I think I would.

How are you going to build your spirit if you don't feed on the Word regularly?

Take a look at Oswald Chamber's devotional "My Utmost for His Highest"....He has an essay explaining how the servant of God waits on Him.

How do you know God isn't teaching you patience or other virtues?

It took God 80 years to bring up Moses.

Not the essay I had in mind but something similar by Chambers:

Waiting on God
http://theeyesofmyheart.com/waiting-on-god/

Simply studying the word simply isn't enough for a lot of people. You could never say someone like Mother Teresa wasn't fully trying, in every conceivable way, to communicate with God. And yet....she most likely didn't believe. She even stopped praying because she felt nothing, even after all those years.

"Maybe he's just teaching patience" is one of those ad hoc rationalizations I don't find convincing. Is there scriptural support for, "Accept Jesus. You will be saved and have a connection to god. Except when you don't. Then wait a few years because god is testing your patience."? And I don't mean "Well this phrase can be construed one way and if you flip a few hundred pages over there's this sentence plus Moses waited 80 years, ergo maybe God is testing you." The bible has a lot of words and a lot of stories about a lot of people, and you can come up with an explanation for anything if you're creative enough. I need something compelling to explain my own experience, compelling enough to explain why my experience is at odds with the plain language of the New Testament. You can use that explanation to hand-wave away anyone's negative experience with Christianity.

Again, no one will or should devote their life to something without some reinforcement that what they are doing and believing is correct.

I doubt most people know about Mother Theresa's experiences. Did she confide everything to the public? What did she experience in extremis?

Some people do report "dark nights of the soul" but not everyone experiences them.

http://www.themystic.org/dark-night/

If you don't want an ad hoc then why bring this up?

Is there something innately wrong about ad hocs?

I study the bible and it builds precept upon precept. Imo there's no reason to consider it any more "ad hoc" than a psychiatrist's conclusions.

Who knows humans better than God?

Didn't read the whole thread but with this mindset - I'm also agnostic to unicorns, the toothfairy, flying pots etc.

It's is extremely improbable - and that's why I'm an atheist.

She confided she never felt anything and didn't believe; that's pretty definitive. (It wasn't public, the information was released via private letters)

There's no point in speculating. We can only go with the information that she provided.

That's some pretty weak rationalization.

Yes, that's correct, although I must say it feels weird saying I'm technically agnostic toward the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Along with lack of evidence, this is the rationale of most every atheist.

Really?

Your argument is weaker. Why bring up someone's religious state that isn't here to interview?

She could of had a "dark night" or she could have fell apostate...who are you or I to tell definitively?

You only have control of yourself in the end.

same boat as you my friend. only difference is it took me a little too long to realize that my lack of results actually meant I was in the wrong boat. I would say ignore Splendour, but it sounds like you already have dealt with your fair share of that "concern" already and know the drill.

why is one woman's belief or lackthereof so crucial to you? Is it so odd for someone who's "really good at being a Christian" to not believe? Cuz let me tell you, back in the day I was where it was at in church. You might not believe it looking at me now, but it's true.

I'm not following.

But I doubt Mother Theresa's a good example for claims above. She's listed as one of the key examples of the dark night of the soul in wiki. Plus she submitted to exorcism late in life.

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/a...resa.exorcism/

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

I brought it up because this is a thread to post your story about losing your religion. As an addendum to my story, I offered examples of how some Christians have responded. I don't know how my story gave you the impression I'm looking for ad hoc explanations. I don't mind discussing your thoughts but you seem to think this is a thread for trying to reconvert people who have lost their religion. I'm fine with you doing that btw, but there's no need to act puzzled about my response.

There's nothing inherently wrong with ad hoc explanations. Many times, though, they come across as disingenuous, desperate, and working-backwards rationalization. This "testing your patience" is unpersuasive because no one reading the bible--no one without an agenda--would conclude this: "For some people, sincerely accepting God and Jesus into your life, being a good person, and trying to live your life as the bible says won't be enough. That's enough for most people though. But sometimes you have to do all that and wait many years of feeling alone and confused and without any type of indication or feeling that there's actually somebody listening at the end of prayers or you're living the way you should." That is working backwards from a problem ("someone's experience with Christianity doesn't harmonize with a plain reading of the New Testament") to rationalize an explanation for that person alone. It's not persuasive. It's cool you think I'm special in God's eyes, unique enough that he'd suspend the rules for me, but after years of struggling with it, it seemed much more likely that between (a) god made my route to heaven tougher by bending the word and the Truth by pretending he's not there and (b) I don't feel the Christian god's presence in my life because there is no Christian god, (b) was the better answer.

Christianity was adding nothing to my life other than guilt, self-blame, loneliness, and confusion. And I would have gladly accepted all that for any personal indication that there was someone acknowledging my struggle. Like, I spent years agonizing over this.

I'm not sure you want to go down this road. You're adding new elements to salvation that make Christianity look more arbitrary and less attractive to nonbelievers. And I don't think you've quite thought through the implications of delaying salvation because of random tests. E.g., If I died before the test was over, I'd go to hell even though I'd lived as I should have.

I shouldn't have posted. I read your original post itt as you being an agnostic as you said you were open minded.

As for the question of salvation, I didn't address it at all. I was addressing your need for a sign.

He is agnostic....in addition to being an atheist (like most/all of us).

Obv, I meant a pure agnostic.

No such thing. You either believe in a God or you lack that belief, even if he's apathetic towards this particular issue. He would just be described as a negative, weak or implicit atheist.

Well he sounded rather in the middle.

It's misleading that they say either you're an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist because actions speak louder than words in my opinion and when you describe yourself as open minded choosing the designator theist or atheist pidgeonholes you.

It's funny to let a label control you and define you or maybe it's not.

i did lost faith in God like a grandfather sitting on the sky. I found faith in what surrounds you, and inner self.

I can't pinpoint the exact moment I lost religion. I did get confirmed as a Catholic when I was 16-even then, I was debating the EV of going through the hassle of it versus dealing with the fit my parents would throw. So yeah, somewhere around there.

I think what finally convinced me is the sheer amount of religions out there. If there was just one, it would be a lot harder to argue with. They certainly can't all be right, and it seems pretty dumb to pick one and hope.

@Splendour-way to ruin a thread. You make me want to throw babies on rocks.

Dude, I don't even know you and we're having the baby discussion in another thread.

I'm sorry you can't use that giant intellect to determine the truth when it's pointed out to you.

Apparently 4.5 billion other people in the world also lack the ability to determine this "truth."

Anyone who thinks they know the truth is insane. I'm sure you don't really think you know the truth Splendour. Maybe you think you're looking in the right direction and learning/know a considerable amount about your beliefs, but the truth? I'm pretty sure no religion claims to give anyone a grasp on the truth, just a set of beliefs and approaches which are based on the truth, given to them by some divine figure or enlightened man.

I'm pretty sure every religion claims to give its followers not just a grasp but THE TRUTH. I mean every religion has a statement of faith that is pretty explicit.