Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

If you wanted to convert an atheist who wanted to believe....

12357…17

Comments

  • #122
    Caspian Curved Cowhand
    Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Caspian Curved Cowhand


    Rev Hellfire wrote: »
    The facts simply aren't there. Its like me saying I had a mars bar because I saw an advert, but more likely I was hungry and then saw the advert. Which was the real reason I ate it ?

    You finally acknowledged and gave in to your previously suppressed knowledge that mars is the only chocolate and food you should be eating, and saw the light with a little help.


  • #123
    Biro
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,091 ✭✭✭Biro


    angelfalling wrote: »
    I like the argument of intrinsic good and evil. These things are relative culture to culture-- because what is good and evil is dependent on how that society operates. In general, we get along with one another and work together, do good deeds, etc, because you can accomplish more things as a group than as an individual. If we went around pissing everyone off, raping and murdering and lying to people we would have more trouble getting them to cooperate to advance society.

    But it doesn't really matter what culture you belong to. Culture may differ in what it determines as right and wrong, but at the end of the day humans will always do wrong things and right things (bad things and good things) in respect to the culture they're actually in regardless.


  • #124
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    Winters, what's the deal with MarkMI6? He really seems to like your posts ;)


  • #125
    wolfsbane
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭wolfsbane


    Bduffman wrote: »
    I know that atheists have been accused on this thread of being a bit touchy -but with statements like the above is it any wonder?
    Somehow, I think we would see quite a bit of touchiness from christians if we said that in their deepest hearts they know that christianity is all bullsh*t but have suppressed it.
    Why would anyone suppress something they 'know' to be true? And in the case of christianity, that would mean risking eternal damnation? Now that would be illogical.
    Sinners are antagonistic to God, therefore they suppress any knowledge they consciously have of Him. We see suppression at work in other areas of life, where the truth does not suit our innermost desires. We can con ourselves very successfully. It is of course illogical - but it feels good.

    Add to that the deceiving work of Satan, bringing many plausible alternatives, alternatives that better suit our desires. For the heathen, their knowledge that there is a spiritual world is accommodated by way of many gods/spirits/idols/demons ruling the world and responding to our service. For the atheist, materialistic evolution fits the bill. Anything but God.


  • #126
    angelfalling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 201 ✭✭angelfalling


    Biro wrote: »
    But it doesn't really matter what culture you belong to. Culture may differ in what it determines as right and wrong, but at the end of the day humans will always do wrong things and right things (bad things and good things) in respect to the culture they're actually in regardless.

    Of course it matters. I guess I don't get what you are saying. So, based on the culture the person lives in they will act accordingly? Yeah, duh.

    I mean, these things change even year to year. We used to think it was perfectly acceptable to hit kids when they misbehaved, and now most people would admit they don't agree with that. Some wouldn't approve of the occasional spanking, even. So good and evil can change without a culture over time, too.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Killaqueen!!!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,026 ✭✭✭Killaqueen!!!


    Winters wrote: »

    Also 'Christ's resurrection' cannot really be used as an example, the 'evidence' supporting this generally comes form the bible which in itself was written only a few hundred years ago and was highly edited and modified. Any atheist would take it as a collection of stories and fables, not a literal accurate historical guide.

    Referring to the scriptures, do atheists believe they are a collection of fairytales manifested from thin air? Then would providing evidence for some of the events in the Bible convince some atheists that perhaps bigger things in the Bible are true too, like the existence of God. Out of curiousity, do atheists believe Jesus too was a myth or that he existed but was just crazy or something?


  • #128
    Caspian Curved Cowhand
    Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Caspian Curved Cowhand


    Killaqueen!!! wrote: »
    Referring to the scriptures, do atheists believe they are a collection of fairytales manifested from thin air? Then would providing evidence for some of the events in the Bible convince some atheists that perhaps bigger things in the Bible are true too, like the existence of God.
    No. Either they didn't happen, were wildly exaggerated, or did happen. None of the above are any proof of a god existing, rather that the people of the time interpreted the events in the way they wanted to. Even if they proved a god existing, they didn't prove it was their particular god, it could have been any other. One small event doesn't prove any bigger one, they're independent.

    Could take a novel as an example again, just because it's set in a real location and maybe some of its references may have happened at some point, doesn't make the novel true.
    Out of curiousity, do atheists believe Jesus too was a myth or that he existed but was just crazy or something?
    Depends entirely on who you're asking


  • #129
    angelfalling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 201 ✭✭angelfalling


    Killaqueen!!! wrote: »
    Referring to the scriptures, do atheists believe they are a collection of fairytales manifested from thin air? Then would providing evidence for some of the events in the Bible convince some atheists that perhaps bigger things in the Bible are true too, like the existence of God. Out of curiousity, do atheists believe Jesus too was a myth or that he existed but was just crazy or something?

    What do you then, as a Christian, believe other holy books such as the Koran are? Humans are capable of making up pretty incredible things. Have you read the Lord of the Rings? (lol).

    Anyways, I think its possible Jesus existed as it was kind of popular during his time to be a "teacher" and have a little group of followers. There was a pretty good program on a few months ago called "Rivals of Jesus" that was quite interesting. Since even by the admittance of followers what was written about him was at a minimum written 50-60 years after his "death", I can't put much faith in that. Hell, you can barely take historical writings that we KNOW are based in fact too seriously as they are written with strong bias.


  • #130
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    bluewolf wrote: »
    No. Either they didn't happen, were wildly exaggerated, or did happen.

    Two words: fantastic :pac:


  • #131
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    angelfalling wrote: »
    What do you then, as a Christian, believe other holy books such as the Koran are?

    The works of a single man, unsubstantiated by anyone else? Joseph Smith and the book of mormon the same. Thats just one thing I find that the collection of testimonies we call the bible has over books like the koran.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    Caspian Curved Cowhand
    Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Caspian Curved Cowhand


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    Two words: fantastic :pac:

    Mm? I can't put three options after an "either"?


  • #133
    uncleoswald
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,616 ✭✭✭uncleoswald


    Killaqueen!!! wrote: »
    Referring to the scriptures, do atheists believe they are a collection of fairytales manifested from thin air? Then would providing evidence for some of the events in the Bible convince some atheists that perhaps bigger things in the Bible are true too, like the existence of God. Out of curiousity, do atheists believe Jesus too was a myth or that he existed but was just crazy or something?

    Well of course if it was proved that the more "magical" events in the Bible happened then of course atheists would believe, but well lets just say I won't hold my breath. But some of the more historic events in the Bible are just that, historical events, and do not in any way confirm the rest of the Bible. For example Jesus is also mentioned in the Koran so his (probable) existence would hardly automatically point to confirmation of the truth of the Bible.


  • #134
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    angelfalling wrote: »
    What do you then, as a Christian, believe other holy books such as the Koran are?

    I'm pretty sure we have had this discussion before. Do we really need to go down this road again?

    I thought not!


  • #135
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    bluewolf wrote: »
    Mm? I can't put three options after an "either"?
    You certainly can but I'm not sure it would be correct. I wasn't laughing at you - well, not really. It just reminded me of something I would do.


  • #136
    Winters
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,761 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    Killaqueen!!! wrote: »
    Referring to the scriptures, do atheists believe they are a collection of fairytales manifested from thin air? Then would providing evidence for some of the events in the Bible convince some atheists that perhaps bigger things in the Bible are true too, like the existence of God. Out of curiousity, do atheists believe Jesus too was a myth or that he existed but was just crazy or something?

    I myself personally would believe them to be a collection of short stories, I'd nearly compare them to Aesop's Fables, just a longer version with one main central character :) [Remember, I would have a thinking along the lines of the person the OP is trying to work with].

