The stumbling block for atheists.

[AV1611VET]

Doesn't change the fact that they were Christians who refused to celebrate Christmas.

Okay, Puritans were Christians who refused to celebrate Christmas.

Sue them.

 

[Kylie]

Okay, Puritans were Christians who refused to celebrate Christmas.

Sue them.

No need for any grumpiness. I'm just giving a specific example of what Redrook said.

 

[AV1611VET]

No need for any grumpiness. I'm just giving a specific example of what Redrook said.

So what's your point then?

That Radrook is praying to find a wife from the 1600's?

(See Post 147)

 

[Paul uk]

But atheism has one fatal flaw. It assumes that the sum total of reality is what can be detected by the senses.

It's not a flaw, it's just the way things are. We define everything which exists against the benchmark of what can be comprehended by the senses. Such things exist, everything else doesn't. This isn't a problem if Genesis is understood correctly but becomes a stumbling block when it is misconceived by both Christians and atheists.

We have to concede that even by biblical standards, God doesn't "exist". Why? because we know this from Genesis. God created everything but he didn't create himself. He was also not created by anyone else. God, therefore, remains uncreated, unmade, not part of his creation.

I don't mean that there is no God - that is a very different proposition.

So think it through. Everything we can comprehend with our senses is the creation, including ourselves. By default, it's not God, unless we wish to reduce the divine to an instance of existence, which is a kind of idolatry and very unsound. Cars, trees, people, whatever are all instances of "existents". God doesn't fall into this category.

“For in him we live and move and have our being.” is a bit more comprehensive. I would say that rather than being an existent, God sustains existence itself, without which there could be nothing - well at least not sentient life.

 

[Cearbhall]

I think I can understand why atheists are atheists. After all, professing Christians don't love each other as we should.

A lot of you do.

We judge each other too harshly. We get hung up over all kinds of unimportant minutia.

Some do, sure, but people are just people. We're all different. Their choices don't reflect on other Christians, imho. Don't get too down on yourselves. My beliefs are not the result of Christians being mean.

To the atheist, Christianity probably just looks like any other kooky cult because we generally don't accurately reflect the nature of our Creator.

Certain sects, yes, but not as a whole. To me, it's just a theistic religion like any other.

But atheism has one fatal flaw. It assumes that the sum total of reality is what can be detected by the senses.

I don't see how that's a flaw.

Drop this assumption and the "magic" of miracles appears, the "pink unicorns" disappear, and the Creator God can become known.

It's not an assumption. It's a conclusion.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I think I can understand why atheists are atheists. After all, professing Christians don't love each other as we should. We judge each other too harshly. We get hung up over all kinds of unimportant minutia. To the atheist, Christianity probably just looks like any other kooky cult because we generally don't accurately reflect the nature of our Creator.

But atheism has one fatal flaw. It assumes that the sum total of reality is what can be detected by the senses. Drop this assumption and the "magic" of miracles appears, the "pink unicorns" disappear, and the Creator God can become known.

I think if you understood atheism, you would no longer call yourself theist.

 

[Radrook]

So what's your point then?

That Radrook is praying to find a wife from the 1600's?

(See Post 147)

No need since there are millions of Christian women today who don't celebrate Christmas.
Then again you might not consider JWs Christians.
How many denominations in Christianity do not celebrate Christmas?

 

[Cearbhall]

Their aversion to an ID is what I find to be their main stumbling block.

I don't have a problem with ID. It doesn't conflict with reality the way Creationism does.

Religious aversions stem from it.

I'm religious.

 

[Ophiolite]

I think I can understand why atheists are atheists.

Arguably there may be as many reason people are atheists, as there are atheists. You are probably overreaching yourself on this one.

After all, professing Christians don't love each other as we should. We judge each other too harshly. We get hung up over all kinds of unimportant minutia. To the atheist, Christianity probably just looks like any other kooky cult because we generally don't accurately reflect the nature of our Creator.

You credit many atheists as having a significant interest in Christianity. Many are - and have always been - disinterested in the religion.

Many others have arrived at their atheism by carefully consideration, not of how the followers of one religion behave, but upon the basis of evidence.

Still others, just never give the idea of a God much thought at all.

Some, undoubtedly, are atheists despite appreciating many of the positive, selfless things accomplished by Christians.

But atheism has one fatal flaw. It assumes that the sum total of reality is what can be detected by the senses. Drop this assumption and the "magic" of miracles appears, the "pink unicorns" disappear, and the Creator God can become known.

I don't know of any atheists who make this assumption. It seems likely that some do, but they fall into that sub-set of atheists called fools.

In shirt dysert, you would benefit from rethinking your position on why atheists are atheists. You are mistaken. (Or were at the time you made the OP. Hopefully posts by other members have already persuaded you of your error.)

 

[Ophiolite]

Oops.

Edit for the previous post: rather than commenting upon dysert's sartorial elegance I did, of course, intend to say "in short" rather than "in shirt".

 

[Chriliman]

I think I can understand why atheists are atheists. After all, professing Christians don't love each other as we should. We judge each other too harshly. We get hung up over all kinds of unimportant minutia. To the atheist, Christianity probably just looks like any other kooky cult because we generally don't accurately reflect the nature of our Creator.

But atheism has one fatal flaw. It assumes that the sum total of reality is what can be detected by the senses. Drop this assumption and the "magic" of miracles appears, the "pink unicorns" disappear, and the Creator God can become known.

An atheist/agnostic is simply someone who claims to not believe in God or admits they don't know if God is real or not.

However, this doesn't mean they have no knowledge of the attributes or characteristics of God as being loving and caring for His creation.

 

[Cearbhall]

I never insert a deity of choice when discussing an ID. The ones who insist on inserting deities into the discussion are the atheists.

Because we can all see in your profile that you're a Christian...

 

[bhsmte]

An atheist/agnostic is simply someone who claims to not believe in God or admits they don't know if God is real or not.

However, this doesn't mean they have no knowledge of the attributes or characteristics of God as being loving and caring for His creation.

I would say virtually all atheists are aware of the attributes attached to a god of diffferent religions. Christians on this site, make claims about those attributes constantly. Also, atheists likely tend to analyze these claimed attributes and overlay them with well evidenced reality, when they reach certain conclusions.

 

[Kylie]

So what's your point then?

That Radrook is praying to find a wife from the 1600's?

(See Post 147)

What, I'm not allowed to give an example to support a claim made by another member? I'm beginning to think you just don't like me, AV.

 

[Kylie]

I don't have a problem with ID. It doesn't conflict with reality the way Creationism does.

I'm curious - what difference do you see between the two that allows ID to remain consistent with reality while still having creationism be inconsistent?

 

[Cearbhall]

I'm curious - what difference do you see between the two that allows ID to remain consistent with reality while still having creationism be inconsistent?

ID can mean that abiogenesis and evolution happened and were simply part of God's plan. It doesn't go against what actually happened. It just adds meaning to it. Creationism, on the other hand, says that species were brought into existence in their present form.

 

[Speedwell]

ID can mean that abiogenesis and evolution happened and were simply part of God's plan. It doesn't go against what actually happened. It just adds meaning to it. Creationism, on the other hand, says that species were brought into existence in their present form.

What you are describing is not ID but theistic evolution. ID holds that while most of life's diversity is the result of the variation and selection of evolution, certain biological structures (including, in some versions, the first life forms) are beyond the power of natural forces to produce and require specific acts of divine (excuse me, designer) intervention.

 

[Radrook]

I don't have a problem with ID. It doesn't conflict with reality the way Creationism does.

I'm religious.

Well, then I wasn't referring to you I guess. Apologies if I gave that erroneous impression.

 

[Ken-1122]

I think I can understand why atheists are atheists. After all, professing Christians don't love each other as we should. We judge each other too harshly. We get hung up over all kinds of unimportant minutia. To the atheist, Christianity probably just looks like any other kooky cult because we generally don't accurately reflect the nature of our Creator.

How you treat each other has nothing to do with why I am atheist; the lack of evidence is why.

atheism has one fatal flaw. It assumes that the sum total of reality is what can be detected by the senses. Drop this assumption and the "magic" of miracles appears, the "pink unicorns" disappear, and the Creator God can become known.

Wrong again; you obviously have a lot to learn about atheism.

 

[Radrook]

An atheist/agnostic is simply someone who claims to not believe in God or admits they don't know if God is real or not.

However, this doesn't mean they have no knowledge of the attributes or characteristics of God as being loving and caring for His creation.

Sounds like an agnostic to me.