If I was an unbeliever reading some of these posts I'd probably say, "I'm so glad I'm not a Christian!" Who wants to end up arguing over textual variants! Not that these posters are, but much of Christian discussion is about fluff. Vague, unprovable concepts, small data sets, ignorance and bias. I can still hear Witness Lee saying, "This means that" and, "This shows us that" and, "We must see that"... Assumption piled onto assumption.
"So subjective is my Christ in me..." yes so subjective. And who else would want your subjectivity as their de facto objective reality? No thanks!
Not speaking for
kappagamma, but this was her thread, once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kappagamma
I was required to attend every Sunday, as well summer school of truths, conferences, and even semi-annuals when I was older. I lived in a sisters house a few years in college and attended FTT-Anaheim for two years. I would say that I was marginally in the CL until the FTT. It was there that most of the issues that I had came to the forefront and I, from that point, couldn't ignore it anymore and made my eventual (but quiet) exit. To me it was just another religion and, having been taught my whole life religion was bad... well, there you have it. Really intrigued to know if there are others here who have been through the FTT and found it to remove a veil rather than adding one?
|
I think this is a valid objection and should be taken on face value. If the Lord's Recovery (LR) teaches that ALL religion is bad, and an ex "Church Kid" realizes that there's nothing in the LR for them, then why not ditch religion altogether?
1. Nobody can prove God exists.
2. Nobody can prove that God raised Jesus from the dead.
3. Nobody can prove that the blood of Jesus does cleanse you from sin.
4. Nobody can prove that there is consciousness after death, which needs forgiveness to avoid suffering, torment etc.
I mean, if the whole thing ends up arguing over declensions and the meaning of the word "nature", then why not just chuck it all? I think that's a pretty good argument.
In my case, I am a Christian because I chose to believe in God (a universe with God somehow seemed 'warmer' than a universe without God [sorry]), and I thought the narrative figure of 'Jesus' still remains the most compelling story of human history. If it wasn't true, I wish it were. So I believe.
The "church" I am less sanguine about. But Jesus as the route to God seems attractive to me. Sorta like your first teen-age crush - you can't really explain it but it just feels right. But why impose that on others!?! Either they get it or they don't. If they don't get it, let them be at peace! I mean, really! The "gospel" should not be about us imposing our neediness on others. Most of the LR-type "gospel" I see is just that. People "need" recruits because their masters at HQ are thumping the drum - revenues are down, growth is flat - go out there and sell, sell, sell! So they go out and impose themselves on weak-willed souls.
The gospel should be a display of power - the same power that raised Jesus from the dead. It should be so obvious. If there's any curtain-pulling moment where the Great and Powerful Wizard of Oz is shown to be just a con man, well so be it (I think of WL's phone call to Sal Benoit - "It's MY business what I do with YOUR money!"). This includes Paul, Jesus, Peter, David, Moses. Everyone is on the dock. If Christianity is a sham, let's have it out on the table.
The gospel should also be a display of peace. Not speeches and rhetoric, but peace. Speech can be used, but speech can never displace peace. The gospel should be about love, patience, kindness etc. You know all the words. Get a Thesaurus. They are all there. Lastly it should be about joy. If I am unhappy because you're not a Christian, what kind of unbalanced, co-dependent 'happiness' am I seeking? Again, the majority of the Christian "gospel" I've been exposed to thus far lies in this vein: If you don't do what I want, then God won't be happy.
Oh, really!?! Get stuffed.
Jesus I'm still interested in. The rest, ...