Atheists debating God, Hell, Good&Evil, Science, Bible

goodman528

Active Member
Jun 2, 2015
25
13
114
✟17,506.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Looking at youtube Christian vs atheist debates, I think most if not all of the atheists misunderstand Christianity, and I'm frustrated that the Christian debater is often too concerned with formal arguments and jargon to correct them and express what I would have wanted to say. So I'm going to post it here:

God is infinite and eternal, not a part of the universe, but the creator of the universe. We know the universe is not infinite and not eternal, so we are not going to observe God through telecopes looking at the big things of the world, nor through microscopes looking at the small things of the world, because God is not of the world. If you are on the road of looking for scientific proof of God's existence, you are already on the wrong road.

Hell exists, but God does not condemn you to it. God is omniscient and ominpotent, but knowing something and being able to do something is not the same as must do that thing. God gives you free will as a gift, it's up to you what you chose to do. You can chose to go to hell, which is not the same as being condemned to hell. Hell is eternal existence in the absence of Grace. Eternity is not a really long time, it is eternal. So you will have an eternity to learn that human behavior is economic behavior and everything can be quantified then bought and sold, until nothing is of value to you anymore. You will be incapable of love or being loved, instead of love for your husband/wife you will only feel that he/she was with you for sex/money/connections/etc. The Bible uses the imagery of being burned by flames to warn you just how painful such an existence will be.

There is Good&Evil. Not everything is a case of he said, she said, who knows who is right? Somethings are good and somethings are evil, and we know this because we are created in God's image, and when in doubt you can refer to the Bible. There has been plenty of atheist morality systems, but good & evil is always relative in the abscence of God. You can express a preference for relative morality over absolute morality, and most of the time if not all of the time, it's because you want to sin. Murder is wrong (absolute morality). So let's declare war, and now it's legal to drop cluster bombs on them and take their oil (relative morality).

Scientific method is a way of understanding the world, but it's not the only way of understanding the world. When God can not be proved through the scientific method, it does not mean God doesn't exist. There are things which we know exists but can never be proven to be existing by the scientific method. For example, things inside a black hole. We can only ever observe the things outside it and theorize about the things inside it, but when a particle falls into a black hole we believe that particle still exists. The other interesting point here is Atheists say if evolution is not true that does not mean creation is true by default; but if God can not be proven by science then surely that does not mean God does not not exist by default.

Bible is a collection of books not a single book. Gospels were written by illiterate people paying scribes to write for them. 1st century AD Israel had literacy rate of maybe 1% at most, and Jesus' disciples are not in that 1% of rich and powerful elites who know how to read and write. When the book says this is the gospel according to Matthew, then that's the author of that gospel. And of course you would expect the scribe to refer to Matthew as Matthew instead of "I". And of course you would expect some scribe errors between the gospels of Matthew and Mark on the exact date of the passover. This is many years after the event and this is an era when common people can't even remember their own birthdays. It's amazing that random unrelated people can attest to the resurrection, rather than say just forget about it and get on with their lives. The documentary hypothesis is nonsense, if you applied it to the Harry Potter books, I'm sure you will find J.K. Rowling didn't write any of them.

I'm reasonably smart person and most of the Christians I know are pretty smart people too, so stop entertaining this notion that Christians are just stupid people gullible enough to believe in magical fairy tales. Faith is not blind belief. It's a reasonable position that can be defended. And I hope everyone can open their hearts to love and open their eyes to God's Grace.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jacks

Jane_the_Bane

Gaia's godchild
Feb 11, 2004
19,359
3,426
✟168,333.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
UK-Greens
Looking at youtube Christian vs atheist debates, I think most if not all of the atheists misunderstand Christianity, and I'm frustrated that the Christian debater is often too concerned with formal arguments and jargon to correct them and express what I would have wanted to say.
Here's the problem: there's about a googleplex of different Christian denominations, and even more individual believers with quite distinct views within each of them.
So no matter what you argue about or against, *some* Christian will turn up and say: "THAT's not Christianity!!! Look here, this is how it *really* is!"

Yes, fundamentalism and literalism look like cardboard cutouts and gross parodies, and you'll see atheists debating these more than, say, the academic minutiae of transsubstantiation vs consubstantiation.
But the important this here is: THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO ACTUALLY BELIEVE WHAT THE ATHEISTS ARGUE AGAINST. And they can not be counted on a single hand, either.

