|
Post by Skyfall on Jul 7, 2021 11:21:38 GMT
If you haven't heard of Brene Brown... get to knowing her Her stuff is fascinating, engaging, life-changing, and easy to follow. Her TED talk from about 10 years ago is what really helped her go mainstream. She has decades of actual, empirical data gathered on studies of shame and guilt. She has a couple of books, which are wonderful, but I'd start with the TED. Recently, she's started a couple of different podcasts, and has been guest interviewed by a lot of influential people. She's a phenomenal person. She is also a Christian, but she is intelligent enough to compartmentalize that, so it NEVER becomes a factor in her work. 1) Link to the original TED from 2010: (only 20 min!) 2) Link to the next TED in 2011, which focused on shame: (also fairly short) 3) Link to the third TED in 2013, on dealing with critics: 4) Link to "Daring Greatly," my personal favorite of her books: www.amazon.com/Daring-Greatly-Brene-Brown-audiobook/dp/B07DX6TNR1/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=brene+brown&qid=1625655661&sr=8-3 5) Link to "Braving the Wilderness" (I just purchased but haven't read yet): www.amazon.com/Braving-Wilderness-Brene-Brown-audiobook/dp/B074G5P4WN/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=brene+brown&qid=1625655661&sr=8-4Feel free to DM if you'd like more info on her, or any other support! This first TED talk posted here is excellent! "If you can't measure something, it doesn't exist" is profound. This site finally measures the dark side of the PRCA to the point of existence, and now leadership has to deal with it. Before they could sweep it under the rug. Thank you for posting this!
|
|
|
Post by ExPRisoner on Jul 7, 2021 13:45:52 GMT
I have noticed that some of the exPRC have become embittered by religion and understandably so. If this is the case or for anyone with doubts I recommend reading the book "The reason for God" by Tim Keller and watching the movie "The Case For Christ" the story of Lee Strobel a Journalist for The Chicago Tribune who was a devout atheist and his wife became a Christian and wanted to raise there son in Church and Lee wanted none of it.
|
|
|
Post by psalm23 on Jul 7, 2021 14:10:37 GMT
People who leave a church that they love and grow up in suffer from religious trauma and church trauma.
If they remain Christians, the painful experience becomes a trauma because they do not have anyone to relate these emotions to because
1)They may fear God’s displeasure if they talk “bad” about “thise who watch over their souls”. I remember fearing that God will “visit the iniquities of the fathers onto the children”
2)No PR ex close friend will hear them out because they will think that these people are backbiting.
3) Families who hve members who stay are torn apart by conflicting loyalties
Personally I attended churches to worship for a long time, but did not ever dare to become a member again for fear of having to “obey those who watch over your soul”. Met others like me from other similar backgrounds who then became a Christian support group. Took almost 10 years to finish the deprogramme. Slowly the joy of being a Christian has returned.
|
|
|
Post by throwaway2018 on Jul 7, 2021 14:41:08 GMT
I have noticed that some of the exPRC have become embittered by religion and understandably so. If this is the case or for anyone with doubts I recommend reading the book "The reason for God" by Tim Keller and watching the movie "The Case For Christ" the story of Lee Strobel a Journalist for The Chicago Tribune who was a devout atheist and his wife became a Christian and wanted to raise there son in Church and Lee wanted none of it. I’m not an atheist because of the PRC, I’m an atheist because I don’t believe Christianity has good evidence supporting its claims. As an aside, I’ve read both the Keller and Strobel books and found them both deeply unconvincing. You may be interested to hear that it’s likely that Strobel was never an atheist and that was a lie concocted to sell more books. At the very least, the book misrepresents Strobel’s past even if he was an atheist. Not that it matters - an atheist becoming a Christian doesn’t provide evidence for Christianity just like a Christian becoming an atheist doesn’t provide evidence for atheism. Here’s just one review that lays out some of the issues with the apologetics with a Case for Christ, which definitely has way worse apologetics than the Keller book in my opinion. www.caseagainstfaith.com/taylor-carrs-review-of-the-case-for-christ.html
|
|
|
Post by fellowhuman on Jul 7, 2021 15:01:11 GMT
I have noticed that some of the exPRC have become embittered by religion and understandably so. If this is the case or for anyone with doubts I recommend reading the book "The reason for God" by Tim Keller and watching the movie "The Case For Christ" the story of Lee Strobel a Journalist for The Chicago Tribune who was a devout atheist and his wife became a Christian and wanted to raise there son in Church and Lee wanted none of it. Most people who go so far against the grain of society as to call themselves atheists have done their research. Speaking for myself, I am familiar with Tim Keller, Charles Taylor, Randal Rauser, Wendell Berry, Rene Descartes, Blaise Pascal, Alvin Plantinga, Nicholas Wolterstorff, William Lane Craig, Frank Turek, Justin Brierly, Cameron Bertuzzi, Jonathan Pageau, Enrique Dussel, David Naugle, Gary Habermas, Norman Geisler, Josh McDowell, Sean McDowell, Matt Slick, Ray Comfort, the late Ravi Zacharias, CS Louis, Aquinas, Kirkegaard, Dostoevsky, Augustine, and, yes, Lee Strobel. I've read The Case for Christ, If God Why Evil, Mere Christianity, and Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Those are just the single-mindedly apologetics driven books. Again, I can't definitively speak for others, but from experience I would suggest that almost everyone who leaves their faith right down to the level of identity does a lot more research than they would bother with just staying in. Especially in the PRC. It's not on a whim that people step away from any semblance of respect, love, and social support.
|
|
|
Post by fellowhuman on Jul 7, 2021 15:20:09 GMT
I have noticed that some of the exPRC have become embittered by religion and understandably so. If this is the case or for anyone with doubts I recommend reading the book "The reason for God" by Tim Keller and watching the movie "The Case For Christ" the story of Lee Strobel a Journalist for The Chicago Tribune who was a devout atheist and his wife became a Christian and wanted to raise there son in Church and Lee wanted none of it. Oh, also, there is no such thing as a devout atheist. At least not in the way you mean. Atheism is not a religion. Atheists can be religious, but about different things (social causes, nontheistic religion, etc.). I suppose gnostic atheists could be said to be making a religious claim, but on the other hand, we don't generally define people as religious by those things they believe do not exist. If I claimed I knew for a fact that Odin did not exist, would that in itself make me religious? Not trying to overwhelm you, you just started a topic that made me excited. It's something we're all ready to talk about (we atheist/agnostics).
|
|
|
Post by prnolonger on Jul 7, 2021 15:27:36 GMT
I have noticed that some of the exPRC have become embittered by religion and understandably so. If this is the case or for anyone with doubts I recommend reading the book "The reason for God" by Tim Keller and watching the movie "The Case For Christ" the story of Lee Strobel a Journalist for The Chicago Tribune who was a devout atheist and his wife became a Christian and wanted to raise there son in Church and Lee wanted none of it. I’m not an atheist because of the PRC, I’m an atheist because I don’t believe Christianity has good evidence supporting its claims. As an aside, I’ve read both the Keller and Strobel books and found them both deeply unconvincing. You may be interested to hear that it’s likely that Strobel was never an atheist and that was a lie concocted to sell more books. At the very least, the book misrepresents Strobel’s past even if he was an atheist. Not that it matters - an atheist becoming a Christian doesn’t provide evidence for Christianity just like a Christian becoming an atheist doesn’t provide evidence for atheism. Here’s just one review that lays out some of the issues with the apologetics with a Case for Christ, which definitely has way worse apologetics than the Keller book in my opinion. www.caseagainstfaith.com/taylor-carrs-review-of-the-case-for-christ.htmlThe Case for Christ has all the same hallmarks of every other piece of Christian cinema. It preaches to the choir, gives Christians all sorts of feel-goody vibes, and gives them the illusion that they're in the intellectual majority with a solid foundation that belief in God is the fundamentally logical default position. Its not. You can have faith that God exists and you can have faith that Christ is God's son sent to save everyone from their sins, but that's what it is - faith. There is no logical proof of these things and the more you pretend it is, the more you turn off people who are actual atheists of the logic bent. Christians need to stop pretending that Christianity is in and of itself the true iteration of logic and science. It is just fundamentally untrue. I say this as a practicing Christian, stop watching Christian cinema. That stuff will melt your brain. It gives you a complete misunderstanding of the atheist position and other-faith positions. God's Not Dead and all the rest are doing you exactly zero favors. They might make you feel good, but they are written by people who are trying to get your white American Christian wallets. That's the goal. The goal is not to convince anyone that God is real or give a theological education. The theology of Pureflix is absolute insanity. Kirk Cameron is in my personal top 10 for modern people who have done the most damage to evangelism. Their understanding of atheist arguments is hilariously bad. I can think of 10 podcasts off the top of my head where atheists watch and dunk on these kinds of movies just for fun. Watching Christian cinema to prepare yourself for intellectual debates with atheists is like watching Karate Kid to prepare yourself for an MMA match. You will get absolutely trounced and probably hurt. That's not to say there aren't any good Christian films. There are. They're just not made with the explicit intention of putting warm sugary nutrition-less Christian-flavored Pureflix junk food down your throat. Here's a few recent things that have good portrayals of Christian themes with actual characters wrestling with Christian ideals and doubts, and not about characters trying to raise enough money at the bake sale to stop the evil atheist from burning down the YMCA to build an abortion clinic or whatever: 1) Les Miserables2) The Book of Eli3) Hacksaw Ridge4) The Lord of the Rings Trilogy5) Believe Me 6) Blue Like Jazz7) Nacho Libre8) The Netflix Daredevil series
|
|
|
Post by prnolonger on Jul 7, 2021 15:34:09 GMT
I have noticed that some of the exPRC have become embittered by religion and understandably so. If this is the case or for anyone with doubts I recommend reading the book "The reason for God" by Tim Keller and watching the movie "The Case For Christ" the story of Lee Strobel a Journalist for The Chicago Tribune who was a devout atheist and his wife became a Christian and wanted to raise there son in Church and Lee wanted none of it. Oh, also, there is no such thing as a devout atheist. At least not in the way you mean. Atheism is not a religion. Atheists can be religious, but about different things (social causes, nontheistic religion, etc.). I suppose gnostic atheists could be said to be making a religious claim, but on the other hand, we don't generally define people as religious by those things they believe do not exist. If I claimed I knew for a fact that Odin did not exist, would that in itself make me religious? Not trying to overwhelm you, you just started a topic that made me excited. It's something we're all ready to talk about (we atheist/agnostics). Usually I'd agree with you, but I would call anti-theists devout atheists. I've known a few devout atheists in my day in that form. I usually get along best with agnostic atheists, the kind of people who are totally cool with talking about God and theology and the implications of faith and belief. That's the good stuff. The PRC education we got tends to make talking about any sort of Christian belief insufferable. Example: PR bible study. You just nod along and everybody shares the same beliefs and opinions, and nobody dares voice anything outside of the pre-prescribed, pre-approved opinions that leadership has given their blessing to. Might as well spend your time reading one of the forms of subscription in the back of the psalter. You get the same thing out of it.
|
|
|
Post by fellowhuman on Jul 7, 2021 16:40:19 GMT
Usually I'd agree with you, but I would call anti-theists devout atheists. I've known a few devout atheists in my day in that form. I usually get along best with agnostic atheists, the kind of people who are totally cool with talking about God and theology and the implications of faith and belief. That's the good stuff.
The PRC education we got tends to make talking about any sort of Christian belief insufferable. Example: PR bible study. You just nod along and everybody shares the same beliefs and opinions, and nobody dares voice anything outside of the pre-prescribed, pre-approved opinions that leadership has given their blessing to. Might as well spend your time reading one of the forms of subscription in the back of the psalter. You get the same thing out of it. [/quote] I may be an anti-theist...it depends on the image that anti-theist conveys. Maybe we could start a thread in Reprobates about that topic... I feel pretty comfortable labeling myself as anti-theist but I'm also an agnostic atheist. I think my view of religion is fairly nuanced... We may have different definitions of anti-theist or maybe I am a "devout atheist" in your book. I can see the terminology being used for, say, Matt Dillahunty or Aron Ra, but I'm not sure I would say it's their atheism that is devout... I think this could be an interesting conversation all on its own. Sorry, prnolonger, I can't get the quote thing right this time.
|
|
|
Post by questioneverything on Jul 7, 2021 16:49:36 GMT
Usually I'd agree with you, but I would call anti-theists devout atheists. I've known a few devout atheists in my day in that form. I usually get along best with agnostic atheists, the kind of people who are totally cool with talking about God and theology and the implications of faith and belief. That's the good stuff. The PRC education we got tends to make talking about any sort of Christian belief insufferable. Example: PR bible study. You just nod along and everybody shares the same beliefs and opinions, and nobody dares voice anything outside of the pre-prescribed, pre-approved opinions that leadership has given their blessing to. Might as well spend your time reading one of the forms of subscription in the back of the psalter. You get the same thing out of it. I may be an anti-theist...it depends on the image that anti-theist conveys. Maybe we could start a thread in Reprobates about that topic... I feel pretty comfortable labeling myself as anti-theist but I'm also an agnostic atheist. I think my view of religion is fairly nuanced... We may have different definitions of anti-theist or maybe I am a "devout atheist" in your book. I can see the terminology being used for, say, Matt Dillahunty or Aron Ra, but I'm not sure I would say it's their atheism that is devout... I think this could be an interesting conversation all on its own. Sorry, prnolonger, I can't get the quote thing right this time.[/quote] I think committed may be a better word.
