An Atheist's View of the Alpha Course

Oh I agree with that! Gurdwaras are wonderful places. Anyone can turn up and get fed, usually a really good curry cooked from scratch, and everyone sits on the floor together to eat.
 
Last of the Fraggles said:
I have to admit my key take-away from this is that I can get a sit down dinner for a pound if I can suffer listening to religious nonsense for a bit...how was the food?
Click to expand...
:D Well, the original course I went on, after the first evening's two-course meal, they apologised for not providing a first course and said that they would be providing desserts only!!!

A couple of years ago, when I thought I'd join another course to see if things had become any different, I went to a CofE church, where there were only 5 people on the course. It took place at the Vicar's house (it's a well-to-do area) and we had excellent home-cooked meals! However, after three weeks I couldn't continue as all my questions - assertively but in no way combatively asked, were responded to with evasion, Bible quotes and an inability to acknowledge up-to-date scientific knowledge. Pity really, as the food was so good, but it would have been hypocritical to attend just for that, I felt!

I think, well, I know, the vicar was quite sorry to see me go because it made the discussion more lively and he quite enjoyed the challenge I think!
 
I've seen them advertised around here- "Are you a Christian who wants to understand faith better? Are you an atheist who want to know more about God?" They give me the creeps.
 
The one alpha course I attended was years ago and very different from this. It was presented sort of like a party. There were refreshments which consisted of generic store-bought snack trays and several 2 liter bottles of soda. We watched a video, maybe 20 minutes long, then I was approached by people in ones and twos who questioned me about what I thought about the video. There was a relatively continuous stream of people so I was never given a moment by myself to think. Two things helped me through it; mentally comparing it to an experience I had when a couple of jewelry salesmen tried to rope me into buying an ugly and expensive necklace for my mother for mother's day and relying on my ADD to come up with marginally related anecdotes to share to prevent me from getting overwhelmed.
 
I joined a group five weeks ago and as an atheist was convinced I couldn't be convinced. However on the fourth week there was a very good DVD and a talk which convinced me that these oeople weren't pushing religion down the throat, they were trying to say that Jesus just wanted a relationship with us as a friend. This week there was a comparison with science as opposed to religion and it totally made sense. I am becoming a believer.
I never believed in Moses, thinking it was a fairy tale but the scientific reason is this.... There are no vowels in aremaic or hebrew so the Red sea would be written as the rd s. This was translated as the red sea when in fact it is the reed sea. The reed sea is at the shore of the meditteranean on the curve from Egypt to Israel where the start of the Suez canal is now. When Moses went to cross there was a volcano on Santorini causing a tsunami. The sea withdrew and Moses crossed. The sea came back in, drowning the chariots. There were flames in the sky which were seen by Moses and his followers that thought this was God's wrath when in actual fact it was the volcano which couldn't be seen by them because of the curve of the earth. So all in all the details of their experience is actually describing in detail a tsunami but they thought it was God. Because the details are so accurate, I now believe Moses existed. I didn't before. Only because I never believed anyone could part the RED sea.
I then began to believe a little in the scriptures.
Tonight there was a talk on the bible and science and I am becoming a believer. They talked about evolution and the disputes between scientists and creationists but they said what if God created evolution. It speaks for itself, mind boggling. I can't wait for next week. Plus they talked about Genesis which I always put down as a fairy tale but I read it again tonight and the sequence of how God created the world in six days matches with what scientists have proved happened... I.e how water was formed and in which order it came as opposed to the animals/plants etc
 
Last edited:
mstricky said:
I never believed in Moses, thinking it was a fairy tale but the scientific reason is this.... There are no vowels in aremaic or hebrew so the Red sea would be written as the rd s. This was translated as the red sea when in fact it is the reed sea.
Click to expand...

