Atheists go to hell even if they are good!?

[Hespera]

They do know He exists by the things of nature and they CHOOSE to reject Him.

And where on earth did I say anything about malicious intent?

With more truth and less calumny we observe:

I dont know "he" exists, and i dont "reject" that which is in no way evident.

You just choose to pretend to believe.

 

[Tergle]

In defense of not only Skavau but many other non-believers here, I'm not sure it's true that they do know God's truth, or that they've actually heard the Gospel.

They are anti believers. Not non-believers. Non believers are those proverbial pygmies in the jungle metaphor.

That word "heard" has very specific meaning, as Scripture applies it in this context. To illustrate my point, concoct the impossible scenario of all the unbelievers here being present for Paul's all night sermon where somebody fell out of a balcony, died, and came back to life. Forget the miracle.

Paul would not have tolerated the mocking and bashfest. He would have asked them to leave.

I think a different level of "hearing" may well take place in that scenario, which many here have not experienced.

They say they have heard. They say they have rejected the Gospel.

Keep them at their word.

 

[Tergle]

Another baseless accusation with no evidence.

Skavau went "straving babies routine." That is ubiquitous in the freethinker act.

Do Ayn Rand and Christopher Hitchens think similar?

Think or act? They both say the same things about Christianity.

How about Joseph Stalin and Richard Dawkins?

Evolution driven. The selfish gene on display for all to see.

I've explained to you already that atheists can be Objectivists, Communists, Socialists, and Capitalists.

And starving babies and flying snorkle/spaghetti monsters all in a row.

There are even some on this VERY forum that identify themselves as Republicans.

So what? There are gay republicans too.

It's perfectly easy to see us as something other than homogenized unless you are a moron...and you are.
[/QUOTE]

Isn't that a flame? That's perfectly easy to see.

I also find it hilarious that you accuse us of group think when all Christians are expected to think the same as well, at least by you.

Think the same? Are you saying that Jesus doesn't hold us all accountable for our very thoughts? He said he does.

How many Christians go "Jesus' sacrifice proofs God loves us" routine. Probably all of them right?

And in that, you have proven my point about atheists.

 

[b&wpac7]

They are anti believers. Not non-believers. Non believers are those proverbial pygmies in the jungle metaphor.

I am not an anti-believer. I have recently come to realize that, in my mind, I like that Christians have come to know the God of Abraham. I just think they are mistaken on a pretty major point, but they still desire to serve God.

 

[Doveaman]

Bump:

My answers to a similar question in a couple other threads can be found here and here.

This doesn't answer my question. I'm not so much focusing on what the word "eternal" or "aionios" mean. I am focusing primarily on what Christ meant when He said the "good" will rise to live and the "evil" will rise to be condemned. Those who rise to live will receive life and those who rise to be condemned will receive punishment. Life or Punishment. Those are the alternatives. How do you reconcile the words of Christ with your idea that everyone will rise to live and none condemned?

Also, in response to this: Mat 25:46 "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

You said this: "The duration of aionios (the Greek word which the English words "eternal", "everlasting" and "forever" replace) is determined by the subject to which it refers."

The subjects to which "aionios" refer in the verse above is "punishment" and "life". Is the "life" temporary or eternal? If the life is eternal why would the punishment be any different since "aionios" is used to refer to both subjects?

 

[m9lc]

They are anti believers. Not non-believers. Non believers are those proverbial pygmies in the jungle metaphor.

Paul would not have tolerated the mocking and bashfest. He would have asked them to leave.

They say they have heard. They say they have rejected the Gospel.

Keep them at their word.

I didn't reject the Gospel; I don't believe that it's true. There's a difference.

I would say that my disbelief in Christianity isn't even voluntary. It's a cognitive impossibility for me to believe in the Gospel with the information that I see now. I was a Christian for the first 15 years of my life, and I was not happy to doubt my faith at first. But I had to, because I couldn't keep up with the doublethink that was my belief. I thought that it was the right thing to keep believing and that I would go to Hell if I stopped believing, but the problem was that everything in my brain was telling me that it wasn't true.

My deconversion had nothing to do with malicious rejection of God; it had everything to do with my compulsion to disbelieve in what evidence shows me to be false. There was a stretch in time toward the end of my religious life when I would pray to God begging him to just show me some sort of miracle like he did for the people in the Bible, so that I could believe in his existence again.

Of course, everything clicked eventually and I deconverted, realizing that I didn't have to be afraid of Hell or God because they didn't exist. That was an incredible relief.

But yeah, for me, my deconversion wasn't a "rejection." It was just my frontal lobe doing its job.

(After writing this post, I wanted to go back and read my posts here from 4 years ago that I made shortly after deconverting, but I suppose that the "Questions from Non Christians" forum has been closed. Too bad, it would have been pretty interesting for me.)

 

[Tergle]

quote=Skavau;57470633I will just respond to this for now.

First of all I'm glad to see that you think eternal torture is horrendous. About time you said so.

Secondly, to contrast the potential of eternal torture with that of natural evil (a misnomer in itself) is inaccurate. We can't do much about natural disasters. We might someday have the technology to vastly alter weather conditions in our favour to prevent tornadoes but preventing atrocities such as earthquakes are impossible. We can only respond to them. This is simply not true of the 'spiritual' where eternal torture, if it did exist would be under the will of God and therefore be a moral evil. I don't distinguish between intelligent agents acting unjustly either in reality or in fantasy.

You do realize that you have made yourself above the Biblical God right? This runs so common in you guys.

A far more logical response would be "I don't belive in God." And that finishes the discussion about hell. And move on to trying to fix the violence and vice of secular cities.

 

[razeontherock]

An all-powerful, all-knowing deity
allowing His child to "maturely" decide to throw himself in front of a
Mack truck that will, for ever after, be running over him doesn't add up.

A little levity in an otherwise deadly serious thread

Unless the parent happens to be of the Mommy Dearest variety, I don't
think the parent(s) would effectively prepare us for dealing with a
God-the-Father of the hell-raising sort put forward in this thread. [/QUOTE]

YouTube - ZZ Top - Beer Drinkers and Hell Raisers

 

[razeontherock]

Oh good -- so endless torment is not part of the scenario in your theology, after all?

.

I didn't say that. I'm actually undecided on that point, and don't see how resolving that would make one iota of difference. What I'm saying is that anything leading to separation from God will be burned out from within us, if we choose to walk in God's Love. Which is a very real possibility, in the here and now.

 

[Tergle]

I didn't reject the Gospel; I don't believe that it's true. There's a difference.

I don't believe in posted speed limits either. I told the cop that but he gave me a ticket anyway. He said I rejected the truth.

I would say that my disbelief in Christianity isn't even voluntary. It's a cognitive impossibility for me to believe in the Gospel with the information that I see now.

I've heard that tune before.

I was a Christian for the first 15 years of my life, and I was not happy to doubt my faith at first.

I was a non believer even longer. 18-years of my life. Reality all around me forced me to see the factual nature of the Gospel. Infant, toddler, child, adolescent, teen. And then adult. Get it?

But I had to, because I couldn't keep up with the doublethink that was my belief.

Blame that on pathetic people and not God.

I thought that it was the right thing to keep believing and that I would go to Hell if I stopped believing, but the problem was that everything in my brain was telling me that it wasn't true.

Why does hell terrify you atheists so badly? You want it gone with so many machinations.

My deconversion had nothing to do with malicious rejection of God; it had everything to do with my compulsion to disbelieve in what evidence shows me to be false.

You were a Christian at birth? At three, five or ten? When did you "become" a believer in Christ from birth to 15?

There was a stretch in time toward the end of my religious life when I would pray to God begging him to just show me some sort of miracle like he did for the people in the Bible, so that I could believe in his existence again.

Miracles? That's it? I'd rather pray to see morality make a comeback. Music is a miracle. It has no evolutionary reason to exist and move us so. And let's face it, most music does not lead us to a sexual encounter no matter the hype that it does.

Of course, everything clicked eventually and I deconverted, realizing that I didn't have to be afraid of Hell or God because they didn't exist. That was an incredible relief.

Yet you cruise Christian forums. There's in intense irony about that.

But yeah, for me, my deconversion wasn't a "rejection." It was just my frontal lobe doing its job.

You detail the definition of rejection and say it isn't rejection.

Cognitive dissonance is more the condition.

 

[Doveaman]

Oops.

 

[razeontherock]

Does this mean you see it as more of a restorative process rather than
merely endless torment with no corrective purpose?

If not, why would sinless people be tormented forever?

.

First, the Bible makes it plain the only sinless person is Jesus. Next, purgatory is a RC concept I see no Scriptural basis for, but I haven't read the apocrypha. I might get to that. Since the Bible speaks so much of fire purging us in the here and now, and God has always shown me that Rev is for the here and now, my "theology" (ugh, I hate that word) centers on the here and now. I can't fathom God's fire correcting us in the here and now, and failing that til the Day of Judgment Him doing that all over again, and having any Hope in such a prospect. But this is not something I have any revelation on, and frankly don't want to ... "gain" such.

 

[Tergle]

Originally Posted by Tergle

You do realize that you have made yourself above the Biblical God right? This runs so common in you guys.

A far more logical response would be "I don't belive in God." And that finishes the discussion about hell. And move on to trying to fix the violence and vice of secular cities.​

​

Do you have a point to make? Then make it.

Go away. You are wasting your own time not ours.

 

[Doveaman]

Go away. You are wasting your own time not ours.

Oh man! You're quick.

My post earlier wasn't meant for you. My bad.

I deleted it.

 

[razeontherock]

Non believers are those proverbial pygmies in the jungle metaphor.

I have encountered one such person. he heard God speak to him, tell him how to save his and life and that of his family, and sought out the nearest Church for instruction. It was a journey of over a week, via road made by his machete. Not only did he understand the Gospel better than his teachers at the "local" Church, but they sent him to school to learn to be a missionary. He understood the Gospel better than his teachers there. So they sent him out as a missionary. Including to the US.

After a bit of that he got homesick and went back into the jungle.

Paul would not have tolerated the mocking and bashfest. He would have asked them to leave.

Point taken. Assume in my scenario that they would respect the church in the setting, and keep their mocking inward.

They say they have heard. They say they have rejected the Gospel.
Keep them at their word.

After dialog, there is only one atheist on CF I can say has maybe really heard the Gospel, and that is mud hole, a newbie. Other than that, there has always been major ground where they are led astray by bad teaching and other falsehood that they are better off without. I spent 12 years holding all things Church to be false, and almost another 4 before He brought me into contact with real believers. I truly was NOT prepared for what I would encounter!

 

[razeontherock]

I didn't reject the Gospel; I don't believe that it's true. There's a difference.

I don't think there is a difference in Jesus' mind.

I would say that my disbelief in Christianity isn't even voluntary. It's a cognitive impossibility for me to believe in the Gospel with the information that I see now.

I came to the Lord through logic. I don't think it's arrogant to say that with my amount of study, it's a certainty that I see things you don't. That doesn't mean that I can resolve all cognitive dissonance for you, just that we might be able to relate, and have some interesting discussion.

(After writing this post, I wanted to go back and read my posts here from 4 years ago that I made shortly after deconverting, but I suppose that the "Questions from Non Christians" forum has been closed. Too bad, it would have been pretty interesting for me.)

I think you could find it archived. I agree it could be a healthy thing for you to do, and suspect there were good reasons for you to get away from ... whatever it is you got away from. My Faith, is on solid rock

 

[Tergle]

Oh man! You're quick.

My post earlier wasn't meant for you. My bad.

I deleted it.

No worries. MY response was a general one anyway.

 

[m9lc]

I don't believe in posted speed limits either. I told the cop that but he gave me a ticket anyway. He said I rejected the truth.

Lol, you made a pun, how cute. Now please promise to never make that argument again; it's really pointless. There's a difference between the English expressions "believe in" (i.e. agree with on principle) and "believe" (i.e. consider to be true).

I was a non believer even longer. 18-years of my life. Reality all around me forced me to see the factual nature of the Gospel. Infant, toddler, child, adolescent, teen. And then adult. Get it?

Yeah, your point? I was just giving you exposition to my story, not trying to gain street cred.

Why does hell terrify you atheists so badly? You want it gone with so many machinations.

It doesn't anymore; I don't believe in it. As for why it terrified me so badly when I was still a Christian, I don't understand why you need to ask that question. It's about the most horrific concept that humans (or God, in your opinion) have ever dreamed up. And when you think that you might be on your way there, it gets quite distressing.

You were a Christian at birth? At three, five or ten? When did you "become" a believer in Christ from birth to 15?

You pointed out a flawed technicality in what I said, how cute

Miracles? That's it? I'd rather pray to see morality make a comeback. Music is a miracle. It has no evolutionary reason to exist and move us so. And let's face it, most music does not lead us to a sexual encounter no matter the hype that it does.

Music could also be seen as a "side effect" of the other cognitive abilities we've developed over time. The fact is, like all modern "miracles" Christians point out, music does not require a God to be believable. It all goes back to the "Why doesn't god heal amputees" question - i.e. why does God refuse to ever perform miracles so supernatural that they are indistinguishable from a statistical anomaly?

Yet you cruise Christian forums. There's in intense irony about that.

Yes, the "You're an atheist but you spend time on Christianity!" argument. How cute. Yeah, I like debating with people, and a forum full of people I disagree with makes an awfully good venue for that. Now please promise to never make that argument again; it's really pointless.

So yeah, all in all you completely missed the point of my post in favor of making puns and cute little arguments of technicality and cliché'd "Gotcha!" arguments that have been used thousands of times.

Try reading it again and actually addressing my point, which is that my deconversion was simply not a malicious rejection, but rather a cognitive process. It had nothing to do with my desire to be sinful, but only to do with my interpretation of the evidence around me. Leading up to my deconversion, I wanted nothing more than to be able to feel what other folks in my church felt and believe in what they did.

 

[Tergle]

I have encountered one such person. he heard God speak to him, tell him how to save his and life and that of his family, and sought out the nearest Church for instruction. It was a journey of over a week, via road made by his machete. Not only did he understand the Gospel better than his teachers at the "local" Church, but they sent him to school to learn to be a missionary. He understood the Gospel better than his teachers there. So they sent him out as a missionary. Including to the US.

After a bit of that he got homesick and went back into the jungle.

Sounds like me and my experience in the University setting. I've done a lot of work in that environment. It's completely %$#@*& #!. Although unfortunately I have to go back sometimes.

Point taken. Assume in my scenario that they would respect the church in the setting, and keep their mocking inward.

Their mocking is impossible for them to let go. Look at British "brights." Their hatred cannot be hidden. And they don't want it hidden anyway. Have you ever listned to Daniel Dennett or Sam Harris? It's far past time for us to give thme back what they throw. And with all due respect, The Fixed Point Foundation is doing just that.

After dialog, there is only one atheist on CF I can say has maybe really heard the Gospel, and that is mud hole, a newbie.

Really? I'm assuming they all have ingested it in length. Most have such an intense vitriolic repsonse to it, I figured they know it well. It's not nice for those that reject it.

Other than that, there has always been major ground where they are led astray by bad teaching and other falsehood that they are better off without.

They are led astray alright. And they know it. Otherwise they wouldn't be here. I don't join atheist sites in hopes to be saved in Darwin. And why wate time asking questions of the closed minded. Or, rather, those that have mad a choice to hate Christians and Christianity. And there is no doubt about it being hate. Think about it, hundreds of millions of Christians go into and out of Churches all over the worlf and come out to engage the world in normality. Nothing more than that. Yet, you'ld think we come out with swords and mob rule. Interesting how that utterly fits the secularists though.

I spent 12 years holding all things Church to be false, and almost another 4 before He brought me into contact with real believers.

Real believers I trust with my life. I love with all my heart.

The Churches I still do not trust. Orgainzations usually don't have a neutral agenda.

I truly was NOT prepared for what I would encounter!

The Body of Christ is too awesome for words. I too have encountered it with a life changing reaction. And then, I live in the secular world and are always reminded why reality validates that experience even more.

 

[Tergle]

Lol, you made a pun, how cute. Now please promise to never make that argument again; it's really pointless.

It was an analogy and it makes the point perfectly and effortlessly.

There's a difference between the English expressions "believe in" (i.e. agree with on principle) and "believe" (i.e. consider to be true).

There's an english expression I'm thinking fits. Don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining.

Yeah, your point? I was just giving you exposition to my story, not trying to gain street cred.

You are trying to express your atheist street cred.

It doesn't anymore; I don't believe in it. As for why it terrified me so badly when I was still a Christian, I don't understand why you need to ask that question.

Of course I do. It is of no concern to the "saved." What do you think they're saved from? Eternal ingrown toenails?

It's about the most horrific concept that humans (or God, in your opinion) have ever dreamed up. And when you think that you might be on your way there, it gets quite distressing.

Hell was not the concept that had me accepting Christ. Reality was.

You pointed out a flawed technicality in what I said, how cute

I pointed out flawed logic. Little kiddies are hardly in a condition to be theologians. And fifteen year old boys are hardly thinking about God every three-seconds. Eh-hem.

Music could also be seen as a "side effect" of the other cognitive abilities we've developed over time.

Your opinion duly noted.

The fact is, like all modern "miracles" Christians point out, music does not require a God to be believable.

In your opinion. In mine, music is supernatural. What ape man thought up the violin or Marshall stack. Even 21st century ape men.

It all goes back to the "Why doesn't god heal amputees" question - i.e. why does God refuse to ever perform miracles so supernatural that they are indistinguishable from a statistical anomaly?

Have you ever thought to add up all of the miracles in the bible as a time consumption game? Almost all of the time there were no miracles happening. But that is complex thinking I know. It's not as tasty as naturalisms knee-jerk reactions.

Yes, the "You're an atheist but you spend time on Christianity!" argument. How cute.

It's a good point. Why do you think wasting your time bashing Christians is a worthwhile endeavor. You are not here to be convinced to convert.

Yeah, I like debating with people, and a forum full of people I disagree with makes an awfully good venue for that. Now please promise to never make that argument again; it's really pointless.

I'll make it as endlessly as you guys bring up amputees that have to live one-armed. Your clicheisms are legendary.

So yeah, all in all you completely missed the point of my post in favor of making puns and cute little arguments of technicality and cliché'd "Gotcha!" arguments that have been used thousands of times.

You guys invented the gotcha argument. I like to use it your way.

Try reading it again and actually addressing my point, which is that my deconversion was simply not a malicious rejection, but rather a cognitive process.

You deconverted from a child. That's supposed to be impressive? Not much street cred there. usually it's more typical though. I'll give you that.

It had nothing to do with my desire to be sinful, but only to do with my interpretation of the evidence around me.

Almost all of we Christians went the other path. We were non believers that figured out the reality of Christ. Many of us after the education process tried to cleanse our minds from healthy thought process.

Leading up to my deconversion, I wanted nothing more than to be able to feel what other folks in my church felt and believe in what they did.

Jesus talked about that. But you realize, that this is none of our fault right?