How I Lost My Christian Faith in 1992 - Sad Story but Perhaps Blessing in Disguise?

[MrMan]

Wow MrMan. Those are very detailed examples of answered prayers. Very amazing. Too much to be coincidence. Keep in mind that New Agers have explanations for such answered prayers too. But atheists like Gali have none. That's why atheism is the WEAKEST model because it explains nothing and has NO answers to stuff like answered prayers, miracles, ghosts, consciousness, etc. Hence it's the weakest model and the worst model. I can't understand why any rational person would adopt it. At least New Age has some explanations for those things.

And Christians have explanations for New Age stuff. There are all kinds of spirits that have some degree of power, and of course naturalistic explanations, too.

About abductions, yes some people have halted them by uttering the name of Jesus. But some have tried it and it didn't work. Aliens are not all the same. Some respond to Jesus name, others don't. Look up serious researchers of ET abductions such as Dr. Karla Turner, Bud Hopkins, and John Mack. They address this and say that no, not all abductions stop in the name of Jesus. It's not that simple. It could be that uttering the name of Jesus activates some powerful aspect of you within, which halts the abduction too. If that's the case, then uttering Buddha or Krishna would work too.

You are assuming the power is within. Didn't you post debunking some of these types of New Age ideas-- the law of attraction and such.

Some demons pretending to be space aliens may back off just at the mention of the name of Jesus. Others might realize that the person saying it has no faith or no authority. The book of Acts mentions seven sons of Sceva, a priest. who went around doing exorcisms. They tried to cast a demon out of a man telling him to come out in the name of Jesus, Whom Paul preaches. The spirit replied Jesus I know and Paul I know, but who are you, and the men went out of there naked and bleeding.

Jesus has authority over all these spirits, whether they support him or are in rebellion. Not everyone who mentions Jesus' name has authority. I suspect a lot of people who are really deep into the alien abduction stuff have spent a lot of time in the occult. Hugh Ross has a Ph.D. in astrophysics. He's also a Christian and a pastor. He is one of the few astrophysicists who interviews people who claim to have experiences with UFOs and aliens. Most stuff in his experience could be explained by natural explanations like weather balloons and stuff. Then you get into people who see ships that violate the law of physics, see aliens, talk with aliens, etc. For the ones whose experiences could not be explained by natural means, he noticed a pattern. Those who dabbled in the occult had 'light' experiences. Those that were heavily into it had more intense experiences-- talking to aliens, abductions and such.

The book 'Communion' is about someone with these experience, and he wrote about his thoughts about how evil these things were and wondered if they were demons.

[Winston]

Wow it looks like I already wrote about this story some time ago. I just found another thread in the related threads section at the bottom where I related the same story in 1992.

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=7056

[Winston]

However, what's important are Jesus' core teachings, if you can grab the essence of them, you have the true message of God, which is not in books or dogma.

Jesus was not a fundamentalist either, he did not like literal interpretations of the OT and the law of Moses, and always rebuked them and preferred esoteric interpretations. This means he would not agree with the Christian fundamentalist interpretation of his teachings today. That's what Christians don't get.

You are contradictory. In your posts you say that God isn't perfect or doesn't have to be perfect. Yet Jesus said, Be you therefore perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect. (Matthew 5:48).

Jesus also said, I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father but by me. (John 14:6).

Yet in your other posts you've said Jesus can't be the only way.

So you are saying He's a great teacher and is good, yet you contradict His statements. You can't have it both ways.

Not exactly. Every wise person knows that Jesus' teachings have been corrupted by Paul and the Church and by 2000 years of history and editing. That's one of the most central facts about religion. Only fundamentalists don't see it. We don't know what Jesus' original teachings were. No one does. That's the 64k question. However if you are very spiritual and wise and have a 6th sense, you can sort of discern from the Akashic Records and from the universal mind and consciousness, what the essence of his teachings were. It's not something you can figure out with logic, only a higher mind connected to the Universal Consciousness or Christ Consciousness. Once you are connected to that, you can sort of figure out what Jesus' core teachings were. Hope that makes sense.

Btw, even if the historical Jesus did say those verses you quote, it wouldn't make it true. No one is infallible. If all the trillions of cells in your body believed you to be infallible because you are their "God" would that make it true? Plus words like that can always be taken out of context. And no one is right about everything. Everyone makes mistakes, even the gods do. Even the God of the OT was a flawed being who made mistakes and lost his temper and had to learn from them. You are a victim of a control system and don't even realize it.

Also, the irony is that if a holy man today said "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me." you would think he was a crackpot. Yet it's ok if someone says it 2000 years ago? lol. See what you are doing? You are projecting your God to something external and far away, never finding the God within. That's the core fallacy of your religion. Even if you had lived 2000 years ago and heard Jesus say that in person, you would have thought he was a crackpot too, naturally. See what I mean? Your beliefs don't hold water if you think about it.

[Winston]

Wow MrMan. Those are very detailed examples of answered prayers. Very amazing. Too much to be coincidence. Keep in mind that New Agers have explanations for such answered prayers too. But atheists like Gali have none. That's why atheism is the WEAKEST model because it explains nothing and has NO answers to stuff like answered prayers, miracles, ghosts, consciousness, etc. Hence it's the weakest model and the worst model. I can't understand why any rational person would adopt it. At least New Age has some explanations for those things.

And Christians have explanations for New Age stuff. There are all kinds of spirits that have some degree of power, and of course naturalistic explanations, too.

Yes but the thing is, the New Age explanations are more broad minded and inclusive and make more sense. It accounts for all the data across time and place and different cultures. It's closer to a "theory of everything" whereas orthodox religion is not. That's the difference. It is also not black and white like Christianity is.

About abductions, yes some people have halted them by uttering the name of Jesus. But some have tried it and it didn't work. Aliens are not all the same. Some respond to Jesus name, others don't. Look up serious researchers of ET abductions such as Dr. Karla Turner, Bud Hopkins, and John Mack. They address this and say that no, not all abductions stop in the name of Jesus. It's not that simple. It could be that uttering the name of Jesus activates some powerful aspect of you within, which halts the abduction too. If that's the case, then uttering Buddha or Krishna would work too.

You are assuming the power is within. Didn't you post debunking some of these types of New Age ideas-- the law of attraction and such.

Some demons pretending to be space aliens may back off just at the mention of the name of Jesus. Others might realize that the person saying it has no faith or no authority. The book of Acts mentions seven sons of Sceva, a priest. who went around doing exorcisms. They tried to cast a demon out of a man telling him to come out in the name of Jesus, Whom Paul preaches. The spirit replied Jesus I know and Paul I know, but who are you, and the men went out of there naked and bleeding.

Jesus has authority over all these spirits, whether they support him or are in rebellion. Not everyone who mentions Jesus' name has authority. I suspect a lot of people who are really deep into the alien abduction stuff have spent a lot of time in the occult. Hugh Ross has a Ph.D. in astrophysics. He's also a Christian and a pastor. He is one of the few astrophysicists who interviews people who claim to have experiences with UFOs and aliens. Most stuff in his experience could be explained by natural explanations like weather balloons and stuff. Then you get into people who see ships that violate the law of physics, see aliens, talk with aliens, etc. For the ones whose experiences could not be explained by natural means, he noticed a pattern. Those who dabbled in the occult had 'light' experiences. Those that were heavily into it had more intense experiences-- talking to aliens, abductions and such.

The book 'Communion' is about someone with these experience, and he wrote about his thoughts about how evil these things were and wondered if they were demons.

Yes New Age ideas are commercialized and contain BS, but just like the Bible it does contain some truth. Not zero truth. Look for the independent New Agers who have nothing to sell and no profit motive. Those are the most genuine ones.

There is power within, but most do not know how to harness it, and it is very limited, not all powerful. Why do you think prayers do not bend the laws of physics or gravity? Doesn't that say that God is not all powerful and only very limited?

That guy I listened to before, Jeffrey Daugherty said that Jesus was lord of the demons, that's why he had authority over them. He implied that Jesus was part of the demonic kingdom himself. He went really over the top with all that, before his channel got banned. He said a lot of things no one would dare say, not even me. I gotta wonder though, if he could be right? If so it would explain a lot.

