ForumsWEPRTheism and Atheism

4668 1473205
thepyro222
offline
thepyro222
2,150 posts
Peasant

I grew up atheist for 16 years. I had always kept an open mind towards religion, but never really felt a need to believe in it. My sister started going to a Wednesday night children's program at a church. Eventually, I was dragged into a Christmas Eve service. Scoffing, I reluctantly went, assuming that this was going to be a load of crap, but when I went, I felt something. Something that I've never felt before. I felt a sense of empowerment and a sense of calling. Jesus called upon my soul, just like he did with his disciples. he wanted me to follow him. Now, my life is being lived for Christ. He died on the cross for my sins, and the sins of everyone who believes in him. He was beaten, brutalized, struck with a whip 39 times, made to carry a cross up to the stage of his death. This I believe to be true, and I can never repay him for what he has done.
I still have my struggles with Christianity, but I've found this bit of information most useful. Religion is not comprehensible in the human mind, because we cannot comprehend the idea of a perfect and supreme being, a God, but we can believe it in our heart, and that's the idea of faith. Faith is, even though everything rides against me believing in Jesus, I still believe in him because I know that it's true in my heart. I invite my fellow Brothers and sisters of the LORD to talk about how Jesus has helped you in your life. No atheists and no insults please

  • 4,668 Replies
MRWalker82
offline
MRWalker82
4,005 posts
Shepherd

There is a reason that eyewitness accounts are the flimsiest, most often dismissed forms of 'evidence' in the world of science. Our senses are fallible. Our minds are built to fill in gaps in understanding with what we either want, or think should be there, not what is real. This is why we see shapes and such in clouds, this is why there are so many 'optical illusions'. If it can't be independently verified, if it can't be measured, tested, and repeated, and if multiple experiments by multiple people don't all arrive at the same conclusion then the ONLY intellectually honest response to an event is "I really don't know for certain". That is exactly why I am an agnostic atheist. I cannot know for certain, and because of that I cannot honestly make any assertions. I can speculate as to the validity or probability of claims, but I must, in the end, admit that I just don't know.

wolf1991
offline
wolf1991
3,437 posts
Farmer

For 1400 years, there hasn't been a prophet, or a wide- scale miraculous sign. We have decided that God has just become fed up. Basically, he's saying "if you don't want to listen to me, then I'm going to let you destroy yourselves.", that is just what our opinion is,


The he isn't all loving then. In fact he's cruel, demanding and indifferent then. The type of god I admit could be possible, though I refuse to believe in.

Because that is what God originally said was the penance for sin. The price for sin is death in the Old Testament. God's not going to change his ways just so more people can enter heaven. That is why he sent Christ to die on the cross, so that we can enter heaven, if we profess that Jesus Christ died to save us, and believe it in our hearts.


An all loving god wouldn't care. Remember the term all loving, indicates a love and compassion for everyone, no exceptions. Rules make exceptions. Punishment indicates your god is not an "all loving" god.
goumas13
offline
goumas13
4,752 posts
Grand Duke

Eyewitness testimony is astonishingly fragile and untrustworthy. Actually, its among the weakest types of evidence. The margin of error is quite big.
As a matter of fact eyewitness testimony is, ideally, evidence of what the witness "believes to have occurred". It may or may not tell what actually happened.
Even the most honest and sincere persons are not obligatory credible. There are numerous factors that make aforementioned testimony -in the vast majority of the cases- to varying extents inaccurate. Personal bias -especially- influences enormously witnesses.

In point of fact eyewitness testimony from competent and earnest persons has put countless innocent people in jail.

vesperbot
offline
vesperbot
955 posts
Nomad

If you believe that then you obviously don't subscribe to any brand of Christianity which is actually based on the Bible.
A megalol at a moderator. Mt 19:26 states that God can do anything He needs. Therefore, He can bring any person to heaven, even if he's not christened and had never heard the Good News.
Pure speculation and baseless assumptions about things which no one could possibly know in the first place. I don't see the relevance.
Sure you don't, you read from the very end of the discussion. You want direct links to the Bible? Mt 18:14. In fact, the phrase you object as unsupported is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, where I belong. So, in order to find out its support, you need to read paragraphs in whole - but I don't expect you will accept anything stated in there as logically grounded.

About Qumran texts (right spelling) - I was wrong, I'm sorry.
Matter interacts as it does due to the composition and structure of our universe.
Okay, then why is our universe structured like that?
MRWalker82
offline
MRWalker82
4,005 posts
Shepherd

A megalol at a moderator. Mt 19:26 states that God can do anything He needs. Therefore, He can bring any person to heaven, even if he's not christened and had never heard the Good News.


And there are numerous passages which state that while he can, he will not. Jesus spoke many times about the difficulty of earning your way into heaven. He spoke repeatedly that one must have faith in him, and keep the commandments, and uphold the laws, and numerous other loopholes one must jump through. So megalol all you want, but I used to teach bible study at my church. I have a fairly solid grasp of what is said in the book.

Sure you don't, you read from the very end of the discussion. You want direct links to the Bible? Mt 18:14. In fact, the phrase you object as unsupported is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, where I belong. So, in order to find out its support, you need to read paragraphs in whole - but I don't expect you will accept anything stated in there as logically grounded.


Ah yes, the catechism. Yet another proof of the contradictory nature of religion. 1 Corinthians 2:11 states (among other passages) that NO MAN can know the mind of God, the the Catechism addressed and sometimes altered many interpretations of scripture, claiming to know by virtue of divine communique, exactly what God wants. According to the Bible itself such a direct understanding of God is not possible, yet the Catholic church claims that it happens all the time, especially to the Pope.

Okay, then why is our universe structured like that?


Due to numerous reasons, many of which I don't fully understand as I'm not a physicist. My understanding, though, is that formation of our universe, the matter created, and the manner in which objects were formed dictated it. Variations in any level of the formation of the universe would likely have resulted in a very different expression of the structure that we see.
vesperbot
offline
vesperbot
955 posts
Nomad

Jesus was an earthling, meaning it would be impossible for the aliens to be saved.
Can you be perfectly sure that God did not give anything like the Decalogue to aliens, so they can also be saved? Jesus said he came to Earth to save humanity. He could do alike things to aliens and not notify us of his deeds to them. Yes, the existance of aliens does not contradict with Christianity, since there is no assumption that we are the only sentient race in the universe.
The FDA disagrees with you
No, they clearly state that the surest way to not get HIV and other STDs is abstinence, so it works. Actually all these letters assume a person has sex with more than one partner, also not regarding the gender of that partner. That's why the protection from STD transmission is stated as needed. The best way of protecting self against STDs is fidelity to your marriage, and this is what opposes currently proclaimed moral of free love and such. Okay, we have a different basis on how a person should behave in sexual sphere, so it's normal to have different views on whether the condom is needed to protect from diseases. This document states: "A person who takes part in risky sexual behavior should always use a condom." I'd say yes, but since we're in this topic, such sexual behavior is mortal sin. So I'm out of this topic, you might as well count as I've resigned.

@wolf1991: I have read your post the first time pretty well, it's good that you're reminding me of it. But I don't remember you answering my arguments against it, IIRC page 41.
A doctrine to be followed without exception. Unfortunately the Romans were left with over 300 texts to sort through. A council was formed to create a work that would allow the people to be moved to inspiration and docileness. So they looked for a heroic figure, a tragic hero. They found Jesus Christ. However, hundred and hundreds of texts claimed that Jesus was not the son of God. That he was, in fact, a mortal man. The Roman council decided this could not be allowed, and destroyed almost every text claiming this.
Sources required, otherwise it's an assumption based on someone's weird thoughts.
it's arrogant to think we are the sole life supporting planet to exist
Life supporting planet - well, no one ever stated there's only one.
The laws of cause and effect did not apply back then, as there was no physical universe
This statement is unsupported.
vesperbot
offline
vesperbot
955 posts
Nomad