God is infinite and eternal, not a part of the universe, but the creator of the universe. We know the universe is not infinite and not eternal, so we are not going to observe God through telecopes looking at the big things of the world, nor through microscopes looking at the small things of the world, because God is not of the world. If you are on the road of looking for scientific proof of God's existence, you are already on the wrong road.
Well, the Bible portrays a deity who at some point in history was quite prolific in interfering with our planet: pillars of flame, rivers of blood, global floods, etc.
So while you *may* argue that God is beyond our reach (which in turn would prompt the question as to why we ought to assume that such a being exists in the first place), Biblegod *can* be falsified simply by checking the events of the Bible for historical veracity - and finding that they do indeed not match the evidence we find out there.

Hell exists, but God does not condemn you to it. God is omniscient and ominpotent, but knowing something and being able to do something is not the same as must do that thing. God gives you free will as a gift, it's up to you what you chose to do.
A common rationalization, but not a very good one. Again, the Bible shows us a God who is all too willing to interfere with free will, striking people dead for touching the ark of the covenant, sending bears to maul children who mock a prophet, or just killing all of the firstborn of a country in order to demonstrate His power (after deliberately manipulating the local ruler to forfeit negotiations).
With great power comes great responsibility. With ultimate power comes ultimate responsibility.
Also, "free will" is not free if the only possible scenario is "worship me or off to Cosmic Torture Camp with you".

There is Good&Evil. Not everything is a case of he said, she said, who knows who is right? Somethings are good and somethings are evil, and we know this because we are created in God's image, and when in doubt you can refer to the Bible.
Ah yes, the Bible. Where people are cruelly executed for collecting sticks on the wrong day of the week, female slaves can be used as substitute mothers for childless patriarchs, rape law follows the logic of "if you damage the merchandise, you must buy it", and virgin girls are treated as spoils of war (just to mention a few "highlights".

There has been plenty of atheist morality systems, but good & evil is always relative in the abscence of God. You can express a preference for relative morality over absolute morality, and most of the time if not all of the time, it's because you want to sin. Murder is wrong (absolute morality). So let's declare war, and now it's legal to drop cluster bombs on them and take their oil (relative morality).
You do not understand the concepts you are discussing.
"Absolute morality" is a morality where the Authority says: "Go to that country and kill all the inhabitants, their children, and their lifestock."
"Absolute morality" gives you rules such as the one I outlined above, and no one may argue against it because: "WHO ARE YOU TO QUESTION THE AUTHORITY, PITHY MORTAL?"
Morality needs to be reasoned, argued, evaluated, debated, tested, and falsified. Otherwise, you end up with atrocities.

The documentary hypothesis is nonsense, if you applied it to the Harry Potter books, I'm sure you will find J.K. Rowling didn't write any of them.
As someone who's got a PhD in literary and cultural studies, I can pretty much say that you don't have a clue.
 
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟186,371.00
Marital Status
Private
Faith is not blind belief. It's a reasonable position that can be defended.
Faith is blind belief ... I'm not sure how Christian dogma such as "God is infinite and eternal ... omniscient and omnipotent", etc. can be defended using reason/reasonably.
 
Upvote 0

MehGuy

A member of the less neotenous sex..
Site Supporter
Jul 23, 2007
55,914
10,825
Minnesota
✟1,163,590.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Looking at youtube Christian vs atheist debates, I think most if not all of the atheists misunderstand Christianity,

Considering Christianity is splintered into many denominations I do not see how someone can derive a singular understanding of Christianity.

Also most atheists are agnostic atheists.. they're not like hurr duur God cannot be proved with science therefore he doesn't exist. I don't see many atheists adopting such a shallow mindset. That's the thing, you criticize us for not apparently understanding something as complex as Christianity yet you do not seem to even understand the mostly common atheist mindset very well.
 
Upvote 0

Cearbhall

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2013
15,118
5,741
United States
✟122,284.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
Looking at youtube Christian vs atheist debates, I think most if not all of the atheists misunderstand Christianity
Perhaps, but it's also entirely possible that we simply refuse to give your religion (and its followers) every benefit of the doubt.

Personally, since I believe it to be a man-made religion, I believe that Christianity is pretty much whatever its members make it. It has countless different forms.
Yes, fundamentalism and literalism look like cardboard cutouts and gross parodies, and you'll see atheists debating these more than, say, the academic minutiae of transsubstantiation vs consubstantiation.
But the important this here is: THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO ACTUALLY BELIEVE WHAT THE ATHEISTS ARGUE AGAINST. And they can not be counted on a single hand, either.
Exactly.
 
Upvote 0

Zoness

667, neighbor of the beast
Site Supporter
Jul 21, 2008
8,384
1,654
Illinois
✟468,399.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Married
Also most atheists are agnostic atheists.. they're not like hurr duur God cannot be proved with science therefore he doesn't exist. I don't see many atheists adopting such a shallow mindset. That's the thing, you criticize us for not apparently understanding something as complex as Christianity yet you do not seem to even understand the mostly common atheist mindset very well.

I've noticed this too; there's very little reciprocation of understanding in these debates. Be it Atheism or Paganism or probably even a myriad of other belief systems. There's an expectation of understanding that is never met.
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,245
2,831
Oregon
✟731,946.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
God is infinite and eternal, not a part of the universe, but the creator of the universe.
As a Love of God, right off the bat you hit one of the main reasons for my de-conversion. Where Christians see God as separate and apart from this Creation, I've opened up to the cosmic wide Divine experience of God as united, whole and One with all there is.
 
Upvote 0

withwonderingawe

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 4, 2015
3,592
510
71
Salem Ut
✟161,549.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
God is infinite and eternal, not a part of the universe, but the creator of the universe. We know the universe is not infinite and not eternal,.....

So no matter what you argue about or against, *some* Christian will turn up and say: "THAT's not Christianity!!! Look here, this is how it *really* is!"

Amen Jane, Amen
 
Upvote 0

withwonderingawe

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 4, 2015
3,592
510
71
Salem Ut
✟161,549.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Faith is not blind belief.

A quote from Gordon B. Hinckley
"....There recently spoke in this city a prominent journalist from the East. I did not hear him, but I read the newspaper reports of his remarks. He is quoted as having said, “Certitude is the enemy of religion.” The words attributed to him have stirred within me much reflection. Certitude, which I define as complete and total assurance, is not the enemy of religion. It is of its very essence.

Certitude is certainty. It is conviction. It is the power of faith that approaches knowledge—yes, that even becomes knowledge. It evokes enthusiasm, and there is no asset comparable to enthusiasm in overcoming opposition, prejudice, and indifference.

Great buildings were never constructed on uncertain foundations. Great causes were never brought to success by vacillating leaders. The gospel was never expounded to the convincing of others without certainty. Faith, which is of the very essence of personal conviction, has always been, and always must be, at the root of religious practice and endeavor.....

The marvelous and wonderful thing is that any individual who desires to know the truth may receive that conviction. The Lord himself gave the formula when he said, “He that doeth the will of the Father shall know of the doctrine, whether I speak of God or whether I speak of myself.” (See John 7:17.)

It will take study of the word of God. It will take prayer and anxious seeking of the source of all truth. It will take living the gospel, an experiment, if you please, in following the teachings. I do not hesitate to promise, because I know from personal experience, that out of all of this will come, by the power of the Holy Ghost, a conviction, a testimony, a certain knowledge.

People of the world seem unable to believe it, so many of them. What they do not realize is that the things of God are understood only by the Spirit of God. There must be effort. There must be humility. There must be prayer. But the results are certain and the testimony is sure."

www.lds.org/general-conference/1981/10/faith-the-essence-of-true-religion?lang=eng
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Cearbhall

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2013
15,118
5,741
United States
✟122,284.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
Bible is a collection of books not a single book. Gospels were written by illiterate people paying scribes to write for them. 1st century AD Israel had literacy rate of maybe 1% at most, and Jesus' disciples are not in that 1% of rich and powerful elites who know how to read and write. When the book says this is the gospel according to Matthew, then that's the author of that gospel.
Um, no, Gospel authorship is not literal. Matthew was dead by the time that book was written.
 
Upvote 0

Cearbhall

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2013
15,118
5,741
United States
✟122,284.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
Only if you assume the earliest copies we have were the first ones.
What are you talking about? What copies? That has nothing to do with how the gospels are dated.

The Gospel of Matthew draws from the Q Source, the M Source, and Mark. This helps to establish a timeline.
 
Upvote 0

goodman528

Active Member
Jun 2, 2015
25
13
114
✟17,506.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Here's the problem: there's about a googleplex of different Christian denominations, and even more individual believers with quite distinct views within each of them.
So no matter what you argue about or against, *some* Christian will turn up and say: "THAT's not Christianity!!! Look here, this is how it *really* is!"

Yes, fundamentalism and literalism look like cardboard cutouts and gross parodies, and you'll see atheists debating these more than, say, the academic minutiae of transsubstantiation vs consubstantiation.
But the important this here is: THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO ACTUALLY BELIEVE WHAT THE ATHEISTS ARGUE AGAINST. And they can not be counted on a single hand, either.


Well, the Bible portrays a deity who at some point in history was quite prolific in interfering with our planet: pillars of flame, rivers of blood, global floods, etc.
So while you *may* argue that God is beyond our reach (which in turn would prompt the question as to why we ought to assume that such a being exists in the first place), Biblegod *can* be falsified simply by checking the events of the Bible for historical veracity - and finding that they do indeed not match the evidence we find out there.


A common rationalization, but not a very good one. Again, the Bible shows us a God who is all too willing to interfere with free will, striking people dead for touching the ark of the covenant, sending bears to maul children who mock a prophet, or just killing all of the firstborn of a country in order to demonstrate His power (after deliberately manipulating the local ruler to forfeit negotiations).
With great power comes great responsibility. With ultimate power comes ultimate responsibility.
Also, "free will" is not free if the only possible scenario is "worship me or off to Cosmic Torture Camp with you".


Ah yes, the Bible. Where people are cruelly executed for collecting sticks on the wrong day of the week, female slaves can be used as substitute mothers for childless patriarchs, rape law follows the logic of "if you damage the merchandise, you must buy it", and virgin girls are treated as spoils of war (just to mention a few "highlights".


You do not understand the concepts you are discussing.
"Absolute morality" is a morality where the Authority says: "Go to that country and kill all the inhabitants, their children, and their lifestock."
"Absolute morality" gives you rules such as the one I outlined above, and no one may argue against it because: "WHO ARE YOU TO QUESTION THE AUTHORITY, PITHY MORTAL?"
Morality needs to be reasoned, argued, evaluated, debated, tested, and falsified. Otherwise, you end up with atrocities.


As someone who's got a PhD in literary and cultural studies, I can pretty much say that you don't have a clue.

Whatever branch of Christianity, the central belief is the same. God loves us, he gave his only son Christ for our salvation. Everything else is unimportant relative to this.

The words of the Bible can be put through the scientific method, or historical method, and you can find evidence against particular events described in the Bible such as the flood. But to do those things is already missing the point of the Bible. If God wanted to tell us about particular scientific theories or historical events, he would have inspired a science book or history book. Instead, he inspired a series of book meant to lead us to salvation.

Heaven and hell are the same place, that place is eternity. Heaven is eternity with God. Hell is eternity without God. Think about that. What do you have without God? Evolution and Materialism. An eternity of it. Not a really long time. An eternity. That's hell.

It's not about this particular thing is good or that particular thing is evil. It's about the concept of there is such a thing as universal good and universal evil. Without God, there is no such concept. To use the example you mentioned: slavery. Slaves were property. Damage or theft of other's property is wrong, isn't it? But isn't the act of using another person's labor against his/her will also wrong? Which of these two is more wrong? Today you would say the second one, but 3,000 years ago you would say the first one. Without the Bible to say an absolute right and absolute wrong exists, whatever the law of the land at the time is becomes the right and wrong, and that law changes.

Your morality is different from another person's morality. Your idea of morality is limited by the fact there is limited resources but unlimited human desire. You can argue and discuss till the end of time, there won't ever be an absolute morality. That's what makes the idea of God and universal morality so radical.

PhD in literary and cultural studies is not PhD in Documentary Hypothesis and the study of the new testament texts from ancient Greek sources. That's an appeal to authority in the absent of a sound argument.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,451
26,881
Pacific Northwest
✟731,998.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Everything else is unimportant relative to this.

Okay, I believe that God is a giant bear named Steve, and that Jesus didn't rise physically from the dead but only was raised spiritually as a ghost, and that salvation is about me getting my own castle in the sky from which I get to see all the people who don't believe in Bear-Steve burn in the fiery lakes of Mordor for all eternity.

Is it really unimportant?

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

goodman528

Active Member
Jun 2, 2015
25
13
114
✟17,506.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Okay, I believe that God is a giant bear named Steve, and that Jesus didn't rise physically from the dead but only was raised spiritually as a ghost, and that salvation is about me getting my own castle in the sky from which I get to see all the people who don't believe in Bear-Steve burn in the fiery lakes of Mordor for all eternity.

Is it really unimportant?

-CryptoLutheran

God loves us, he gave his only son Christ for our salvation.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,451
26,881
Pacific Northwest
✟731,998.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
God loves us, he gave his only son Christ for our salvation.

Okay, shouldn't it be important to understand what "salvation" means too? Perhaps also what we mean when we say "He gave"?

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

habibii zahra

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2016
812
96
36
lebanon
✟27,368.00
Faith
Muslim
Marital Status
Single
Looking at youtube Christian vs atheist debates, I think most if not all of the atheists misunderstand Christianity, and I'm frustrated that the Christian debater is often too concerned with formal arguments and jargon to correct them and express what I would have wanted to say. So I'm going to post it here:

God is infinite and eternal, not a part of the universe, but the creator of the universe. We know the universe is not infinite and not eternal, so we are not going to observe God through telecopes looking at the big things of the world, nor through microscopes looking at the small things of the world, because God is not of the world. If you are on the road of looking for scientific proof of God's existence, you are already on the wrong road.

Hell exists, but God does not condemn you to it. God is omniscient and ominpotent, but knowing something and being able to do something is not the same as must do that thing. God gives you free will as a gift, it's up to you what you chose to do. You can chose to go to hell, which is not the same as being condemned to hell. Hell is eternal existence in the absence of Grace. Eternity is not a really long time, it is eternal. So you will have an eternity to learn that human behavior is economic behavior and everything can be quantified then bought and sold, until nothing is of value to you anymore. You will be incapable of love or being loved, instead of love for your husband/wife you will only feel that he/she was with you for sex/money/connections/etc. The Bible uses the imagery of being burned by flames to warn you just how painful such an existence will be.

There is Good&Evil. Not everything is a case of he said, she said, who knows who is right? Somethings are good and somethings are evil, and we know this because we are created in God's image, and when in doubt you can refer to the Bible. There has been plenty of atheist morality systems, but good & evil is always relative in the abscence of God. You can express a preference for relative morality over absolute morality, and most of the time if not all of the time, it's because you want to sin. Murder is wrong (absolute morality). So let's declare war, and now it's legal to drop cluster bombs on them and take their oil (relative morality).

Scientific method is a way of understanding the world, but it's not the only way of understanding the world. When God can not be proved through the scientific method, it does not mean God doesn't exist. There are things which we know exists but can never be proven to be existing by the scientific method. For example, things inside a black hole. We can only ever observe the things outside it and theorize about the things inside it, but when a particle falls into a black hole we believe that particle still exists. The other interesting point here is Atheists say if evolution is not true that does not mean creation is true by default; but if God can not be proven by science then surely that does not mean God does not not exist by default.

Bible is a collection of books not a single book. Gospels were written by illiterate people paying scribes to write for them. 1st century AD Israel had literacy rate of maybe 1% at most, and Jesus' disciples are not in that 1% of rich and powerful elites who know how to read and write. When the book says this is the gospel according to Matthew, then that's the author of that gospel. And of course you would expect the scribe to refer to Matthew as Matthew instead of "I". And of course you would expect some scribe errors between the gospels of Matthew and Mark on the exact date of the passover. This is many years after the event and this is an era when common people can't even remember their own birthdays. It's amazing that random unrelated people can attest to the resurrection, rather than say just forget about it and get on with their lives. The documentary hypothesis is nonsense, if you applied it to the Harry Potter books, I'm sure you will find J.K. Rowling didn't write any of them.

I'm reasonably smart person and most of the Christians I know are pretty smart people too, so stop entertaining this notion that Christians are just stupid people gullible enough to believe in magical fairy tales. Faith is not blind belief. It's a reasonable position that can be defended. And I hope everyone can open their hearts to love and open their eyes to God's Grace.
I congratulate you for this great possible as if I am reading an Islamic doctrine
my question is if god if you don't believe in god as a part how do you believe in trinity and that god the father the son and the holy spirit are one god???
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums