.

If atheists speak of man's worth, it is because they are borrowing the concept from Christianity. Within atheism, it means nothing. If man is just an accident like rats and cockroaches, then man is no more of worth than rats and cockroaches.

"To the atheists, I will concede the idea that God may not exist, but then please explain what else stops you from inflicting every imaginable cruelty you can to those who you think deserve cruelty?"

Explain to me how religion stops this.

My experience is that religion encourages it.

----

Try to change my mind all you want, just quit making judgmental, condescending statements about my path. The implication that my life has no meaning and is immoral because I don't believe the same as you is insulting and offensive. It feels like I'm talking to a TBM.

----

And regarding religion as the moral high road (Regarding religion's atrocious record as a moral guide.):

1) Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
2) Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

---

The reason humans have a sense of morality is we evolved that way - it allowed humans to better cooperate and thus survive. The reason we have ethics is that as a society we define them as our civilization and culture advances. It's not hard to see how far humanity has advanced in that area in the last 4,000 years - despite religion.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 11:37AM by bc.

"To the atheists, I will concede the idea that God may not exist, but then please explain what else stops you from inflicting every imaginable cruelty you can to those who you think deserve cruelty?"

Morality, empathy, a common sense of goodness.

Now, the question to you: Please explain how you can support an all powerful being that you believe created you to be innately evil for the sole purpose of worshiping him, while he does nothing to stop the evils in the world (which by the way, you have to believe he set in motion)?

I'm going to steal this from Wiki because I'm tired and will surely mess it up:

God exists.

God is omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good.

A perfectly good being would want to prevent all evils.

An omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence.

An omnipotent being, who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence.

A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil.

If there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good being, then no evil exists.

Evil exists (logical contradiction).

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

Not a big fan of cockroaches or rats, but killing anything gives me pause.

Spiders and flies go outside. I'd rather they live out there than in my apartment. Getting a fly outside is not easy.

I have morals. At times they're questionable. I try to check that.

I lash out in anger. I try to check that, too.

When I'm able, I try to give whatever I can, my time, my talents, to people who need them.

I am an atheist, and it was a lot easier to hurt people when all I had to do was pray for forgiveness and *poof*, I'm "right with God."

Now I have to be right with me. That's much harder.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 11:34AM by Beth.

Yeah it was a lot easier when you could rationalize immoral actions and attitudes just because God said you should, huh?

Chop that head off Nephi...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 11:38AM by bc.

That claim that "God is not concerned with morality" is not a Christian claim.

The presence of rats, cockroaches, and pestilences are explained in Genesis.

All I ever want to ask is how atheism became a RATIONAL option after Mormonism. If atheism is taken to its logical conclusion, what we have is a horribly depressing vision. Even the original atheists themselves acknowledge this. You have to come to grips with a substantial amount of nihilism.

You'll have to deal with the fact that whatever cruelty Hitler, Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot did were morally neutral actions.

Look up the writings of Dawkins, Hitchens, or Harris, they never deal with mass murderers.

Whether something is depressing or not has no bearing on whether it is reality.

>>"You'll have to deal with the fact that whatever cruelty Hitler, Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot did were morally neutral actions."

Wow! That's incredibly ridiculous. The assertion that there is no moral code and no ethics without a God is incredibly silly.

-

If you believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob then you have to believe that murder and rape are morally positive actions.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 11:52AM by bc.

Atheists dig mass murders and dictators?

Bizarre.

He has stated before in other threads that he believes that Atheists should be OK with rape and incest because the only thing keeping humans in line is literally the fear of god and punishment in the afterlife. (It was suggested that he should keep his religion for fear of what he would do, unleashed onto society with the only tether keeping him from pillaging anything he sees gone.)

If he has actually read any of the authors he states, he would know about kin relationships, societal influence, ideas of where morals really come from (hint, not religion), etc. But he chooses to ignore all that in favor of a God.

If you believe in God you have to believe that he created evil, including Hitler, et all. That he created them to be the people that they turned out to be. That God had some purpose for them to behave the way that they did.