You do know the bible wasn't written in English, right?

mstricky said:
The reed sea is at the shore of the meditteranean on the curve from Egypt to Israel where the start of the Suez canal is now. When Moses went to cross there was a volcano on Santorini causing a tsunami. The sea withdrew and Moses crossed. The sea came back in, drowning the chariots. There were flames in the sky which were seen by Moses and his followers that thought this was God's wrath when in actual fact it was the volcano which couldn't be seen by them because of the curve of the earth. So all in all the details of their experience is actually describing in detail a tsunami but they thought it was God. Because the details are so accurate, I now believe Moses existed. I didn't before. Only because I never believed anyone could part the RED sea.
I then began to believe a little in the scriptures.
Click to expand...

Well, this is all speculation. You're speculating yourself into belief. That sounds just so incredibly strange to me.

But think of this. If Moses really existed, and led such a huge uprising, why is this never mentioned by the Egyptians? Why is it never mentioned by anyone, outside the bible?

And why is Ramses II's mummy in the museum of Cairo, when he supposedly was drowned in the middle of the Red, sorry, I mean Reed Sea? And for a tsunami from the Mediterranean Sea to hit the Red Sea, or Reed Sea, it would have to travel across land...

mstricky said:
Tonight there was a talk on the bible and science and I am becoming a believer. They talked about evolution and the disputes between scientists and creationists but they said what if God created evolution. It speaks for itself, mind boggling. I can't wait for next week. Plus they talked about Genesis which I always put down as a fairy tale but I read it again tonight and the sequence of how God created the world in six days matches with what scientists have proved happened... I.e how water was formed and in which order it came as opposed to the animals/plants etc
Click to expand...

Ah. You're pulling our legs, right? Which Genesis sequence of events? There's not just one.

And which scientist have proved that humans were created before all the other animals?

What I take from all this is that I suspect you never reasoned yourself into atheism, you were brought up as one or was never exposed to religion much. Because if all the above was enough to convince you to believe, you didn't have much knowledge of the world, or history, or science, to begin with.
 
Last edited:
I'd be more impressed if someone created a new religion entirely rather than repackaged an old one.
 
mstricky said:
I joined a group five weeks ago and as an atheist was convinced I couldn't be convinced. However on the fourth week there was a very good DVD and a talk which convinced me that these oeople weren't pushing religion down the throat, they were trying to say that Jesus just wanted a relationship with us as a friend. This week there was a comparison with science as opposed to religion and it totally made sense. I am becoming a believer.
I never believed in Moses, thinking it was a fairy tale but the scientific reason is this.... There are no vowels in aremaic or hebrew so the Red sea would be written as the rd s. This was translated as the red sea when in fact it is the reed sea. The reed sea is at the shore of the meditteranean on the curve from Egypt to Israel where the start of the Suez canal is now. When Moses went to cross there was a volcano on Santorini causing a tsunami. The sea withdrew and Moses crossed. The sea came back in, drowning the chariots. There were flames in the sky which were seen by Moses and his followers that thought this was God's wrath when in actual fact it was the volcano which couldn't be seen by them because of the curve of the earth. So all in all the details of their experience is actually describing in detail a tsunami but they thought it was God. Because the details are so accurate, I now believe Moses existed. I didn't before. Only because I never believed anyone could part the RED sea.
I then began to believe a little in the scriptures.
Tonight there was a talk on the bible and science and I am becoming a believer. They talked about evolution and the disputes between scientists and creationists but they said what if God created evolution. It speaks for itself, mind boggling. I can't wait for next week. Plus they talked about Genesis which I always put down as a fairy tale but I read it again tonight and the sequence of how God created the world in six days matches with what scientists have proved happened... I.e how water was formed and in which order it came as opposed to the animals/plants etc
Click to expand...

Very interesting.
I like how the Moses story makes sense to you when it's a natural phenomenon, no God needed. But then the Genesis story makes sense to you even with God in the mix. So in the one case, it's the lack of a miracle which sells it, but in the other, the miraculous is tacked on to the scientific explanation and that's convincing too.

I suspect something else is happening underneath. Perhaps the Holy Spirit is working to open your eyes?
 
mstricky

May I recommend remaining as impartial as possible? This is what I wrote after attending an Alpha Course some years ago.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/index.php
Later, as I learnt more about it, I wish I had been more severe in my criticism! There are so many flaws and inconsistencies in it.
 
