Goodbye Jesus

Tim Sledge was a Southern Baptist preacher and writer for 35 years. His pioneering work in faith-based recovery ministries in the 80s and 90s ultimately guided participants in 20,000 Christian support groups across the U.S.

The driving force behind Sledge’s ultimate rejection of Christianity was his long-term, up-close observations of church life. “After living and leading in the church for decades, I saw no consistent evidence of an ongoing supernatural presence—and I wanted to see that evidence with all that was in me.”

Goodbye Jesus

Objective morality -- really?

By Rebekah ~

Some people seem to feel very insecure about the idea there's no objective morality by which to control others. Yet, the question isn't if we want there to be some transcendent objective moral code; it's whether or not one actually exists anywhere. If we believe in one, yet it doesn't exist, then we have a problem because everybody will be simply elevating and conflating their own subjective values to the level of the one true objective morality. This is how many terrorists acts, the crusades, witch hunts, and religious wars have come about such as the Catholics and Protestants killing each other brutally because each believed their subjective interpretations of the supposed objective morality is the correct one. If there were actually an objective morality in the Bible, people wouldn't need to apply their own values and interpretations to it

One difference between believing there is an objective morality to be learned and an alternative view that we have evolved on our own, often overlapping (i.e., subjective moral values based on our genetics, environment, and life experiences) is that the latter comes with more room for compromise, and the former adds fuel to the feeling that only one side is objectively correct and any opposition to it is evil.

When it comes to subjective values, we do feel strongly about our own and are willing to act upon them, but we also don't have the same level of conviction that the other side must therefore be evil and objectively wrong. Which is how religious aderents are so often willing to believe the 'others' deserve ridiculously severe punishment.

Ultimately, if it can't be demonstrated that an objective morality exists anywhere, then the shared subjective values hypothesis is closer to the reality of the situation, and believing that which is closest to reality sets us up to make wiser choices and cause less harm.

Which promotes better values, the Bible or Chatgpt?

By Rebekah ~

I stumbled across this verse in the New Testament...

"But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve." – 1 Timothy 2:12-13

This prompted me to ask Chatgpt, "Should women be allowed to speak or lead over men?" The response was...

"Yes, women should be allowed to speak and lead over men if they possess the necessary skills, qualifications, and experience for the job. Women have the same fundamental human rights as men, including the right to freedom of speech, the right to participate in decision-making processes, and the right to pursue leadership roles."

Bible passages are often used to justify men being deemed the head of the house, which means his opinion will always outweigh hers, and he is divinely ordained to make every decision. Many women end up realizing they have very little control over their own life in this system. Through a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible, the only power women are granted when they are stuck in a position like this is to submit to, and pray over him, and not to quarrel. Divorce isn't permitted except for infidelity.

The truth is, there's nothing about men which makes them inherently better at speaking, leading or making decisions. So how did the church get away with making it the norm to exclude women from such important roles in society? Most churches still don't allow women to be members of the board, deacons, pastors, etc.