Yes many alien abductees are into the occult. Many of them are artists too, with a strong right brain and high in creativity and imagination. That's what researchers found. Many are also from an abductee bloodline, so their parents and ancestors were abductees too. So are their descendents. I don't know why. But the Greys themselves have said that these people made a soul contract with them to be abductees, so they do have the right to abduct them.

You also assume MrMan, that all abduction experiences are negative. Some are positive, how do you explain that? For example, Billy Meier has had positive contactee experiences since the 1950s, with the Pleiadians. He has thousands of photos to prove it, which experts cannot duplicate without CGI, not even with small scale models. These photos are from the 1970s so there was no CGI he could have used. They've always treated him like a friend. How can they be demonic then?

Same with Alex Collier. He's an Andromedan Contactee who has had positive contact with ETs from Andromeda and even been aboard their ship. How can that be if they are demonic?

Also Travis Walton in 1975 was accidentally harmed by a UFO in Arizona. They took him on board and fixed him because they felt bad for what they did. After one week they put him back down on Earth after he was healed of his injuried. It's the most credible abduction case ever, and very well documented. No skeptic has ever been able to debunk it and they often become believers. Why would demons fix someone up like that? Aren't demons supposed to be 100 percent evil?

Also, Bob Lazar saw 9 alien craft at Area 51 in Nevada being back engineered. They were physical craft. The US government has them. So how can that be demonic? Demons would disappear right?

Btw MrMan, you would love this documentary I saw on YouTube called "The Omega Conspiracy". It's an older documentary but it does a bait and switch. First it pretends to be a normal open minded UFO documentary. Then in the last half hour, it starts to interview people who say that UFOs/Aliens are demons and lying spirits. You would love it. It's your kind of thing. It's free up on YouTube last I saw.

Also, this French man named Jacques Valles, who is not even a Christian, also said that UFOs were demonic and deceptive. So did Dr. Karla Turner. Yet neither were Christians. You can find some of Jacques Valles interviews online. And Dr. Karla Turner has many lectures online from the 1990s.

It seems that those who get too heavily into this topic meet a tragic demise. Dr. Karla Turner was abducted one night while driving alone, after being warned not to drive alone. When she came back she had an unusual form of breast cancer, which quickly spread all over her like wildfire. She had no chance at that point. Very unusual. All her fans believe she was murdered. Two other top researchers on abductions, Bud Hopkins and Dr. John Mack, also had unusual deaths or accidents. So it seems that if you expose this topic too much or make a career out of it, you are gotten rid of somehow. Very scary and disturbing. Even Art Bell has a sudden and mysterious death after exposing this topic for decades. Hope it doesn't happen to George Noory.

[TruthSeeker]

You made my point exactly Winston. If someone came along today and said "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me" we'd call him a crackpot or some kind of cult leader.

When Jesus said it, they did not because it was the truth. It rang of TRUTH.

Have you ever had someone tell you the truth and you know it's the truth? It's kind of a sixth sense. Just like when someone is lying you can tell that they are lying.

I do not think that Paul or others corrupted Jesus' teachings. Paul was given additional revelation for instruction of the Church.

Without the shedding of blood there is no remission for sins. (Hebrews 9:22).

Jesus is that ultimate sacrificial Lamb acceptable to the Father.

[Winston]

You made my point exactly Winston. If someone came along today and said "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me" we'd call him a crackpot or some kind of cult leader.

When Jesus said it, they did not because it was the truth. It rang of TRUTH.

Have you ever had someone tell you the truth and you know it's the truth? It's kind of a sixth sense. Just like when someone is lying you can tell that they are lying.

I do not think that Paul or others corrupted Jesus' teachings. Paul was given additional revelation for instruction of the Church.

Without the shedding of blood there is no remission for sins. (Hebrews 9:22).

Jesus is that ultimate sacrificial Lamb acceptable to the Father.

Yeah but the point is, if you had met Jesus when he said that, you would have thought he was a crackpot too. Admit it. Come on. The Pharisees thought he was a crackpot too remember?

If it rang of truth, then why do most people not believe Jesus is the only way to God? Even the most spiritually advanced people do not think that. Their sixth sense and intuition do not tell them that. My God given conscience does not either. How do you explain that? Only people who want everything to be simple and literal and clearly defined in black and white want Jesus to be the only way.

Yes I can tell if someone is lying most of the time. My intuition is good, so it my empathy and gut feeling. But I do not sense that Jesus is the only way or that the BIble is infallible and uncorrupted. No way. Even Alex who loves Jesus, does not believe that. Nothing written and edited by man is infallible. That's a trick by the Church, and you fell for it.

Paul may claim he has additional revelation. But that's his claim. Doesn't make it true. I already quoted two verses where Paul says that his writing is HIS opinion only, not God's remember? His letters are to the church, not to be canonized as scripture. The church did canonize it because it fit their agenda. Nowhere does Paul say that his letters are canonized scripture. It's obvious. Don't you see that? Any freethinker can see that. Even Alex can.

[Winston]

I asked Alex how to know which of Jesus' teachings is original and which are corrupted. Here's his guideline. It makes sense.

Alex:

"by reading a long text you can recognize a writing "style" right? and if style change remarkably then you can reasonably suppose a different person wrote that part of the text. Now the same can be done with personality patterns and teaching patterns. If the great majority of Jesus teachings from NT points in one direction we can assume that a contradictory teaching may be due to inaccurate report or corrupted text"

[MrMan]

I asked Alex how to know which of Jesus' teachings is original and which are corrupted. Here's his guideline. It makes sense.

Alex:

"by reading a long text you can recognize a writing "style" right? and if style change remarkably then you can reasonably suppose a different person wrote that part of the text. Now the same can be done with personality patterns and teaching patterns. If the great majority of Jesus teachings from NT points in one direction we can assume that a contradictory teaching may be due to inaccurate report or corrupted text"

You could also argue that Steven Speilburg did not direct Shindler's List since it is so different from ET and Indiana Jones. Or one could argue that Mark Twain did not write _A Connecticut Yankee in King Authur's Court_ because it is so different from Huckleberry Finn.

[Winston]

Thats not the same MrMan. Because a fiction writer or movie director can make different stories. But the style and personality is usually consistent. Different fictional stories don't contradict because they are not literal.

[Winston]

To Alex:

Yes true. But some of that is subjective. Its also a bit subjective because tend to accept the teachings they like and reject the ones they dont.

Alex:

it's not subjective if the amount of contradictory events are a small minority compared to other events that are consistent

in the case they were same amount that would cause great uncertainty and subjective choices

like if Jesus ten times in different ways teaches forgiveness and non violence and then one time he shows anger and violence, that one event is either misrepresented or an exception to the rule

Winston:

But everyone can lose their temper sometimes under stress. Even Jesus can. Even u and i can. Right?

However a man doesnt usually teach one thing and then teach the opposite.

Alex:

exactly. So by recognizing the core teachings, the consistent part of the teaching you can recognize also what is not consistent and contradictory and therefore you may consider such as result of text corruption or misrepresentation

[MrMan]

in the case they were same amount that would cause great uncertainty and subjective choices

like if Jesus ten times in different ways teaches forgiveness and non violence and then one time he shows anger and violence, that one event is either misrepresented or an exception to the rule

Winston:

But everyone can lose their temper sometimes under stress. Even Jesus can. Even u and i can. Right?

However a man doesnt usually teach one thing and then teach the opposite.

Maybe you are interjecting Buddhist ideas or just your own ideas into passages about forgiveness. The accounts about Jesus overturning the tables of the money changers and the seats of them that sold doves which should not have been in the temple do not even say that He was angry. I saw one of those Jesus movies where the actor looked angry. Maybe that is what you are thinking of. Jesus saw injustice and had authority to correct it as the Son of God, and did so. I hear they made anyone that wanted to offer a lamb by it in the temple instead of getting it from his flock like the Old Testament required, and that they had taken over the part where 'all nations' were supposed to come and turn it into a marketplace for these activities.

I did a search on 'angr' in the New Testament and came up with these verses that have to do with people being angry.

Luke 15:28
And he was angry, and would not go in: therefore came his father out, and intreated him.

John 7:23
If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?

Ephesians 4:26
Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:

Titus 1:7
For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;


Also Jesus taught if your brother sins and says, "I repent" forgive him. Maybe you think 'forgive' means let stuff slide and don't do anything about it. It could be you have a different concept of forgiveness, like from that dude in the robe in Tibet or something like that.

[Winston]

I forgot to mention something significant in my Christian deconversion story of 1992. One time i was reading this big book called "Intangible Evidence". I had just gotten out of high school and was enjoying my newfound freedom and exploration. The book contained a lot of interesting info on psychic phenomenon, astrology, the occult, etc. My mind was fascinated and excited and blown away by it. However part of me felt scared and guilty too. Because i had been a Christian since 1983 and was not supposed to be interested in this stuff. It was condemned by Christianity and considered demonic and satanic. So i was inviting the wrath of God by reading this book. This gave me mixed feelings. Something didnt seem right about all this conflict. Why couldn't i pursue my intellectual hobbies and interests without feeling fear and guilt, I wondered. Something didn't seem right.

I think at that point subconsciously I started fishing for reasons and excuses why my Christian faith was not what i was told, in order to resolve such conflicts, and give myself more intellectual freedom to pursue my interests. It was at that point I started reading stuff that was aimed at debunking Christianity. In the mid 1990s when the internet came out, I started reading articles by Robert Ingersoll, a 19th century author who heavily criticized the Bible and Christian church with powerful eloquent writings. They were very persuasive and i began to be sure that Christianity was not what i had believed. It was only then that my fear of condemnation from God began to subside. I also read articles from the secular web, which contained an archive of atheist articles debunking Christianity. They made many good points. I realized that Christianity was not as unassailable as i thought it was.

The main lesson here is that not everyone is meant to be a Christian. If u have a strong desire to study the occult or astrology or psychic phenomenon for example, like i did, then Christianity is not right for you. Just like if u have a strong desire to eat meat then vegetarianism is not right for you. Because it will restrict your freedom to be yourself and pursue what you love. The typical devout Christian for example, usually has no desire to study the occult or astrology. So they do not feel restricted from doing what they want. But if u do then obviously Christianity isnt right for you. This is what fundamentalists dont get. They assume Christianity is right for everyone and that everyone is meant to be a Christian and that that is God's will. It just isnt so.

For example, I have no desire to eat meat, so being a vegetarian is easy and natural to me. Likewise a devout Christian usually has no desire to study the occult. So its easy for them to be a Christian. You see what i mean? Someone into the occult is better suited for Paganism or Wicca or the mystery schools or ancient esoteric alchemy like ancient Egyptian spirituality, etc. So it's a mistake and fallacy to assume everyone is meant to be a Christian. Do you see what i mean? Do you agree?

What's a bit disturbing is that if Christian fundamentalists had their way, in their ideal world, everyone would be a Christian and all religious non-Christian books would be burned and destroyed. There would be no religious diversity at all. That would be a terrible thing. Don't you agree? Of course it would be, but in the ideal world of the Christian fundamentalists that would be the case. If you think about it thats pretty disturbing and sad and demented isnt it? Do Christians ever think or realize this? Even intelligent Christians like David Wood or William Lane Craig?

One more point. When Christians use arguments such as fulfilled Bible prophecies or evidence for the resurrection of Jesus to support their faith, the thing is those arent the real reasons for their belief or faith. The real reason is that the faith connects with their soul at some deeper level. And those arguments used to justify their faith are just that, reasons used to try to justify a PRE-existing belief.

This is human nature and cuts both ways though. Because if u are seeking to leave the Christian faith then u will justify it with reasons why fulfilled prophecies and resurrection arguments are flawed arguments and don't hold water, like atheists do. I have experienced this on both sides, when i was trying to justify my Christian faith and when i was trying to detach from it. So all the reasons and arguments that Christian authors and apologists give are there to justify a PRE-existing belief. They aren't the actual core reasons for or causes of their belief or faith. Do you see what I mean? Have any of you realized this too?

To use a simpler analogy, if you like someone and resonate with them, you will find reasons to justify it, such as see qualities in them that you like and find admirable. Conversely if u dislike someone you will fish for reasons to justify your dislike of them. Women especially do this and thats why they focus on trivial things when they like or dislike people, things that don't matter but they use them to justify their like or dislike of others. I've seen this countless times with women. For example, Dianne likes the core essence of who i am. So everything about me including my quirks and eccentricities, are seen in a positive light by her, even if they are weird to most people. You see what I mean?