As an atheist, I can look at the Hitlers of the world and see them for the sick demented outliers that they are. People who had something go wrong upstairs who lost their moral code. I don't have to write any other significance or "deal" with it any other way than that.

Because it advances our chances of survival. We are evolutionary creatures and as such, we do whatever it takes to increase our odds of propagating our species.

Religion is one of those things.

I'm with Beth - she's the one practicing the Golden Rule here. Just trying to save the OP from another mindscrew.

I appreciate you are attempting the same in saving your neighbor, but for all of Christianity's big claims, there is very little evidence offered. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence afterall. A bunch of fables copied down, mauled and promoted by people with known agendas doesn't hack it for me.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 02:36PM by iflewover.

A child does as he is told for fear of punishment and hope of reward. Religion treats people like children. Christians believe that without God, there is no reason to behave, which is why they fear non-theists.

True morality comes from empathy. I treat my cats well not because someone will punish me for hurting them or reward me for taking care of them, but because it would pain me to see them hurt and pleases me to see them happy. I would not like to steal from someone because I know how much it hurts to be stolen from. The only true sins are those that cause undo pain to others, which is why marijuana and consensual sex are not sins in my view. Meanwhile, polluting the environment and killing habitats is one of the worst sins humans have ever done and are doing.

Mormonism has such shallow morality because they care more about your bed and your glass than how you treat this planet. It is fine for them to shun a gay son, but not okay to drink ice tea. If there is a god, he would likely care far more about how we treat his creations than whether we sit our butts in churches every Sunday and pay tithing.

I think that you have tripped over the same wire that many do. You have decided that Christianity is the path to god and then you decided that Paul knows better than Jesus. Jesus never taught worthlessness as a human condition, never. Jesus taught that humans are inherently flawed, but he never taught that the condition was anything hard work couldn't overcome.

Go ask your pastor what the theological debate is between Paul v Jesus. My guess is that if he is aware of it at all he will dance around it but the bottom line is Paul is a faith man, and Jesus is a works man.

On a final note as an atheist I am a works man, and I find inspiration in many of Jesus humanistic teachings.

Atone for what?

Original sin?

Being human?

I don't chase after imaginary carrots anymore. Survival of the fittest is the only theory that makes sense in this life.

I appreciate your comments

Mormonism is way off on a tangent of Christianity. They have been indoctrinated to believe that if they have a temple recommend, that they are worthy and they are going straight to heaven.

Not so.

I believe that after we die, people will be expecting justice. You cannot harm others and expect a free pass because of Jesus. Jesus decides if he is going to forgive us. We need to understand that we are in submission to him. He will forgive us if we repent with humility.

The arrogant mormon mentality of declaring yourself, or having your church declaring you as worthy is a huge false doctrine. We are all equal in that we all sin. Judging others as sinners and not our selves is not a Christian teaching.

We all sin, we all fall short of the mark, we all need access to a Saviour, but Jesus decides if He will forgive us, if the demands of forgiveness have been met, otherwise, we will have to suffer for our own sins. For example, a rapist that got away with it and didn't repent, will have to suffer for what he did. There is no free pass, someone has to pay to satisfy justice.

Jesus also looks at your heart, your motivation for doing things. If you have taken advantage of others you whole life, you will not be with those that have given themselves to others. Just because a mormon has a TR means nothing.

We need to be in a constant state of humble gratitude for the atonement, not in an arrogant state of "I'm worthy"

I agree.

I think one of the biggest things that differentiates Mormonism, in a bad way, from other Christianity is it's focus on "worthiness".

It is actually a excuse for:
Discrimination
Sexism
Exclusion
Public Shaming

It makes public things that should remain private.

It excludes families from experiencing things like weddings together.

It enforces thought control since the first basis of "worthiness" is having a testimony of the right things.