Last edited:
mstricky said:
I never believed in Moses, thinking it was a fairy tale but the scientific reason is this.... There are no vowels in aremaic or hebrew so the Red sea would be written as the rd s. This was translated as the red sea when in fact it is the reed sea. The reed sea is at the shore of the meditteranean on the curve from Egypt to Israel where the start of the Suez canal is now. When Moses went to cross there was a volcano on Santorini causing a tsunami. The sea withdrew and Moses crossed. The sea came back in, drowning the chariots. There were flames in the sky which were seen by Moses and his followers that thought this was God's wrath when in actual fact it was the volcano which couldn't be seen by them because of the curve of the earth. So all in all the details of their experience is actually describing in detail a tsunami but they thought it was God. Because the details are so accurate, I now believe Moses existed. I didn't before. Only because I never believed anyone could part the RED sea.
I then began to believe a little in the scriptures.
Click to expand...

Believe what you like, but there is no evidence that the Jews were ever slaves in Egypt, nor for their "exodus," or for the migration of a million people through the Sinai peninsular.

There is lots of evidence that the Alpha course uses subtle brain-washing techniques to facilitate conversions.
 
Ryocan. The Reed sea as I said was at the shore of the Meditteranean where the coastline curves between Egypt and Israel. The Med must have been called the Reed sea in those days. Lava has been found in the area. As Moses got there, the tsunami drew the sea out. They would cross and when the sea came back it would swamp/drown the Egytians.
I know the Old Testament was not in English, it was Hebrew whilst the new testament was Greek.
The example I gave....i.e.....rd s for the Red Sea would be of course written in Hebrew but seeing that I don't know the equivalent in hebrew, I had to give the English version.
 
Last edited:
mstricky said:
The example I gave....i.e.....rd s for the Red Sea would be of course written in Hebrew but seeing that I don't know the equivalent in hebrew, I had to give the English version.
Click to expand...

Here you go:

Red
Reed (10th from top)

As you can see, they have no characters in common, and certainly don't look identical.

As far as Genesis being in the correct order goes, right from the start, it says that God created the Earth first, then other stars, then the sun and moon. Well, the stars were around long before the Earth, the sun was around long before the Earth, and the sun was around long before the moon. So that's completely wrong, for a start.

It says that water existed before land, yet the heat of the early Earth means that it would have been a long time before there was liquid water, so that's completely backwards.

It says that birds were there before land animals, but that's wrong.

As has been pointed out, there are two accounts of creation in Genesis, one which says that animals were created before humans, and the other which says that humans were created before animals.

It has light existing before the sun and stars which, I'm sure I don't need to tell you, is nonsense.

It has all plants evolving before the creation of the sun, which couldn't be more wrong if it tried.

Are you sure that this is "mind boggling"? Because it doesn't actually fit unless you really, really want it to and therefore ignore 80% of what Genesis actually says.

As for "what if God created evolution?", what if Odin created evolution? What if Vishnu created evolution? What if the Jagroth created evolution? Saying "what if?" is easy. But is there any actual reason to believe it to be true, other than wanting it to be true?
 
Last edited:
Squeegee I don't know what you mean by no characters in common. Hebrew/Aremaic language do not have vowels so red would be rd. in transalating the bible to English the translater must have assumed it was red but it could have been red/rud/rid/rod/rude etc etc it should have read... Reed
I get your point/info on Genesis and agree with you having considered it again
 
mstricky said:
Squeegee I don't know what you mean by no characters in common. Hebrew/Aremaic language do not have vowels so red would be rd. in transalating the bible to English the translater must have assumed it was red but it could have been red/rud/rid/rod/rude etc etc it should have read... Reed
I get your point/info on Genesis and agree with you having considered it again
Click to expand...

Yes, but as you yourself point out, it wasn't written in English. Squeegee gave you links to show you how both Red and Reed are written in Hebrew, and that the words don't look or sound alike in that language. The fact that Red and Reed are similar in English has no relevance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom