Christians shouldn't always turn the other cheek and ignore the attacks of secular thought, says one prominent conservative writer. They need to step out and meet the atheist critique.
CP HOME
> Education > General
Christians Urged to Meet Atheists in the Public Square
By
Lillian Kwon
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Oct. 11 2007 01:55 PM EDT
[-] Text [+]
Comments
Euripedan,
You really need to start taking Scripture more seriously.
Creationism
http://polemos.net/Creationism.html
Do Atheists Exist?
http://polemos.net/Do%20Atheists%20Exist.html
DARWINISM and ATHEISM: UNSCIENTIFIC and MYTHICAL
http://www.evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
WE ARE NOW WITNESSING THE EXTINCTION OF ATHEISM.
http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
"So the atheist in a way is getting a little more desperate," D'Souza believes.
The atheist is getting a little more disgusted, not desperate. The atheist wonders when will people stop acting like children who have invisible friends. The atheist see religious stupidity everywhere and he wonders when the world will grow up.
If we as Christians are to successfully present our case in the public arena, we must first confess our own diversity. We range from Liberal to Conservative, span all ethnicities, and interpret the Bible in a multitude of ways. Some of us are Theistic Evolutionists, like Joan Roughgarden of Stanford University who is a world-renown Evolutionary Biologist and a person of strong, Christian faith. If you interpret every word of the Bible literally, I believe you're going to run into a lot of scientific roadblocks. Though I believe strongly in the divinity of Jesus Christ, I also accept the fact that the universe is billions of years old and that evolution is itself a manifestation of God's glory. I believe that humanity is but one of many sentient races that God has created throughout the universe. The time scales of evolution and the magnanimity of the cosmos do not derail my faith. I was raised in the Fundamentalist tradition in a Christian school before graduating from a public university with a degree in Mathematics and Physics. I am also an author of Civil Rights literature. However, as I read history, I see that the face of Christianity is not always the face of Christ. Many fools have committed atrocities in the name of our faith. But there is another river that flows through history that is far more compelling; and that river flows through the stories of great human beings like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Quakers of the 19th Century willing to risk fortune, life and limb to liberate slaves. You’re not going to reach people by showing God to them in a test tube, or in elaborate mathematical formulations. The language of science does not answer WHY. Rather, it follows a sequence of repeatable events that lead to expected conclusions. An unbeliever will more likely be reached by the love of God expressed through human beings than by a science text. We seem to have forgotten that essential truth when we blast gays with greater venom than we show toward terrorists. God is the God of all people, not just those who look, behave, dress, act and talk just like us. We need to show how our faith has pioneered the great liberation movements of history, either directly or indirectly. To be honest, the face that we present to the world is most often penchant, intractable and exclusive. You don’t reach unbelievers that way.
holito8: your analogy fails. Parents are accountable to society for how they raise their children. You believe in a god who is accountable to no one, and you can't recognize the corruption in that.
So parents pass every decision thru the community before they make it? If so tell me why haven't I been asked any question about clothing, schooling, hygine, and etc concerning every child in society. Ooops! My parents made in their own choices on many matter. So you equate God, omiscient to a person limited intellect.
Here’s a link to an article from the LA Times, titled “10 myths -- and 10 truths -- about atheism”:
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-op-harris24dec24,0,6970228,full.story
From the story:
“Most polls show that about 90% of the general public believes in a personal God; yet 93% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences do not. This suggests that there are few modes of thinking less congenial to religious faith than science is.”
I don’t think you’re going to win any arguments with atheists that are based on science.
Ezekiel 28: 2
.. Thus says the Lord God: ‘Because your heart is lifted up, and you say, I am a god,
I sit in the seat of gods, in the midst of the seas, yet you are a man, and not a god, though you set your heart as the heart of a god (Behold, you are wiser than Daniel! There is no secret that can be hidden from you! With your wisdom and understanding you have gained riches for yourself, and gathered gold and silver into your treasuries; By your great wisdom in trade you have increased your riches, and your hear is lifted up because of your riches….
I never said expanding your knowledge is a bad thing. Do have children? Do you tell them all the decisions you make? Can you understand what God is saying?
holito8: Hey, you are the one who chooses to artificially limit your horizons by buying Christian dogma. If you refused to believe things which lacked evidence, then you too could expand your knowledge and learning without fear of losing a stagnant and fragile faith. But since you do not, that's no cause to issue threats against those of us who do learn and grow. If everyone took the same attitude you express, we'd all still be sitting in caves eating raw dead animals.
Ultimately you want to master life and death, creation and destruction and be masters over all sounds familiar like survival of the fittest. Stalin, Kublai Kan, Alexander the Great, and etc to name a few had a similar plan. You will say no; we have no alterive motive. But you won’t take responsibility for your actions.
Genesis 3:22
…the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us, to know good and evil. And now lest he put out his hand take also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever.”
Genesis 11:4
And the people said, “come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower whose top is in the heavens; let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.”
Isaiah 14:13-14
For you (Lucifer) have said in your heart:
‘I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation on the farthest sides of the north;
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High.’
You assail that you have a right to know it all. Science will prevail against God. His creation will be like Him a god. You will use His natural world to prove your theories. You will change and become truly great.
Man was expelled from the garden. The people were scattered at Babel. Lucifer and all those who followed his teaching were cast out of heaven.
Thus will be the fate of all who challenge God.
He a man who wrote a book that doesn't make him an authority on nature. He still learning. If he knew everything, he'd be a god. But he not and he is making speculations on what appears to come from "controlled data." He puffing himself up to be a truth teller, but he still doesn't have the complete picture. Thus, you can follow him all you want. A man leading a man... Yet better, a man still learning and telling another his has sure knowledge and wisdom. That's kinda funny... Blind leading the blind and neither knows whats around the corner. Some people would rather be in darkness than seeing in the light stumbling from one theory to the next hoping its the "holy grail."
holito8: Adaptation happens over time, through reproduction. If the environment changes fast enough, there won't be time for a beneficial mutation to appear and be selected for. Read The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins, for an explanation of genes and natural selection.
Everyone talks about evolution to explain what they cannot not prove. My sister and I had a discussion on this last night. Why is it no one can find these missing links but claim they lived. Now, they can find the beginning and the end but not the middle. So they look at that is comparable to other species, and says O this is the missing evolved state. I don't claim species have made adaptions to adjust to environmental changes.
However, there is a term known as extinction. Entire species have been show to have died out. With shrinking habitats, why aren't more species adapting and becoming something else. Instead, they are on the verge of dying out. Because they cannot change species, they cannot break the laws which governs them. Once they have adapated as much as possible there isn't another choice for them. Adapting means improving on your dietiary constraints added more variety to your diet. Diet does not make you another species. Some humans are vegetarians and some are more carnivirious. But they are both still humans. Some bateria are resistant to some drugs and some are not. However, they are the same type of bacteria.
Why haven't they become something else more like there adapations?
Holito8: Did you learn creationism or ID in your classes, or did that come from somewhere else.
Holito8: I've read enough and taken enough classes to know that the creation accounts of genesis are not "truths because they are true" as you wrote earlier.
Books or classes have you takened.
I took comparative anatomy, microbiology, cellular biology and experimental biochemistry.
holito8: Just out of curiosity, what books have you read concerning the theory of evolution?
A theory's predictions are what we would expect to also be true if the theory is true. It could be that it would not be that way for reasons we don't understand, so in sense, they could be called "educated guesses." Those predictions, or hypotheses, or "educated guesses" are then tested to see if they are also the case. As I said, if they aren't that way, either the theory is wrong or we don't understand the relationship between the variables as well as we thought. If they are true, that is added support for the theory being accurate.
Finally, we have a basis for understanding. First a person sees what God has made. Understanding it all works just as He said and there is no variation. You can argue minute changes in an animal or etc. But a dog is still a dog even if it has a thick coat in a cold climate.
You do no understand why God make the Bible so easy to understand. God made the Bible simple so that even a fool, one who tries to find folly within it, could not err. Every man whether learned or not with a sound mind can read and understand it with out someone telling him what it says. God gave simple thing to his children so that all generations who read it can find Him. Many have read with eyes of "Sinai" and have not seen.
holito8: You aren't making sense. What is "it" and what real thing is "it" close to but not the real thing? What do you mean "a theory can fail even as it passes?" Can you give an example?
A theory's predictions are what we would expect to also be true if the theory is true. It could be that it would not be that way for reasons we don't understand, so in sense, they could be called "educated guesses." Those predictions, or hypotheses, or "educated guesses" are then tested to see if they are also the case. As I said, if they aren't that way, either the theory is wrong or we don't understand the relationship between the variables as well as we thought. If they are true, that is added support for the theory being accurate.
Where are you going with this?
So you say a theory is accurate. Then why is it called a precise prediction. Now my understanding is that it is as close to the actual thing but not the real thing. That means it is not, and also the parameters are controlled to get the desired outcome to avoid error. That means a theory can fail even if it passes sometimes. Therefore, it is not completely accurate. According to the scientific definition, you chose to use.
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena. Most theories that are accepted by scientists have been repeatedly tested by experiments and can be used to make PREDICTIONS about natural phenomena."
Again, what's the scientific definition of prediction? When you admit a prediction is an "educated" guess, we can proceede forth.
holito8: Oh, I see what you are saying. You are asking if predictions made by the theory are accurate. The answer is yes if the theory is more likely to be correct. If the predictions turn out to be wrong, then there is probably something wrong with the theory.
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena. Most theories that are accepted by scientists have been repeatedly tested by experiments and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
Ok, I'm use your for this discussion. So it accurately tell the complete story or does it predict a possible outcome based on given scientific information?
The question in simple. Does a prediction accurately tell the outcome? yes or no. I cannot be any more simple. You can argue semantics, but the question is yes or no.
Now, you say you can't understand my question. I question you ability to effectively argue your position.
holito8: I'm afraid I don't understand your question. Just what exactly are you getting at?
letsgetreal: Ah, but if you suppose that the father is the one responsible for shoving the child out there in the first place, and moreover that the father is somehow responsible for the dangers the child faces, then the child's refusal to bow to the father's coercion is not stubbornness, but courage and righteousness. So it is in your religion. Your god, supposed to be the creator of everything, the "first cause" as IDers like to put it, is ultimately responsible for everything (including free will, so that defense doesn't excuse your god). Your god is responsible for every torment suffered by those who have the courage to reject this whole rigged system. Does that sound like morality to you? It doesn't to me, and if you try to excuse your god from human judgment, you add even more corruption to the charges against him, through making his power totally unaccountable.
I don't understand your question about my worldview and rejecting jesus. Could you expand on your question, because I don't see how my understanding that justice is a human production is contrary to my thorough explanations of why the christian god is 1. baseless and 2. immoral and unjust.
I thank you for your compliments, and I appreciate your willingness to continue engaging in this debate. Nonetheless, I wouldn't recommend waiting up for me to "come home." Been there, done that, remember?
Citizen: If a Father says to his son, “Come inside, it’s dark and dangerous and your enemies are all around. Please come inside where it’s safe, and everything I have is yours”. But the son won’t listen, and stubbornly refuses to believe him. And the Father continues to implore the son and continuously sends messengers to him to come inside before they are separated. But the son gets angrier and not only won’t he listen, but he tells others to rebel against his father as well. Should the father carry the son kicking and screaming into his house stirring up trouble or allow him to make the choice to stay outside? God always says Choose!
I stand corrected in your Response: “if you don't know what judgment will look like, how do you know whether the bible is right or not in saying that God is just (this is also contrary to what I have heard from many Christians, that all sin is accounted the same. Can you comment on that?)?” I meant to say the Reward system Jesus was talking about when He mentions in Revelation 22:12 “And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work”. Others may feel all rewards are the same as well, but this is not clarified to my knowledge.
We have come back to the original question of who is God (judge) in our lives. You seem to have great faith in humanity to know how to judge fairness and we Christians will place our trust in Jesus. If you truly believed that your worldview does not require the universe to be inherently just than why do you work so hard rejecting Jesus?
Nevertheless, I admire your courage and honesty to debate for what you believe is correct. You remind me of the Apostle Paul before his conversion and you will be a powerful voice for our Lord, when you come home. And I hope to meet you in our Father’s house on the other side.
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena. Most theories that are accepted by scientists have been repeatedly tested by experiments and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
Ok, I'm use your for this discussion. So it accurately tell the complete story or does it predict a possible outcome based on given scientific information?
Holito8: I'm using the American Heritage SCIENCE Dictionary, not the regular, more colloquial one. It makes sense to me that since we are talking about scientific theories, we are only interested in the definition of theory in the scientific sense, therefore the SCIENCE dictionary is the one we should use.
I'll let you choose which one you will follow.
The American Heritage® Dictionary
theory (n.) A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
theory (n.) The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.
theory (n.) A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
Sorry, you said you gave the full American Heritage definition. Your computer cut off some of the translation:
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This the·o·ry (thē'ə-rē, thîr'ē) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. the·o·ries
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.
A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.
Is that the correct defintion? You can check again. No matter where I look it still says assumption in the mist of all the other meaings.
I'm not patronizing you. But I dislike have truths. He is the fulliness of the definition.
the·o·ry /ˈθiəri, ˈθɪəri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -ries. 1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6. contemplation or speculation.
7. guess or conjecture.
Now does a theory fully explian something? I'll make it simple: yes or no.
holito8: Don't patronize me. I have no idea what you are talking about. I gave the full paragraph, unless you think I should have added on "see note on hypothesis" but I don't see the value of that to you. Here is the citation for my definition:
theory. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Science Dictionary. Retrieved October 16, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theory
Citizen you gave on part of the scientific definition of "scientific theory." Please will you write the full passage or do you want me to show you what it really says. You don't have to be surreptitious just let all out. You'll feel better when you reveal the complete definition so we can all see.
holito8: For a scientific theory, you should probably go to a scientific dictionary. The American Heritage Science Dictionary defines theory as "A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena. Most theories that are accepted by scientists have been repeatedly tested by experiments and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena."
As for your statement, "these are truths because they are true" that is a conclusion without supporting evidence. You want to talk about assumptions and conjecture, look to what you are doing, not to scientific theory.
letsgetreal: That's right, it is unjust, if the community is not able to act to punish the guilty, or the harm of punishment for that particular act outweighs the benefit. In many cases, the community is able to act, and there is justice. But in many cases, not. However, I am not the one positing a just judge. You are. My worldview does not require the universe to be inherently just, only that we should work towards it together.
I will refer you back to the injustice of an innocent person suffering for the guilty, and also the injust of both blood guilt (original sin) and blood sacrifice (the cross). Also, "believe or be damned" is most definitely coercive. Do you have a truly free choice whether or not to surrender your car when someone threatens to blow your brains out if you don't? That you seem to regard this as an act of mercy rather than an act of corruption still stupifies me. I'm have no idea what principles of justice you are using. Perhaps you should enlighten me in that area. Also, if you don't know what judgement will look like, how do you know whether the bible is right or not in saying that god is just (this is also contrary to what I have heard from many Christians, that all sin is accounted the same. Can you comment on that?)? Your bible verses are ambiguous and could stand for a number of propositions, so they really don't help much.
Citizen: You believe that Jesus is an unjust Judge, and that He judges every sin alike with no regard for Justice. But it’s exactly the opposite.
First of all I would like to point out that’s what your belief does. According to the finality of Atheism/Humanism, there is no difference to where a person ends up. You could be the biggest Philanthropist or Mother Theresa, spending your life saving the cities poor, or a war criminal having murdered many, your end would be the same. The only highlight of your existence isn’t measured by what you’ve accomplished in good or bad ways, but only in the amount of time you have on earth. Many babies in the womb, who have never done anything wrong only get to live less than a month, and old tyrants could live to be 100. If this were all, it would be extremely unjust!
Christ on the other hand, paid the price for our sins, so no matter what we’ve done, He offers Eternal Life to anyone who believes it. This is not a forced belief but one of choice, you can only receive something you believe is there. It’s also not a question of slavery, but one of marriage in a perfect union as Co-Heir with Christ, seated in the Throne of Heaven. When we CHOOSE to know Him, we can’t help but fall in love with Him who is pure Love.
The Bible says that God is a just God and that in the end there is a judgement. What that will look like no one knows. But there are many scriptures that says God will reward us according to our labor. Here are a few.
2 John 1:8
Look to yourselves, that we do not lose those things we worked for, but that we may receive a full reward.
Revelation 11:18
The nations were angry, and Your wrath has come, And the time of the dead, that they should be judged, And that You should reward Your servants the prophets and the saints, And those who fear Your name, small and great, And should destroy those who destroy the earth.”
Revelation 22:12
“And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work.
Ok, let stop eating baby food and eat meat. Up to this point, Citizen has been throwing around the word theory. Theory is, by Webster, an assumption or conjecture....not prove yet. If theory is proven it becomes a law.
Law: 1 a (1): a binding custom or practice of a community : a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority. a statement of an order or relation of phenomena that so far as is known is invariable under the given conditions.
Now let me reiterate, God said the word that goes out from His mouth. It will not return to Him void but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.
Law: God said let there be light and there was light. God divide the light and the darkness.
He called the light Day and the darkness He call Night. So the evening and the moring were the first day.... God said let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and tthe fruit tree that yield fruit according to its Kind, whose see is in itself.... God made two great lights. The greater light to role the day, and the lesser light to rule the night.... So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the water abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. God blessed them, saying , "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let the birds multiply on the earth. God said "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to its kind; cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind" ; and it was so.... And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
To the woman He said "...In pain you shall bring forth children;"
Then to Adam He said: "...In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; For dust you are and to dust you shall return."
There are too many laws to highlight them all.... but a one more won't hurt. God gave Noah a sign, I set My rainbow int the cloud, and it shall be for the sign of the covent between Me and the earth. I will remember My covenant with is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh.
These are truths because all are true. All things bring forth according to there kind. All thing return to the earth. The rainbow come with the rain. According to the definition of law, a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority. Ask any scientist which is greater a law or theory?
Hawk49: Romans 13 is about submitting to a god-appointed king. Hardly in harmony with a constitutional democracy such as we have. As for jesus, what is relevant about him in this context?
You're questions fail on their face, because evolution is not by chance, but by natural selection. Nevertheless, there is a strong basis in my worldview for answering your quesitons:
We, the People make the law in order to build a stable and prosperous society. The whole point is to get away from the "might makes right." The strong and the majority benefit from living in society too, and those benefits would be lost if they had to deal with constant rebellions caused by oppression. So they have to concede equality before the law and inalienable rights in order to preserve the society that is the context in which they are strong, or the majority. That is the basis for all of those things: the social nature of the human animal. No supernatural creator necessary.
CITIZEN: I read the site and was amused how biblically illiterate the author is. He has focused on one area without incorporating the total message in the Bible. He only focused on the Israelites. He has failed misserably incorporating Christ's message and Romans 13. But, again, can you speciffically address the article I sited? How does your worldview/lifestance support those truth claims? What is the basis for the particular truth claims you make?
HAWK49: Well, I think this blog post (not mine, but I substantially agree with it) rebuts your editorial quite nicely: http://www.daylightatheism.org/2007/10/is-america-a-christian-nation.html
CITIZEN: It would be interesting to read your take on today's column from CP entitled Heritage of Faith Supports Democratic Ideals. It would be helpful as you address specific secular utopias you provide specific instances where these utopias were met.
Secular cynics counter that we live in a more enlightened age than that of America’s founders. They maintain that we should discard the antiquated notions that inhere in the Judeo-Christian religious traditions. Secularists reject the notion that there is a transcendent God to whom human beings will one day render an account. They maintain that God is merely a creature of our imagination. Human beings were not created. They evolved by chance from slime, and they are accountable only to themselves. They are but "beasts," albeit the best of the beasts. There is no such thing as truth, no right or wrong; it all depends. There is no authority greater than the state, and it is from the state that human beings are granted their rights. What the state gives, the state can take away.
The secular world view of those who condemn religious conservatives has also had an impact on the rights and freedoms of our citizens. To assess that impact, one may again ask a few simple questions:
• On what basis does a creature of chance claim to have worth, value and dignity worthy of the protection of the law?
• On what basis can such a creature claim to have a "right" to resist the will of the majority or the weak to resist the will of the strong?
• What claim can such a creature lay to inalienable rights conferred by the Creator, when the very existence of the Creator is denied?
The answers to these questions suggest that when it comes to preserving our legal rights, it is the view of the secularists, not of Christian conservatives, which is to be feared.
Thomas Jefferson rightly declared, "God, who gave us life, gave us liberty." Then he wisely asked, "Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are a gift of God?"
Personally, I’d rather go to jail than see an innocent man put in my place, even if he was crazy enough to want to go there. But then, I guess I don’t have a Christian moral code, where its ok for innocents to suffer in place of the guilty.
Ah, but then, you don’t get this “get out of jail free” card if you don’t agree to love, honor and cherish this unjust judge. Now we are getting into corruption. Should a judge agree to allow a criminal to go free if that criminal becomes the judge’s servant. Isn’t that slavery? Should the judge be allowed to coerce people into slavery by sentencing them to death if they don’t do it?
In summary, if you call your god “just” you are deceived. I will also note that the only reason the other gods don’t speak or hear is that you don’t believe in them. If you did you wouldn’t believe in jesus, and you would see no need for a savior. So you are still left to explain why you choose to believe you need a savior, and if its because of the judge described above, I think the more courageous thing would be to impeach the judge, rather than participate in his coerced servitude.
Savedbygrace: I read books, and the information I found in those books plus reflection lead to the conclusions that I present today. I know the standard stereotype among evangelicals and fundamentalists is that atheists don’t believe because something bad happened to them so they are “mad at god,” but that just isn’t so for me. I’ve lead a relatively happy and comfortable life, and where there were problems, I’ve solved them on my own. Believing in jesus didn’t change anything.
“God is truth” is irrelevant. I’m saying that treating all crimes the same is injustice. Do you agree with that statement or not? Would you like to see jaywalkers get the death penalty? If not, then you have to agree that if your god treats all crimes the same, he is unjust. You then throw in the story of Adam, but then you are agreeing it is justice to punish descendents for their ancestor’s crimes. Is that justice? But then, oddly, your god doesn’t take into account character evidence of a positive nature, its “as rags” as it were. If you are going to allow in evidence of ancestor criminality, shouldn’t you also give strong consideration to positive character evidence? Isn’t that the just thing to do?
How is a system stacked against humanity at every turn “justice?” Because you are allowed to believe that an innocent man suffered for these supposed crimes? Haven’t you heard the phrase “better 10 guilty go free than one innocent be sent to jail”? Here we have the worst of both worlds: the “guilty” go free AND the innocent is punished. Would you want to live in a society where judges punished the innocent so the guilty could go free? Isn’t a principle of justice: Punish the guilty, not the innocent? Again, injustice.
PeacebyJesus: As I have been explaining to others, your god is corrupt and unjust, and a poor candidate for any kind of morality, even in the event that he existed.
holito8: It's true: I'm perfectly happy to acknowledge ignorance, rather than guess and pretend that guess has anyting more substantial than wishful thinking behind it. You can't explain why it has to be your god behind the big bang and not either some natural process or some other god that you don't believe in. In reality, you explain nothing, you only make yourself feel good, and that is not the way to find truth.
#2: Religion has caused history's wars, murders, and violence
Actually it has, but not Biblical Christianity, but the atheistic belief system, -and it is one - is most manifestly violent. While some contest that it is nonsensical to point out "evil atheists" like Stalin who have done bad things throughout history, it is relevant as militant atheism is presenting itself as a morally and intellectually superior system, while being destitute of any transcendent objective authority that defines morality, and the most notable history of those who operated out atheism's personal sense of morality reveals it to be contrary to the morality of the Christian faith, which atheism attacks, and is the only faith i am interested in defending.
Some attribute Stalin's atrocities to his beginning in Orthodox Christianity but it was the objectively baseless morality that allowed Stalin to do what he did, and fostered the kind of political religion that was conducive to his ends.
Yet neither are the crimes that were done by apostate Christianity (Roman and Eastern Catholicism) attributable to Biblical Christianity, unless it can be shown that the New Testament supports a theocracy, and waging war after the flesh, and of taking physical vengeance upon enemies, which is most assuredly does not! (Mt. 5:44; John 18:36; Rm. 12:19; 2 Cor 6:1-10; 10:3-4; Eph. 6:12). Thus both the Bible itself and those who sought to go by it were often suppressed by such false religion, and we can expect the same by the hands of atheism, the fastest growing religion in the west (perhaps after the Wiccan religion).
Citizen: I'm getting back to you on being "afraid" of new knowledge. I'm not afraid of discoveries by men. I know when all good knowlege comes, so I don't fear what man "discovers." When new theories come- and they will, I take them in stride. Anything that is not sound, I leave it. As always, someone will take the reigns and run with foolish trying to prove an unfound assumption. People will follow it as always yet knowing it explains nothing. I do not fear these things... They will come and pass. I take hold of sound doctrine because I was given a sound mind. When I read God's word, I read sound truths. I see history unfold. I know where I come from and who my Father is. I'm not wondering where it all began. Scientist will always come close but miss the mark. I don't have to wonder Who made the universe. I know the Who and where he is. I know where I am heading when this life ends.
If it comforts you that Darwin's version is what you choose to accept, I cannot make you change your mind that is utterly pointless. Or if you choose to follow scientists unsupported finding- who for years are not sure of the Big Bang Theory or how life acctually started. I ask you have they not been saying this for years and nothing has come of it. They only get a better understanding that it is still a great mystery. But let says they prove all this matter was at one central location and exploded. One question still remains. From where did it come? What started the spark? Bodies at rest remain at rest until a force is applied to it. God is the Creator and the Force necessary for it all to happen. Science cannot prove otherwise. They just know something happened. I cannot live in ingorance or on a blind pretention. If you or others can sleep with this, go ahead
Citizen: I'm getting back to you on being "afraid" of new knowledge. I'm not afraid of discoveries by men. I know when all good knowlege comes, so I don't fear what man "discovers." When new theories come- and they will, I take them in stride. Anything that is not sound, I leave it. As always, someone will take the reigns and run with foolish trying to prove an unfound assumption. People will follow it as always yet knowing it explains nothing. I do not fear these things... They will come and pass. I take hold of sound doctrine because I was give a sound mind. When I read God's word, I read sound truths. I see history unfold. I know where I come from and who my Father is. I'm wondering where it all began. Scientist will always come close but miss the mark. I don't have to wonder Who made the universe. I know the Who and where he is. I know where I am heading when this life ends.
If it comforts you that Darwin's version is what you choose to accept, I cannot make you change your mind that is utterly pointless. Or if you choose to follow scientists unsupported finding- who for years are not sure of the Big Bang Theory or how life acctually started. I ask you have they not been saying this for years and nothing has come of it. They only get a better understanding that it is still a great mystery. But let says they prove all this matter was at one central location and exploded. One question still remains. From where did it come? What started the spark? Bodies at rest remain at rest until a force is applied to it. God is the Creator and the Force necessary for it all to happen. Science cannot prove otherwise. They just know something happened. I can live in ingorance or on a blind pretention. If you or others can sleep with this, go ahead.
Citizen: I'm curious as to what has happened in your life to fill you with such doubt & resentment. Throughout the world, mankind has different opinions of what is right or wrong. Some actions that appear as 'wrong' in one culture may be perfectly 'right' in other cultures. In addition, these actions carry different degrees of 'wrongness' or 'rightness', depending on the culture. Stealing in some cultures may be punishable by cutting off the thief’s hand; whereas in the U.S., someone may serve a short prison sentence where they receive food, shelter & free medical care. The list of differences in man’s opinion goes on and on. So, a particular sin, measured by man’s standard, would be viewed in different contexts depending on where you were from. Therefore, each culture would have a different punishment if the action were considered a sin to them. According to man, truth is relative. However, truth is not relative. There is one truth. God is truth.
All mankind was born to sin because of Adam’s disobedience. To Holy God, our righteousness is as filthy rags. Jesus, the Word, who was God, came to earth in the form of a man & gave Himself as a sacrifice for our sins. He bore the penalty of all the world's sin, whether man thinks the sin is big or small. Through accepting His sacrifice, we are covered with the righteousness of Christ.
I don’t believe in all gods because they do not speak; they do not hear; they do not see. No other ‘god’ gave himself as a sacrifice for my sins. Mohammed, Buddha, Confucius, etc. remain in their graves. Jesus’ tomb is empty. If you are interested in learning the historicity of the Bible and the historicity of Jesus Christ, then go to the website I suggested earlier. http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/
I personally believe that the Spirit of God has been calling you. The reason I believe this is because you have been so strong upon my mind. And I think other Christians that have posted have also felt that God is working in your life. Jeremiah 31:3 “...Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore, with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.” Jesus, I believe You died for my sins that I might be saved by Your grace.
savedbygrace: Pascal's wager doesn't consider the possibility that you are wrong because it is a non-christian god that exists. So you should probably believe in every god thats ever been proposed, just to be on the safe side. Or you could recognize that if you baselessly jack up the consequences, you can justify believing anything or nothing. So it really is worthless.
I've told you and others why I don't believe: the bible is a text of myths lacking extrinsic support for its claims concerning a god.
I said your god is unjust not because of judgement for sin, but because all sin is accounted the same. Crimes vary in magnitude, and not recognizing this by punishing them differently is one injustice of your god. The other is eternal torment, which no crime can justify. Imposing that for all crimes (by accounting them the same) is injustice. Threatening this consequence if a person does not believe is extortion, which is corruption. Its like if a judge sentenced you to the death penalty for jaywalking unless you became her slave. You'd call that corrupt and unjust, and that is analogous to what you believe your god is. You should probably reconsider whether such a being would be worthy of worship if it did exist.
