Priscillian,

I must be reading my posts very differently to others if you feel I’m not addressing this calmly. I’m even doing by best to avoid reacting to the occasional snipe - which I don’t mind too much anyway.

In regards to Mr Sellick’s article, I was concerned that I was too far off topic, but at the same time, I think my point about not being able to distinguish between god and something that doesn’t exist (a point relevant to all sophisticated Christians) pretty much covers the premise of the article to render the rest of it fairly meaningless. Although, I will add that as far as the trinity goes, I think Thomas Jefferson said it all that needs to be said:

“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.”

As for the length of my responses, I feel it’s important to address these misconceptions thoroughly as possible so as to not leave any sense of doubt and uncertainly or drag it out any longer than necessary.

I don’t hold too much hope of changing anyone’s view here, although I am walking proof that it’s not impossible. I like to communicate my points on this topic in such a way that I believe could have made a difference for me when I was a believer.

A J Phillips
I say "fair enough" to everything you just said.
I find your ex-believer status very interesting. I bet you that your attitude to religion was not changed by someone who talked you out of it but that it occurred in increments(like evolution). In my case I was born an atheist (like we all are) and have found no reason to change.

In the book "godless" by Dan Barker he explains how he moved from fire and brimstone preacher, to atheism. A fascinating story. You would be surprised what initially sparked a niggling doubt in his mind, and it wasn't a non-believer. I saw Dan speak at the Atheist convention last January and his description of the mind of a true believer was a real insight. I recommend the book to anyone reading this, believer or skeptic.
American philosopher, Dan Dennett, delivered, at a seminar, the results of a study that investigated the level of disbelief amongst the clergy in the USA. This talk can be found on Youtube. The results are astounding.

That’s spot on, Priscillian...

<<I bet you that your attitude to religion was not changed by someone who talked you out of it but that it occurred in increments(like evolution).>>

From what I’ve read, my de-conversion process was similar to that of Dan Barker’s actually.

I was a very enthusiastic Christian. From an early age, I would debate the existence of god with the kids at school and try to bring them to god by convincing them of his existence. When I got too old for Sunday school, I immediately volunteered to assist to one of the Sunday school teachers and then - being someone who gets along well with children - eventually became a Sunday school teacher myself.

I didn’t consider myself an “evangelical” as that was a bit of a dirty word in the Lutheran church I attended (it’s association to the real crackpot, happy-clappy Pentecostal churches was too strong) but I would preach to anyone who seemed the slightest bit interested in hearing the “Good News”.

I'd attend weekly Bible study and even had my own little pocket Bible I carried around with me everywhere. The thought of seminary would even cross my mind occasionally.

Yep, I lived and breathed religion; and god’s love was like a constant high for me.

My de-conversion process is a long story, but it’s best summarized by the chapter “I Just Lost Faith in Faith” in Dan Barker’s book: http://ffrf.org/legacy/books/lfif/?t=lostfaith

I’ll be sure to check out that talk of Dan Dennett’s. Yes, disbelief amongst the clergy and Pastors of the Protestant denominations is quite surprising. Many stop believing but continue the work anyway because it’s all they know.

Reason starts to set in for some theists and in my observation, they’ll usually respond in one of two ways:

-admit that there’s no good reason to continue believing, or;
-push god further and further into an untouchable realm of the unknown.

Anyway, thanks for your responses, they were a timely reminder that I’ve said quite enough for now. I’ve made more than enough points to be content to leave it at that.

A J Phillips and anybody else interested
The Dan Dennett talk I mentioned earlier can be found at:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_9w8JougLQ
Highly recommended.
Thank you for your story A J. I guess it hasn't been easy for you. You have my admiration.

AJ

Do you believe that science is able to reveal all that there is to know about life?

Waterboy.
I'm not speaking for A J but I think your question is an interesting one. I don't think science or scientists have ever claimed that they can know everything about life. What they do claim is that the testing and re-testing of theories can lead us closer to the truth and that superstitious beliefs deny the beautiful complexity and wonder of the natural universe . Although the ancient texts so loved by the believers make extraordinary claims they fail time after time to deliver proof. I will be the first to convert when this proof is delivered in a logic and testable fashion.The same goes for water divining and fairies.