In my Christian experience "worthiness" is a term seldom used and is very much a Mormon thing. Grace on the other hand is absent or diminished within Mormonism but elevated highly within conventional Christianity. It is the concept of grace, defined as unmerited favor, that God gives freely to all who come to him that enables them to bridge the gap between the mortal and fallen state and God's holy and exalted state. Christians I know center their lives around grace and not concepts such as worthiness or unworthiness. Guilt and feelings of unworthiness have no place in the life of a Christian.

Kentish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> unmerited favor, that God gives
> freely to all who come to him

You don't see the contradiction in that phrase, do you?

If you don't come to him you haven't merited the favor. If it were truly a freely given unmerited favor, then we wouldn't need to do anything. No belief in God, no acceptance of Jesus as one's savior, nothing.

But the free gift is conditional, just like with Mormonism. The conditions are just different and to a different degree.

Stray Mutt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But the free gift is conditional, just like with
> Mormonism. The conditions are just different and
> to a different degree.


I would also add the conditions of:

1. Being born after Christ's lifetime.
2. Being born in a place and time that offers some level of knowledge of Christ's life.
3. Being literate.
4. Having adequate access to the written words of Christ in your own language, and an "expert" in those written words to explain to you how it all works.

These conditions do nothing for the ancient aborigines of Australia. F*ck them, I guess.

Wow! I never expected this topic to take off like this. I would compare the LDS church's "calling and election made sure" to being saved by grace except that having your "calling and election made sure" is a decision made by man, not by God. Being saved by grace was as simple as telling God that I deny Mormism for eternity and accept His Son into my heart for eternity and ask forgiveness for all I've done to offend him. I did this on January 28 and I have had a feeling that Mormons would describe as the Holy Ghost ever since. Again, I don't say this is for everyone. I know that religion is used to abuse and deceive. I'm happy where I am.

My main intent in this post was to demonstrate how my Bishop was so dismissive of my concern and literally mocked me as if I were a naive teenager (I'm in my 40s and served a mission.)

I really appreciated hearing your approach and faith and what it meant to you. I'm not on the same path, but I'm glad its working for you.

I was just reading a treatise last night by Cardinal Scola, his doctorates are in philosophy/theology.

In Catholicism, the individual is seen as having worth and dignity due to being created by God and saved by Christ's atonement.
This standing oes not have to earned,it is the heritage of the faithful.

Glo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This standing oes not have to earned,it is the
> heritage of the faithful.


But because it is not the heritage of the non-faithful, then it DOES need to be earned -- by being among the faithful.

No, if you don't come to him you reject the favor he has already extended. Your choice.

First off... don't let yourself be told that you aren't worthy. That is someone telling you that you have an imaginary disease so they can sell you the imaginary cure. You ARE worthy and original sin is bullshit.

Second, to the person who says that Richard Dawkins has a belief in some sort of a god... do some more research. I had a whole thing typed about that but decided not to post it. Just do some research before you post blatantly false "facts" like that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 12:28PM by cecil0812.

It sounds like you were arguing semantics with your bishop. The words he said meant a different thing than the words you said. Just because neither of you could use similar terms does not mean one religion is more true than another.

Sure, it's a fact that there's some crap in the Bible, but it's not exactly a known law of physics that some god-guy's blood and or his suffering saves billions of people from their mostly intangible sins. Seriously, how does that work--in physical terms, I mean? And what kind of sadistic mofo invents such a procedure?

The idea of unworthiness is one of the most destructive ideas ever foisted upon the human race, and Christianity did it long before anyone thought of Mormonism. Mormonism only just made it into a big impossible test.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 01:31PM by munchybotaz.

There are several "born again" Christian churches in southern Alberta that have dumped on Mormonism and preach the whole "you have to be born again" and Mormons aren't real Christians bullshit. As much as I dislike Mormonism and the control freak mentality and guilt they preach, I really hate the intolerance the evangelicals have as their stock in trade.

I was raised to be tolerant of others by my LDS parents. All of my Mom's family are never-mo and our family always had many friends outside the church.
Being kind and compassionate to your fellow man trumps everything else.

Ron Burr



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2013 01:12PM by Lethbridge Reprobate.