Jesus spoke many times about the difficulty of earning your way into heaven.
Yes, this applies to people who hear Him, and to those who will hear His words traditioned to future by any means. This can't be applied to those who have never heard of either Jesus or God the Father, by the very same logic.
I used to teach bible study at my church. I have a fairly solid grasp of what is said in the book.
Good, then you can be countered by your own words, if I provide you with correct verses from the Bible. Hmm
1 Corinthians 2:11 states (among other passages) that NO MAN can know the mind of God
Mt 11:27 states that if Son will decide to open the will of the Father to someone, He's free to do this. Yes we can't know for sure, but we can base on what was revealed to us. Good thing we have church tradition that brings us such revelations from as far as the times of the Apostles. For some reason whatever protestant church there is, its authorities decline this tradition. In fact any such revelation is critically observed prior to accepting as true, and this process can last for decades. But at some time bishops or the Pope receive knowledge that either prove or disprove the statement in question, and act accordingly. Still, I can give you another verse, Jn 6:65 and previous, about "no one can approach Me if he won't be granted so by Father".

I'll probably be out of this discussion for several days, it's highly unlikely that I will ever turn on the PC in this weekend. I'll attempt to reply everything when I return.
MRWalker82
offline
MRWalker82
4,005 posts
Shepherd

Yes, this applies to people who hear Him, and to those who will hear His words traditioned to future by any means. This can't be applied to those who have never heard of either Jesus or God the Father, by the very same logic.


And where is this stated? Or is this (yet another) personal opinion? I can recall nowhere in the Bible where anything like this is stated. However there are numerous places where it states quite clearly that no one will enter the kingdom of heaven except through submission to Jesus and following all 50 some odd of his commandments, in addition to the original 10.

But at some time bishops or the Pope receive knowledge that either prove or disprove the statement in question, and act accordingly.


Ah, yes. They 'receive' information. You mean, arrive at a conclusion and claim it as divine inspiration so it won't be questioned. Seriously, please apply a bit of your critical thinking to the processes of religion and the accompanying traditions.
wolf1991
offline
wolf1991
3,437 posts
Farmer

@wolf1991: I have read your post the first time pretty well, it's good that you're reminding me of it. But I don't remember you answering my arguments against it, IIRC page 41.


Page 41? Nope, no arguments there. In fact I'm pretty sure you failed to address my post completely. My post answers your questions about how the bible cannot be used a a reliable historical source, and why it is a political tool. If you fail to recognize my argument as such then I suppose i'm wasting my time with you. You obviously fail to see the value of history. Also, my previous argument was not caustic. Many historians support the idea that without Rome christianity would not have flourished. That's why they call it the Roman Catholic Church. Just so you know.
thisisnotanalt
offline
thisisnotanalt
9,821 posts
Shepherd

This statement is unsupported.


The Big Bang was the moment at which time and space began expanding and our Universe came into being. Because the Big Bang essentially caused these things to exist, we can't apply them to the cause of the Big Bang. The law of cause and effect requires time - which was not present "before" the Big Bang - to exist. "Before" the Big Bang, there was no time, so there was no law of cause and effect.

Shazam

Kazow

Pew Pew
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

As for aliens, there is an estimated 10 trillion planets in the universe. Frankly, it's arrogant to think we are the sole life supporting planet to exist.


That seems way low. Or are you just talking about Earth like planets?


Yes I know, however, historians give credit to the idea of a Historical Jesus, because a story such as Jesus's has to have a come from somewhere.


There was a story of a real person about a century prior to Jesus who fit many of the historical points. From what I remember it was believed this was the basis for some of the historical aspects of Jesus, or the historical Jesus was influenced by the story. I don't think we have enough evidence to discard either possibility.

Though the actual historical aspects of Christianity is a topic well worth getting into.

I want to know why? Why did you all of a sudden just lose faith that Jesus Christ is your savior? Do you feel that God has just forsaken everyone? or is it because something so terrible has happened in your life, you figure, "there can be no God if this has happened, because he wouldn't allow it."


For me it wasn't sudden at all.
I had quite a mix of religious influences in my life. My mom was Catholic, my dad came from a Catholic background but ended up a sort of deistic Buddhist, my grandfather again from Catholic background but converted to Judaism and back later in life, my grandmother also Catholic (much more traditional then my mom). I was also exposed to many religious views, several forms of Christianity, Wicca, Urantia (which is based on Christianity), Unitarian views, VooDoo (which is a combo of Catholic and African tribal beliefs), Satanism, and a smattering of Native American beliefs. My dad always encouraged me to question everything. Even when it was something he believed to be true.

I first tried finding truth with just one religion, Though every one seemed not hold the answers they claimed to. With such a wide spectrum of religions to look at I thought perhaps each religion had a piece of the truth that when found could be put together like a jigsaw puzzle. Evaluating and reevaluating my position became part of my belief system, and in many ways still is. After trying this for quite a while I found what I had was no better then any single religion.

I also saw how my mom reacted to her religious indoctrination. She would often start talking about the negative experiences she had with religion such as the nuns in her school. But when I would speak ill of religion she would react with an almost rehearsed response, I saw this not only in her but in others when I went to church with her. It seemed like brainwashing to me.

I had misconceptions of what atheism was at the time, seeing it as a stance that God defiantly did not exist. I saw this view as no better then religion claiming that God defiantly did exist. I still held the belief of some sort of higher being along with many other metaphysical beliefs. The hardest of which to let go was the belief in an afterlife.

I eventually stopped challenging my beliefs like I once did, until one of the last talks I had with my dad before he passed away. I asked him what he believed since he said his beliefs were hard to explain. After trying to explain it the best he could and deeming it "meism" he then asked me if I believed in a god. I thought about it for a moment and said "I don't know", he replied with "good answer".

That talk got me thinking about it again. Without my parent to talk to about it like I once had I turned to the internet. I began viewing videos on religion from both perspectives. Each video that I watched I would then use my father's advice "question it" So I would research what they said. One of the videos gave a definition of what atheism was. Double checking what this person said, I realized I had been an atheist for some time and didn't know it.

Another thing that came into play, I began to really question the beliefs I held and finally went to a forum and created the mother of all random religions points threads ever (not on here), it was basically just a bunch of my thoughts poring out. From that thread I was able to gauge the responses given from both atheists and theists. After seeing each sides response I realized I couldn't so easily divorce a belief in god from a religion, and since I already saw religion as false I had to also throw away the concept of god.

As I found other more likely explanations for things I slowly began getting rid of each of my metaphysical beliefs.
Cinna
offline
Cinna
753 posts
Nomad

I had misconceptions of what atheism was at the time, seeing it as a stance that God defiantly did not exist.


?

Please berate me mercilessly if that link doesn't work...
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

Please berate me mercilessly if that link doesn't work...


I guess I wasn't very clear. There's a difference between lack of belief and belief there is no God. Lack of belief in a God is a negative position, referred to as weak atheism or agnostic atheist. I thought it was just a positive position that there was no God, known as strong atheism or gnostic atheist.
stormwolf722
offline
stormwolf722
227 posts
Nomad

1john 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

Psalms 9:18
But the needy will not always be forgotten, nor the hope of the afflicted ever perish

Romans 15:4
For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.

Ephesians 1:18
I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints,

Titus 2:11-14
For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. It teaches us to say "No" to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, while we wait for the blessed hopeâ"the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

I have faith in everyone who isn't a christian and they might become one someday i know

Cinna
offline
Cinna
753 posts
Nomad

There's a difference between lack of belief and belief there is no God.


... ... ... Uh ... ... ... What?
so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.


I freaking wish Stormwolf.
Showing 511-525 of 4668