|
|
|
Post by fellowhuman on Jul 7, 2021 18:11:57 GMT
Usually I'd agree with you, but I would call anti-theists devout atheists. I've known a few devout atheists in my day in that form. I usually get along best with agnostic atheists, the kind of people who are totally cool with talking about God and theology and the implications of faith and belief. That's the good stuff. The PRC education we got tends to make talking about any sort of Christian belief insufferable. Example: PR bible study. You just nod along and everybody shares the same beliefs and opinions, and nobody dares voice anything outside of the pre-prescribed, pre-approved opinions that leadership has given their blessing to. Might as well spend your time reading one of the forms of subscription in the back of the psalter. You get the same thing out of it. I may be an anti-theist...it depends on the image that anti-theist conveys. Maybe we could start a thread in Reprobates about that topic... I feel pretty comfortable labeling myself as anti-theist but I'm also an agnostic atheist. I think my view of religion is fairly nuanced... We may have different definitions of anti-theist or maybe I am a "devout atheist" in your book. I can see the terminology being used for, say, Matt Dillahunty or Aron Ra, but I'm not sure I would say it's their atheism that is devout... I think this could be an interesting conversation all on its own. Sorry, prnolonger, I can't get the quote thing right this time. I think committed may be a better word.[/quote] Yeah, I might be getting side-tracked with the word "devout". It was a petty point that probably wasn't worth my making it. The fact is that I have and I suspect all of us have images in our heads of what "devout atheist" means. What I think all four of us conversing now can agree on is that Lee Strobel (and, similarly, Josh McDowell) was not a devout atheist, whatever that image is, until he performed all the research that led to his book. He may have been converted to Christianity, but his way of telling the story is misleading, as is clear from his book (and subsequent movie).
|
|
|
Post by prnolonger on Jul 7, 2021 18:49:04 GMT
I may be an anti-theist...it depends on the image that anti-theist conveys. Maybe we could start a thread in Reprobates about that topic... I feel pretty comfortable labeling myself as anti-theist but I'm also an agnostic atheist. I think my view of religion is fairly nuanced... We may have different definitions of anti-theist or maybe I am a "devout atheist" in your book. I can see the terminology being used for, say, Matt Dillahunty or Aron Ra, but I'm not sure I would say it's their atheism that is devout... I think this could be an interesting conversation all on its own. Sorry, prnolonger, I can't get the quote thing right this time. I think committed may be a better word. For sure.
|
|
|
Post by Feminist on Jul 8, 2021 18:24:23 GMT
I have noticed that some of the exPRC have become embittered by religion and understandably so. If this is the case or for anyone with doubts I recommend reading the book "The reason for God" by Tim Keller and watching the movie "The Case For Christ" the story of Lee Strobel a Journalist for The Chicago Tribune who was a devout atheist and his wife became a Christian and wanted to raise there son in Church and Lee wanted none of it. I’m not an atheist because of the PRC, I’m an atheist because I don’t believe Christianity has good evidence supporting its claims. As an aside, I’ve read both the Keller and Strobel books and found them both deeply unconvincing. You may be interested to hear that it’s likely that Strobel was never an atheist and that was a lie concocted to sell more books. At the very least, the book misrepresents Strobel’s past even if he was an atheist. Not that it matters - an atheist becoming a Christian doesn’t provide evidence for Christianity just like a Christian becoming an atheist doesn’t provide evidence for atheism. Here’s just one review that lays out some of the issues with the apologetics with a Case for Christ, which definitely has way worse apologetics than the Keller book in my opinion. www.caseagainstfaith.com/taylor-carrs-review-of-the-case-for-christ.htmlI agree, neither of those books are convincing. What I have found more interesting is the Bible Project. Believe in God or not, at least you get an idea of the real meaning of the texts.
|
|
|
Post by Feminist on Jul 8, 2021 18:32:11 GMT
I’m not an atheist because of the PRC, I’m an atheist because I don’t believe Christianity has good evidence supporting its claims. As an aside, I’ve read both the Keller and Strobel books and found them both deeply unconvincing. You may be interested to hear that it’s likely that Strobel was never an atheist and that was a lie concocted to sell more books. At the very least, the book misrepresents Strobel’s past even if he was an atheist. Not that it matters - an atheist becoming a Christian doesn’t provide evidence for Christianity just like a Christian becoming an atheist doesn’t provide evidence for atheism. Here’s just one review that lays out some of the issues with the apologetics with a Case for Christ, which definitely has way worse apologetics than the Keller book in my opinion. www.caseagainstfaith.com/taylor-carrs-review-of-the-case-for-christ.htmlThe Case for Christ has all the same hallmarks of every other piece of Christian cinema. It preaches to the choir, gives Christians all sorts of feel-goody vibes, and gives them the illusion that they're in the intellectual majority with a solid foundation that belief in God is the fundamentally logical default position. Its not. You can have faith that God exists and you can have faith that Christ is God's son sent to save everyone from their sins, but that's what it is - faith. There is no logical proof of these things and the more you pretend it is, the more you turn off people who are actual atheists of the logic bent. Christians need to stop pretending that Christianity is in and of itself the true iteration of logic and science. It is just fundamentally untrue. I say this as a practicing Christian, stop watching Christian cinema. That stuff will melt your brain. It gives you a complete misunderstanding of the atheist position and other-faith positions. God's Not Dead and all the rest are doing you exactly zero favors. They might make you feel good, but they are written by people who are trying to get your white American Christian wallets. That's the goal. The goal is not to convince anyone that God is real or give a theological education. The theology of Pureflix is absolute insanity. Kirk Cameron is in my personal top 10 for modern people who have done the most damage to evangelism. Their understanding of atheist arguments is hilariously bad. I can think of 10 podcasts off the top of my head where atheists watch and dunk on these kinds of movies just for fun. Watching Christian cinema to prepare yourself for intellectual debates with atheists is like watching Karate Kid to prepare yourself for an MMA match. You will get absolutely trounced and probably hurt. That's not to say there aren't any good Christian films. There are. They're just not made with the explicit intention of putting warm sugary nutrition-less Christian-flavored Pureflix junk food down your throat. Here's a few recent things that have good portrayals of Christian themes with actual characters wrestling with Christian ideals and doubts, and not about characters trying to raise enough money at the bake sale to stop the evil atheist from burning down the YMCA to build an abortion clinic or whatever: 1) Les Miserables2) The Book of Eli3) Hacksaw Ridge4) The Lord of the Rings Trilogy5) Believe Me 6) Blue Like Jazz7) Nacho Libre8) The Netflix Daredevil seriesI second this. Third this. I infinity this. The Christian fiction books, the “Christian” movies. All a bunch of hogwash. If you want to enjoy it like a Hallmark movie, at least be honest with yourself about its fictional feel-good status. Place it in the right category!
|
|
|
Post by Feminist on Jul 8, 2021 18:34:40 GMT
The Case for Christ has all the same hallmarks of every other piece of Christian cinema. It preaches to the choir, gives Christians all sorts of feel-goody vibes, and gives them the illusion that they're in the intellectual majority with a solid foundation that belief in God is the fundamentally logical default position. Its not. You can have faith that God exists and you can have faith that Christ is God's son sent to save everyone from their sins, but that's what it is - faith. There is no logical proof of these things and the more you pretend it is, the more you turn off people who are actual atheists of the logic bent. Christians need to stop pretending that Christianity is in and of itself the true iteration of logic and science. It is just fundamentally untrue. I say this as a practicing Christian, stop watching Christian cinema. That stuff will melt your brain. It gives you a complete misunderstanding of the atheist position and other-faith positions. God's Not Dead and all the rest are doing you exactly zero favors. They might make you feel good, but they are written by people who are trying to get your white American Christian wallets. That's the goal. The goal is not to convince anyone that God is real or give a theological education. The theology of Pureflix is absolute insanity. Kirk Cameron is in my personal top 10 for modern people who have done the most damage to evangelism. Their understanding of atheist arguments is hilariously bad. I can think of 10 podcasts off the top of my head where atheists watch and dunk on these kinds of movies just for fun. Watching Christian cinema to prepare yourself for intellectual debates with atheists is like watching Karate Kid to prepare yourself for an MMA match. You will get absolutely trounced and probably hurt. That's not to say there aren't any good Christian films. There are. They're just not made with the explicit intention of putting warm sugary nutrition-less Christian-flavored Pureflix junk food down your throat. Here's a few recent things that have good portrayals of Christian themes with actual characters wrestling with Christian ideals and doubts, and not about characters trying to raise enough money at the bake sale to stop the evil atheist from burning down the YMCA to build an abortion clinic or whatever: 1) Les Miserables2) The Book of Eli3) Hacksaw Ridge4) The Lord of the Rings Trilogy5) Believe Me 6) Blue Like Jazz7) Nacho Libre8) The Netflix Daredevil seriesI second this. Third this. I infinity this. The Christian fiction books, the “Christian” movies. All a bunch of hogwash. If you want to enjoy it like a Hallmark movie, at least be honest with yourself about its fictional feel-good status. Place it in the right category! And, watch some non Christian stuff, for Pete’s sake. Christians done have to only listen to “Christian” music or watch “Christian” tv. Learn from different ideas. It won’t harm you.
|
|