    The fact is that the story of Jesus (Born to a virgin mother, performed miracles, persecuted and killed then rose from the dead etc.) has been told by stories and scriptures for many thousands of years. Infact there are old egyption, greek, asian etc. stories which pre-date Jesus and the bible which would lead you to the obvious conclusion that the story of Jesus was based upon these and show that it was not in anyway unique.

    The fact that there were numerous people during those times all claiming to be the new messiah beg to ask the question, what makes him unique over all the others? Was it that it was all true or is it that his story was told louder than the others?

    And remember this was all happening at a time when we were not even educated enough, as a species, to understand how we get sick, why medicines work, what was beyond the clouds in the sky. During those times stories and fables were the only method of entertainment for people, what's to say that this was no more of a story that got passed on and on so much that people believed it to be truth? The bible was not written during the days of Jesus but was a collection of books published hundreds of years afterwards, this would logically give rise to concerns about the authenticity of its contents and who chose what books to actually put into it?


  • #137
    Owen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    For me, one example where the Bible really shoots itself in the food when it claims Noah is 600+ years old, and that all of the animals/insects/birds of the world can fit on a boat made from wood, which would need to be the size of County Cork.

    For an athiest, this gives us a message that people circa 2k years ago were dumb enough to believe that people could live to be 600+, and that they'd believe anything. I mean, to someone from a less educated time, this would certainly look like a God shining his light down on us - when we know it's just the clouds and sun today :

    sun-breaking-through-clouds-4002.jpg


  • #138
    wolfsbane
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,980 ✭✭✭wolfsbane


    Winters said:
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wolfsbane
    You miss my point. Sinners cannot be converted by argument, no matter how strong. They are both blinded by Satan and antagonistic to God. They will not believe.

    Sinners are converted when God gives them a new nature/new heart, one that is not blinded by Satan nor antagonistic to God. They then gladly respond to God's command to repent and believe
    The question an Atheist would ask when being told this is; if God was the creator then he would have created them AS a sinner, no?
    No. God created all things good. Man sinned and lost his good nature.
    For sin to exist then God would have had to create it.
    Again, No. Sin resulted from man's actions, not God's. The most that can be said is that God permitted it to happen.
    So if God created them AS a sinner, then changing yourself to go against how god created you ... would that not be going against god's work?
    As He did not, then your question is invalid.
    If not, then why would god create us beings, inherit of Sin (through no fault of each individual person, but that of people thousands of years ago whom we have only a vague blood connection) and require us to change our ways just to please him?
    God's physical creation ended in Eden. After that, Adam sinned. We are the natural offspring, inheriting Adam's fallen nature. However much you may contest the fairness of that, you cannot dispute the fact that all of us commit sin against God. That is indescribably wicked and deserving of His righteous wrath.
    Does he not love us the way we are?
    Depends what you mean. Is He happy to let us go on being wicked and when we die bring us to heaven to continue our wickedness? No.

    Does He desire that we all repent of our evil and turn to Him, trusting in His Son to cleanse us of our sin and make us His loving children? Yes.

    Has He set His love upon a number of us and chosen us for salvation? Yes.
    These comments of yours would do more to push many Atheists away from the notion of God and re-enforce close minded stereotypes. Which is not what either side in the OP's initial question would want.
    These comments of mine are what the Bible declares, and have been used by God to convert all who ever were converted. I know they sound foolish to the unconverted, but that too is a mark of the gospel truth. It only serves to demonstrate it is God at work when men are converted, not human reasoning:
    1 Corinthians 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:

    “ I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
    And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.”

    20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

    26 For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. 27 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; 28 and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, 29 that no flesh should glory in His presence. 30 But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God—and righteousness and sanctification and redemption— 31 that, as it is written, “He who glories, let him glory in the LORD.”


  • #139
    angelfalling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 201 ✭✭angelfalling


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure we have had this discussion before. Do we really need to go down this road again?

    I thought not!

    My apologies, I'm new around here. It's valid, though. There's no more proof that one document is more valid than the other, and like i said, taking any written document for truth is dangerous even for historians.
    Again, No. Sin resulted from man's actions, not God's. The most that can be said is that God permitted it to happen.
    This is hard for me to swallow. I often find it difficult to understand if God is the ultimate creator and controller (who is quite capable of anger and vengeance, or used to be and somehow got into therapy to control his anger management issues) than why does he "allow" for the things that he hates so much? You can't attribute it to "satan" or humans because if he made everything then he made humans with the ability to sin, for whatever reason.


  • #140
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    wolfsbane wrote: »
    God's physical creation ended in Eden. After that, Adam sinned. We are the natural offspring, inheriting Adam's fallen nature. However much you may contest the fairness of that, you cannot dispute the fact that all of us commit sin against God. That is indescribably wicked and deserving of His righteous wrath.

    How is it indescribably wicked if we are simply inheriting Adam's fallen nature? It is like blaming someone with Down's Syndrome for inheriting their parents faulty genetics.

    And who decided that we would inherit this fallen nature in the first place? Who decided that a "nature" could be inherited in such a fashion?

    You don't have to go far before you get to a point where God must have chosen that this would be the way it would be, despite knowing what would happen, ie he decided that this would be the way it is rather than simply allowing it to happen.


  • #141
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    angelfalling wrote: »
    My apologies, I'm new around here. It's valid, though. There's no more proof that one document is more valid than the other, and like i said, taking any written document for truth is dangerous even for historians.

    Sorry, I wont drag this off on a bible validity discusson. I'll just say this. Remember that the bible is not 'one' document. It is a collection of a multitude of documents from various ages written by various people. As I mentioned earlier, unlike the koran or the book of mormon etc, it isn't a book one person said they recieved from God.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    angelfalling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 201 ✭✭angelfalling


    JimiTime wrote: »
    As I mentioned earlier, unlike the koran or the book of mormon etc, it isn't a book one person said they recieved from God.

    Okay, the Talmud? There are loads of Hindu texts as well.


  • #143
    Liber8or
    Closed Accounts Posts: 662 ✭✭✭Liber8or


    If "God" created me, and "God" made me intelligent, so much so that he would know that I would question his apparent existence. Since, inquisitiveness and curiosity are inherant in intelligence.

    (Careful now, I am gonna quote the bible here.) For example, when Eve asks the snake why she can't eat the fruit from the forbidden tree. There is an example of human inquistiveness, designed by "God". Surely, at those early stages of human development, he could have remade us to cut that out and prevent us Atheists asking questions down the road.

    Therefore, if he was aware that his own designs would question his existence, surely all us "non-believers" have a get out clause?

    "You made me intelligent enough to ask questions, so its not my fault your existence became one of those questions..."

    Only the ignorant ones would not question his existence and therefore be guaranteed automatic entry to the Heaven Festival?

    Seems a bit unfair to me...

    However, should I be facing the "Big Man" when my time is up, I shall surely quote my case to him and be on my merry way.


  • #144
    Winters
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,761 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    wolfsbane wrote: »
    No. God created all things good. Man sinned and lost his good nature.

    But then who created all things bad? If God did not create all things bad, but there is bad things out there then he is not as powerful or as omnipresent as he is believed to be, so maybe he is not actually worth praising? Maybe the other guy is better? Who came first, the good or the evil?
    wolfsbane wrote: »
    Again, No. Sin resulted from man's actions, not God's. The most that can be said is that God permitted it to happen.

    Why would God, if he is indeed as all powering, let it happen? Was it for our own free will? If it was for our own free will then why does he guide us in other stage of live and decide when we are all to die? Does he pick and choose when we get free will?
    wolfsbane wrote: »
    Depends what you mean. Is He happy to let us go on being wicked and when we die bring us to heaven to continue our wickedness? No.
    Then he should use his powers to change us. None of us today wish to be born with inherited sin, so why not remove this and let us all be good Christians from the start?
    wolfsbane wrote: »
    Has He set His love upon a number of us and chosen us for salvation? Yes.
    Why not forgive us all, if he is indeed so forgiving?



    These also begs the questions, did we exist somewhere before we were born? Or is birth, to this planet, mark the beginning of an everlasting life? Or is there a possibility that we lived with god BEFORE we came to this earth? If the latter then how do we know we have not already repented our sins?


    wolfsbane wrote: »
    These comments of mine are what the Bible declares, and have been used by God to convert all who ever were converted. I know they sound foolish to the unconverted, but that too is a mark of the gospel truth. It only serves to demonstrate it is God at work when men are converted, not human reasoning

    As I said before, comments like this, if said by the OP to their friend would do more harm then good. It gives the impression of a deluded person reading from age old books that they memorised to repeat on demand. It would definitely not win over many possible sceptics.


  • #145
    Killaqueen!!!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,026 ✭✭✭Killaqueen!!!


    Winters wrote: »
    I myself personally would believe them to be a collection of short stories, I'd nearly compare them to Aesop's Fables, just a longer version with one main central character :) [Remember, I would have a thinking along the lines of the person the OP is trying to work with].

    The fact is that the story of Jesus (Born to a virgin mother, performed miracles, persecuted and killed then rose from the dead etc.) has been told by stories and scriptures for many thousands of years. Infact there are old egyption, greek, asian etc. stories which pre-date Jesus and the bible which would lead you to the obvious conclusion that the story of Jesus was based upon these and show that it was not in anyway unique.

    The fact that there were numerous people during those times all claiming to be the new messiah beg to ask the question, what makes him unique over all the others? Was it that it was all true or is it that his story was told louder than the others?

    And remember this was all happening at a time when we were not even educated enough, as a species, to understand how we get sick, why medicines work, what was beyond the clouds in the sky. During those times stories and fables were the only method of entertainment for people, what's to say that this was no more of a story that got passed on and on so much that people believed it to be truth? The bible was not written during the days of Jesus but was a collection of books published hundreds of years afterwards, this would logically give rise to concerns about the authenticity of its contents and who chose what books to actually put into it?


    Yes, I see where atheists are coming from but let's start at the basics. There is so much evidence for the existence of Jesus as you seem to understand - exaggerated or not, that in my eyes he has to have existed. So whats the evidence that he's anything more than just a man. Well, I don't see why the scriptures are deemed invalid here. The Gospels are separate accounts from separate people, telling the story of Jesus and the miracles he performed. Are they simply inventing this? Yes, they are followers, but their accounts each have their differences.

    Perhaps atheists would be more convinced if an account came from 'one of their kind'. Take Julian the Apostate, who wrote around 300AD:

    "Jesus . . . has now been honored for about
    three hundred years; having done nothing
    throughout his lifetime that was worthy of fame,
    unless anyone thinks it a very great work to heal the
    lame and the blind and to cast out demons in the
    towns of Bethsaida and Bethany"

    He seems to accept that Jesus performed miracles...hardly a fable IMO. The fact that he mentions Bethsaida and Bethany too. Mark 8:22 states that Jesus healed a blind man in Bethsaida and John 12:1 states that Jesus rose Lazarus from the dead in Bethany.


  • #146
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    angelfalling wrote: »
    Okay, the Talmud? There are loads of Hindu texts as well.

    If you want to discuss this further, I suggest you set up another thread.


  • #147
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Killaqueen!!! wrote: »
    Yes, I see where atheists are coming from but let's start at the basics. There is so much evidence for the existence of Jesus as you seem to understand - exaggerated or not, that in my eyes he has to have existed. So whats the evidence that he's anything more than just a man. Well, I don't see why the scriptures are deemed invalid here. The Gospels are separate accounts from separate people, telling the story of Jesus and the miracles he performed. Are they simply inventing this? Yes, they are followers, but their accounts each have their differences.

    Perhaps atheists would be more convinced if an account came from 'one of their kind'. Take Julian the Apostate, who wrote around 300AD:

    "Jesus . . . has now been honored for about
    three hundred years; having done nothing
    throughout his lifetime that was worthy of fame,
    unless anyone thinks it a very great work to heal the
    lame and the blind and to cast out demons in the
    towns of Bethsaida and Bethany"

    He seems to accept that Jesus performed miracles...hardly a fable IMO. The fact that he mentions Bethsaida and Bethany too. Mark 8:22 states that Jesus healed a blind man in Bethsaida and John 12:1 states that Jesus rose Lazarus from the dead in Bethany.

    All religions and cults have claims by people that miraculous events happened. Christianity is no different, but I don't see anything in Christian accounts that is particularly more believable than any other religion. You have modern cults posting descriptions of miracles straight after they happen, Christian accounts of Jesus were written down years after they happened.


  • #148
    Caspian Curved Cowhand
    Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Caspian Curved Cowhand


    Killaqueen!!! wrote: »
    Perhaps atheists would be more convinced if an account came from 'one of their kind'. Take Julian the Apostate, who wrote around 300AD:

    "Jesus . . . has now been honored for about
    three hundred years; having done nothing
    throughout his lifetime that was worthy of fame,
    unless anyone thinks it a very great work to heal the
    lame and the blind and to cast out demons in the
    towns of Bethsaida and Bethany"

    He seems to accept that Jesus performed miracles...hardly a fable IMO.
    One guy from centuries ago writing about another guy from centuries before HIS time? Relying on what as his evidence? No, I'm not any more willing to accept that, I don't care if they were the most hardcore atheist on the planet at the time or not.
    The fact that he mentions Bethsaida and Bethany too. Mark 8:22 states that Jesus healed a blind man in Bethsaida and John 12:1 states that Jesus rose Lazarus from the dead in Bethany.
    See above.
    And EVEN if it were true, it still wouldn't prove anything except something extraordinary happened that the people of the time chose to interpret as the work of their god. It doesn't mean there was a god, it was THEIR god, nor that jesus was the son of their god/ had any divinity.


  • #149
    angelfalling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 201 ✭✭angelfalling


    Killaqueen!!! wrote: »
    Well, I don't see why the scriptures are deemed invalid here.

    Because you can hardly take a text seriously, not this old. Often times good deeds written about slowly evolve into tales of "heroics" that are far from reality.
    As for Julian the Apostate, if he believed Jesus was such a miracle worker who died for our sins and rose again, why did he spend some much energy trying to push Christianity out of the empire? He was not a Christian, which is kind of obvious since he is "the apostate".
    If you want to discuss this further, I suggest you set up another thread.
    I don't have a need to. I don't really feel I need to defend this point any further-- it applies to this thread because as an atheist who denies God based on logic and reason the biggest reason I refute Christianity is my inability to view the Bible as the word of God.


  • #150
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Wicknight wrote: »
    All religions and cults have claims by people that miraculous events happened. Christianity is no different, but I don't see anything in Christian accounts that is particularly more believable than any other religion. You have modern cults posting descriptions of miracles straight after they happen, Christian accounts of Jesus were written down years after they happened.

    Lets not forget, that those who started the 'lies', were willing to die, and did die for the lie too. Not a case of the guys at the top taking advantage of the gullible, as in suicide bombers etc. This was the guys at the top. The actual people who 'knew' for 'certain' if it was a lie or not. Strange behaviour to let oneself be tortured and killed to perpetuate a lie that you know is a lie.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    kelly1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    bluewolf wrote: »
    - I haven't encountered any atheists claiming we have no free will, perhaps you could point me in their direction
    I certainly have! Check out:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055214929 and
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055214094&highlight=free+will
    bluewolf wrote: »
    - Amusing that you claim to be the ones having free will when you're the ones worshiping an omnipotent deity who created you as you are, your circumstances, and knows your future.
    Sorry, I don't see your point. We can make choices can't we?
    And God's I don't believe that we're forced to do anything just because God knows the future. He just knows in advance what choices we're going to make and we make the choices.


Advertisement