Letsgetreal: You say you aren’t trying to scare me, but I don’t believe you. You would not have the concept of hell if it weren’t coercion to keep people believing, because as I have said, it is contrary to principles of justice, which I am sure you care about. Your book and your followers can disagree with me, but that is the fallacy of the argument ad popularem. A thing’s truth does not depend solely on how many people you can get to agree with it.
I don’t believe in afterlives, so it doesn’t make sense to talk to me of beauty in eternity, or “where I’m going.” I am not going anywhere. When I die, my body will shut down and then it will be disposed of in the proper manner, and that will be the end of it. There is no part of me that is “spiritual.” Human beings are wholly physical creatures.
Letsgetreal: If that is what you learned the “bottom line” conclusion of atheism is, you probably should have kept studying. If you want, I can make some recommendations that clearly demonstrate that atheism does not require nihilism. Rationality (or “intellectualism” as you put it) does not mean the end of emotions, it means understanding them, and not expecting more of them than they can deliver. Your quotes from the bible demonstrate that Christianity does not approve of this, because it requires you to believe based on what feels good, and taking that as your test of truth. It is a defective test.
As I have told many, my church was not filled with “control freaks.” My church had lovely people in it, whom I liked and respected. As for rules, they are good and necessary when established on a legitimate authority. Christianity is based on illegitimate authority, and therefore has no power to bind anyone. I see no evidence of this god you speak of, so interdependence on others is the best way to go through life.
As for hell, it doesn’t matter how good or bad I am, eternal torture is too large a punishment for any crime. Its unjust. Suppose a child runs away from their parent. Would a loving parent refuse to prevent a harm to the child, even though they have been rejected? No, indeed not, they would care more for the child’s well-being than they would for their own hurt feelings.
Citizen: I don’t believe in ex-Christians. If you did become a born again Christian at one time in your life, then I think that your unbelief has grieved the Spirit of God. Jesus said in John 10:28 “And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” Heb 13:5 “...I will never leave thee or forsake thee.”
I don’t know what led you into a path of unbelief, only God knows. But just because you have fallen into unbelief doesn’t mean that God is through with you. You’re His child. My children will always be my children. Proverbs 3:12 “For whom the Lord loveth He correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.” I discipline my children when they need disciplining, but my love does not change for them. I love them just as much when they are bad as I do when they are good. I love them even if they say they hate me. They are my children and I am their mother and nothing can sever that bond for as long as we live on this earth. Isaiah 49:15 “Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee. Behold I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me.”
Just because you’ve fallen doesn’t mean that you’ve fallen from God’s grace. Proverbs 24:16 “For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again:” Psalms 139:7-11 “Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me. If I say, Surely the darkness shall cover me; even the night shall be light about me.”
God is just. You said not so because all sin is counted as the same. Sin brings judgment because of a person’s rejection of God’s free gift of salvation, Jesus Christ. If you are seeking the TRUTH, you will find the truth. A good site to check is http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/ This site was created by Randall Niles, who was once an atheist.
If you’re right and I’m wrong-- then I lose nothing.
If I’m right and you’re wrong-- then you lose everything.
theSeer01
Thank you for your thoughtful comments and encouragement. I also exhort you, to continue standing up for Truth that makes sense like you have been. We will all learn from it. This is a great way to have dialoge and to build bridges dividing our Nation. The truth will always win out just like 1 and 1 always = 2 with no gray areas. There are no gray areas with Jesus.
Citizen: I'll get back with you soon gotta go... check back tomorrow....
The Seer
letsgetreal: I'll respond in full later, but I wanted you to know that I saw your post, and I am planning to answer it.
Citizen (Continued): And if you are one of those who believe deep down inside that you are a good person and God wouldn’t be so cruel to send you to Hell. You have the concept all wrong. If you choose not to acknowledge Him, then you don’t want to be with Him, and He has no choice but to leave you alone. He will not violate your Free-Will. Just as a man cannot force a Bride to love him and want to be with him. God will not force you. We are not trying to scare you with Hell, because if your only motivation to loving God is to escape Hell, He still won’t invite you into His house.
But if you think you can have all the beauty you now enjoy with you in eternity without Him or that you’ll have eternal peace through “Nothingness”, the oldest book in the World and billions of followers say you are wrong. All beauty belongs to Him and He won’t be around where you are going unless it’s with Him. We also can write you forever and explain the Truth, according to His Word, but you are the only one who can make that decision. God does not listen to our Words, He reads our Hearts. If you really are searching Truth, then seek the Counsel of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth.
Finally, by not going deeper with God, you miss out on the most beautiful and powerful Cosmic Awareness in the Universe. There is so much more to Him, and you’ve settled for the dust of the earthbound. Scientists have discovered through Physics that all Energy is made up of “Vibrating Strands”, which most likely are Living Sound Waves projected throughout the Universe when God said “Let There Be Light” and the Big Bang happened (sound produces light). You have a choice to discover the mysteries leading to empty Nihilism or the Mysteries of this Greatest Wonder called GOD!
Citizen: Your search for Truth has valid points. That’s exactly where I started out, when I was a young self-proclaimed intellectual and Disciple of Atheism which espoused an easy answer to our Universal question. What is the meaning to Life?
Through studying, I learned the bottom line conclusion Atheism offered is achieving a State of “Nihilism” (Nothingness). Meaning one shouldn’t feel anything, no joy, love, sorrow, pity, shame, grief, mercy, kindness, goodness or any of the senses that both of us have agreed as wonderful. History reveals that Frederic Nietzsche, the famous teacher of Nihilism, became a severe drug addict ending in insanity.
His supposition was that if you could feel nothing, you could overcome everything. He indeed did try and conquer the world through influencing those after him, in men like Karl Marx founder of Communism and the Nazi Party. As Atheists, they wouldn’t have to feel anything as it led to the murder of millions of people who were esteemed not worthy in the Chain of Evolution. Jesus said “you’ll know them by their fruit, a good tree cannot bear bad fruit and a bad tree cannot bear good.”
You may think you’re not this kind of Atheist, but you become what you feed on, and a small dose of Heroin is still Heroin, gradually requiring more. Right now you have bitten into the Tasty Morsels of Intellectualism, which I fully agree can be very seductive. These aren’t new concepts, they are as old as mankind’s original testing, with the same argument, “When the woman saw that the tree was good for food… she took its fruit and ate…her husband with her” (Genesis 3:6), allowing evil and death into the human mind and the world.
I know that you are searching, but encourage you to get through it a lot quicker, by finding the Bottom-Line (the end result) of where your new Prophets like Dawkins are leading you. Again I maintain if you really knew your best friend Jesus as Lord and Savior, you wouldn’t have left Him.
You may have had bad experiences with control freaks in the Church and view them negatively, or you have fallen for the chaotic lie that all rules are bad, but the truth is that Christians only have one Authority and His Name is Jesus. He is the one we follow, and because of that we desire and strive to achieve getting our lives in proper order with one another wherever He wants us, like a living Body with many parts.
We sincerely hope and pray that you will return to the Body of Christ and the wiser for it. You have a choice to follow corruptible, finite men or an incorruptible eternal God who’s Love for you cost His Son’s life. It’s not too late, because of His blood, you will be forgiven, but there is no salvation without repentance, which means sorrow of heart for the wrong you’ve caused Him and others, then TURN AROUND.
holito8: By your own words, you are afraid of new knowledge, because you are afraid of change. You call ignorance "knowledge" and knowledge "ignorance" I'm starting to wonder if your god is actually Big Brother, with all the Orwellian redefinition you do.
theseer01: if you are by any chance a Democrat or an open minded moderate/centrist/independent, you might be interested in democraticunderground.com anyway. It's a really interesting community, and you seem like the type who could handle the religious mix on the site (its about half atheist/half everything else)
theseer01: Guess that depends on who you want watching us. I'm comfortable with any audience, so its your choice Jjust make sure its one that has few or no restrictions on either believers or unbelievers. The former christianforums.com is the only one I can think of off hand where we'd both be comfortable. The others I know are internetinfidels.org, and the religion/theology forum of democraticunderground.com ;-)
I don't believe because of fear. I know God loves, provides, keeps me safe and etc. God has not turned His back on anyone that's why His word is still going forth. God longs that every man be saved. You want everyone wanting for a man to tell him what to believe. You are waiting on a scientist to tell you the next great thing. Only so a few years later another man will have a different scientific finding. I can ony admit the truth... Because Christ has taught me too much to ever go back to being ignorant.
God has created things to teach us about Him, to improve or lives, to get a glimpse of the awesome things that await us, and to add a drop of creativity(everyperson) to it all.
Citizen : what message board would you suggest?
Citizen: I appreciate your candid and passionate responses. I think we can tie up our discussion on this matter. To be sure I'll debate you on other issues in other articles. Take Care, Seer.
holito8: I don't care what you think my fate is going to be, I just wish you'd take some responsibility for choosing to believe in such a unjust, corrupt god, and admit that you believe out of fear, not out of desire for truth.
theseer01: I, too, would like this to continue, but it appears we are starting to misinterpret each other beyond the ability of this somewhat restricted arena to sort out. For example there is no "quote" function, and prior posts are sorted by page rather than all appearing in a single one-page list. If you want to take this to a message board, I'd be ok with that, but if you agree that we are starting to lose our ability to read each other fairly, then perhaps things should just end here for now, with the stipulation that neither of us is making any statement about the strength or weakness of our position by moving on.
No evidence, you say. You have grasped after one failed theory after the next trying to prove yourself. The gods of Greece is another thing. But it would take too long to explain. You are wrong about Constantine… He could no more save Christianity as he could save Rome from being destroyed. You are reaching… If it pains you to know the fate of those who chose to live with out God, then tough. I have no more power to condemn you than to make you believe. You have complete control over that decision. I have not threaten your life in any way. I told you what the word of God says so that your blood is not on my hands. God has never lost a battle. It is not by my strength, knowledge or wisdom. God is God, supreme and complete; Power, knowledge and wisdom are His. He changes times and seasons. He sets up kings and deposes them. Glorious is His name. From the rising of the Sun to the setting of the Moon, He is God. I have a zeal for His Word (Christ) to know His Salvation (Christ). I pray that whenever I open my mouth words may be give me so that I will