Atheists......'splain them to me. Please. (2)

[Mandy_S]

The Bible is not the only reason I do not believe in Christianity.


I can't. 'Absolute certainty' is only something theists tend to insist upon. I have good reason to accept many things I have not seen. I have never seen the geysers of Iceland, but there is excellent reason to accept their existence.

That's not the point..whether that is the only reason you do not believe Chritianity or not, you will believe history books but you won't believe the Bible.

There is also reason to accept God's existence..So are you telling me that there is no absolute certainty in anything?

 

[Mandy_S]

One difference is, with history books is that they pertain to things which we have already seen happen in our lifetimes.

For example, people discovering new countries, we know it's possible, because, well, we have boats, boats which can be used to explore the planet, and find new places.

Which is a remarkably different thing than making supernatural claims about things which nobody has ever seen happen, then believing them as true, anyway.

But then again, has anyone ever seen something come out of nothing?? It takes faith to believe in evolution as well.

 

[rainycity]

But then again, has anyone ever seen something come out of nothing?? It takes faith to believe in evolution as well.

what does evolution have to do with something coming out of nothing?

 

[Ayersy]

But then again, has anyone ever seen something come out of nothing?? It takes faith to believe in evolution as well.

Oh dear. Evolution does not work that way!

 

[rainycity]

Technically, you can never be 100% certain, just extremely sure. Those events which we know happened in history we know from large numbers of contemporary accounts, perhaps photographic evidence or video evidence, archaeology, official records and so on. When we have all those, we're either looking at the truth or a ridiculously complicated conspiracy theory to trick historians of the future.

And even if we're looking at the truth when we study history its still mythology.

 

[razeontherock]

Edit for clarification: it has come to my attention that my whole reason for this post isn't clear. It's a response to

On a side note, would anyone be interested in doing an opposing post - one on the issues they have with atheism? It would be very interesting to read and/or answer, as I've found that many Christians on here misunderstand a lot about the atheistic viewpoint. It would also be very appropriate for this thread.

Far from my comment below being any "declaration of fact," I'm saying this is all I can figure from my limited perspective. I am on this thread to try to understand an atheist POV, and the following quote gives me my first ever glimpse into that.

What is God? What are his origins? If he is eternal, how does that work? What influence does he have upon the world today?

How do I believe in something that has been placed in a position where it cannot be proven?

4)Logical Contradictions
How can an all-loving being let evil exist?

5)The Bible
1) Contradictions between Bible passages
the contradictory nature of the Bible leads to all sorts of questions, the biggest one for me being "which side do I believe in?"

2) Contradictions between the Bible and reality
Pi is not 3. The universe is more than 6000 years old. There is no evidence for a global flood.

3) Contradictions between Christians

4) The Issue of a Man-Made Bible
For example, the Bible does not demonstrate, or even necessarily say, that these men were God inspired.

Jesus
1) Lack of Evidence (Again)
This is pretty self-explanatory, so I see no need to go into this.

2) The Problem of the 'Sacrifice'[/B]

a) Was it a sacrifice?
No matter how I look at the crucifixion of Jesus, I can no longer see how it was actually a sacrifice. Before I start, I'm defining sacrifice in this context as:
"Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to have a greater value or claim."
I assume most Christians will agree with this definition.

Bringing Jesus back to life sort of defeats the purpose of letting him die to begin with.

b) What did it achieve?
Jesus died for our sins. Ok, so which sins? We still have sin, we're even still subject to original sin, which God has never thought of getting rid of considering the number of times he has got rid of sinfulness throughout the Bible.

If Jesus died to give us the opportunity of getting rid of sin, by repenting to him, why did God wait so long? Even if you assume the Earth is only 6000 years old, that's still 4000 years of people who have no opportunity to get rid of their sin. According to a literal interpretation of the Bible, that's 4000 years of people who are quite possibly in hell right now.

As you say, I've never really understood an atheist's mind, but at least I've never pretended to. My only insight into the atheist position for 45 years has been my own Brother. He's a weird dude, turns out he's only my half-brother, and when confronted with his own mortality who does he turn to? (More Captain Obvious here: me, because of my long-standing Faith.)

So thank you for sharing your perspective. Please note that what I snipped above, ALL has rational answers. I don't know everything, can't answer the parts I omitted to my own satisfaction, (yet, but I am still learning) and refuse to "make up stuff." My Brother's sole reason for being an atheist is your #4, the existence of evil. I find that position to be inexcusably weak, especially for a smart guy.

So obviously I have some issues with atheism! Not wanting to turn this into a debate, I won't address all those points I quoted above that I feel I have rock solid answers for, but if anybody wants to know I'll try. No guarantees.

I will say anyone still seeing contradictions in the Bible can't be sure they understand any of it, and it's being written is such a way as to require such close examination is intentional, to avoid careless mistakes. Also, it does not say the Earth is 6,000 years old, and actually coincides perfectly with a meteor wiping out the dinosaurs. The things it told Mankind long before we had science to prove it or even know what it meant boggles my mind. Yet I readily admit there are still portions, however small, that I still can't make any sense out of at all. Those aren't significant.

At least 1 person thinks airing out my issues with atheism is appropriate here, so here goes:

Probably more than with the individual atheist, I feel frustrated with myself. I expected an atheist simply doesn't understand what I do, my first glimpse into atheism confirms that, and I have been given a rather special set of circumstances to understand what I do on this matter. It seems so simple to me, why can't I "put it out there" in a way that is just as simple to everyone else? Further, both my parents are teachers, one Sister is a teacher, the other Sister is not only a shrink but a top Phd in her field so obviously she explains abstract things on a regular basis. People even tell me I'm a good teacher, but really, I'm not. "Those that can't do, teach." I'm a doer.

Scientists that are atheists I have no issue with. I don't think I could go to work everyday as a scientist and be a believer; seems like it'd be too easy to throw my hands up in the air and say "I don't know, God did it." While rare today, there are still some very good scientists who believe, and I tip my hat to them. I know a PhD in micro-biology who was an unbeliever, but working on his thesis made him convert. (Yes, we've had some fascinating discussions) I'll also point out most of the great discovering minds in the past cited God as their inspiration.

Apart from a working scientist, the atheist seems to me to be someone who threw his/her hands in the air saying "I don't know, all this stuff is hard." I spent years living through that, sorting out my convictions. I actually picked up the Bible to find where it said God was unfair for holding me to what I "knew" He did. And I found exactly that! That wasn't my first answer, nor my last.

Still not perfect yet,

Ray

 

[hikersong]

First of all, "my" criteria is meaningless, and does not exist.

But you said you had put enough effort in (to finding God), and someone else hadn't. I'll quote you again: "There are plenty of us that see the sense, rationale, and logic behind Christianity. You don't because you have not put in the effort I have".

That is a criteria. In fact that is a judgement made upon someone who you presumably don't know. I agree that it is meaningless, so why make it. Once you've made it, you should be prepared to define it.

Secondly, I have no rationale for rejecting Christ. To me it's utterly senseless, which is why I clicked on this thread; hoping to understand those of you who do reject Him.

OK. Have you only ever spent your time with Christians? Surely you've come across non-christians before. But anyway, for your information no-one is rejecting Christ. They might be putting another interpretation on the sources of information they have about him, or they might feel that they simply have no reason to find out about him, but no-one is rejecting him. That is something you can only do to somebody that you know.

Enough effort? As defined by God, "in the day you seek me with your whole heart, you will find [Him]." Personally, my problem was I didn't have a "whole heart" to seek Him with. I'll be Captain Obvious here and point out God has a solution for that problem, and I found it. (via reading the Bible, obviously)

So, you're saying that if I come to believe in God in the way you do, then I've put enough effort in.

Like you I've read the bible. In fact I went to an evangelical bible school for 3 years. My present wife who I met there used to tell me off for reading the bible ahead of reading the textbooks when we were at that college together. I was as whole hearted as it was physically and emotionally possible to be, and in far more ways than merely reading the bible. I wanted God (at least that is how I would have defined it then. I was looking for love and for truth in essence).

So, again, I would like to hear a more full definition of what you consider to be enough effort or whole-heartedness. I'm just following up on the comment you made. If you want to retract that comment then fair enough.

 

[Mandy_S]

Technically, you can never be 100% certain, just extremely sure. Those events which we know happened in history we know from large numbers of contemporary accounts, perhaps photographic evidence or video evidence, archaeology, official records and so on. When we have all those, we're either looking at the truth or a ridiculously complicated conspiracy theory to trick historians of the future. The further back we go, the less information we have and so the less answers we have.

None of those exist for Jesus. The accounts of his life were written long after he died, there is no archaelogical finds to back his existence up and offical records, AFAIK, are practically silent on his existence. You'd think for a figure like Jesus there would at least be something.

So you also believe there are no absolutes? There are many scientific facts in the Bible that was not known by scientists until recently..Not to mention the fulfilled prophecies.

 

[razeontherock]

I wrote "WRONG! Extremely wrong in my case. Also, a part of Christianity that is currently overlooked by the church is that there are people that believe w/o the book, ever hearing a preacher, or anything like that. The natural world is another of God's "books," and says at least as much as the Bible."

Which still doesn't change the fact that it all started out with people writing a fictional book, which people believe in because it makes them feel good. The book is the reason why people believe what they believe, not nature.

This amounts to "lalala, I can't hear you." I have no respect for that. Ev has far more to back it up.

 

[Mandy_S]

Oh dear. Evolution does not work that way!

Oh, excuse me then..Please explain to me where it started.

 

[hikersong]

That's not the point..whether that is the only reason you do not believe Chritianity or not, you will believe history books but you won't believe the Bible.

And you believe history books but presumably won't believe the Koran. Would you accept that as an argument from a muslim?

 

[rainycity]

There are many scientific facts in the Bible that was not known by scientists until recently...

what are they

 

[rainycity]

Oh, excuse me then..Please explain to me where it started.

evolution doesn't deal with the origin of life, thats abiogenesis. Evolution started with the first singe celled organisms.

 

[razeontherock]

But you said you had put enough effort in (to finding God), and someone else hadn't. I'll quote you again: "There are plenty of us that see the sense, rationale, and logic behind Christianity. You don't because you have not put in the effort I have".

That is a criteria.

Sure, but it's not MY criteria. I didn't write the Bible.

So, you're saying that if I come to believe in God in the way you do, then I've put enough effort in.

Nope. I'm not interested in going around in circles so I hope you'll detect a pattern here. My standards, criteria, judgment etc means nothing.

no-one is rejecting Christ ... they might feel that they simply have no reason to find out about him

Same-same.

Like you I've read the bible. In fact I went to an evangelical bible school for 3 years. My present wife who I met there used to tell me off for reading the bible ... I wanted God (at least that is how I would have defined it then. I was looking for love and for truth in essence).

This appears to strengthen what I've said, rather than your position. If it doesn't, that only means I've done a poor job of communicating. Wouldn't be the first time, but I do wish you the best with your wife.

No retractions but again, if you're looking for definitions or standards declared by me, you're asking the wrong ... One.

 

[Ayersy]

I wrote "WRONG! Extremely wrong in my case. Also, a part of Christianity that is currently overlooked by the church is that there are people that believe w/o the book, ever hearing a preacher, or anything like that. The natural world is another of God's "books," and says at least as much as the Bible."



This amounts to "lalala, I can't hear you." I have no respect for that. Ev has far more to back it up.

No it doesn't, it amounts to "The book is a book.", unless you can provide citation that people who have never been introduced to the concept of God somehow believe despite not knowing, then it remains that nature is not proof of God, and the only "proof" there is, is the bible.

You're the one making claims, I'm merely calling things what they are. A book is a book, nature is nature.

Oh, excuse me then..Please explain to me where it started.

Where what started? Evolution? Abiogenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia There you go, a little light reading.

 

[razeontherock]

Oh, excuse me then..Please explain to me where it started.

This thread could easily get de-railed on this separate argument. Please don't; we've got tons of threads on the subject, in multiple sub-forums. Basically you're right, we very mortal humans either know everything or we don't. Science is also correct for separating into distinct disciplines to accomplish more. Division of labor and all that.

 

[razeontherock]

unless you can provide citation that people who have never been introduced to the concept of God somehow believe despite not knowing, then it remains that nature is not proof of God, and the only "proof" there is, is the bible.

More "lalala, I can't hear you." D00d, learn a new song. (And my ignore list just expanded by one) I am someone who has learned of God in the natural world, and it should be quite obvious to you that if I've met someone such as you describe (which as it turns out, I have) that it wouldn't be very likely there would be "citations" about it. Other than me telling you, that is. Laptops don't evolve in jungles, their natural habitat seems to be Silicon Valley.

 

[razeontherock]

what are they [Biblical statements of scientific fact, not discovered til long after, some fairly recently]

We should make this another thread, somewhere. Maybe make it a sticky?

 

[Ayersy]

More "lalala, I can't hear you." D00d, learn a new song. (And my ignore list just expanded by one) I am someone who has learned of God in the natural world, and it should be quite obvious to you that if I've met someone such as you describe (which as it turns out, I have) that it wouldn't be very likely there would be "citations" about it. Other than me telling you, that is. Laptops don't evolve in jungles, their natural habitat seems to be Silicon Valley.

This is anything but "lalala, I can't hear you.". I'm asking for citation, if you could present it, I would be interested to learn about it, otherwise, why should I believe you, because you say so? Sounds familiar... Hmm...

If it's as obvious as you say it is, that people can just somehow magically believe in something without even knowing who, or what it is, then you shouldn't have any trouble coming up with some examples. Not only am I not ignoring what you have to say, I'm asking for you to expand upon what you have said.

 

[rainycity]

[Biblical statements of scientific fact, not discovered til long after, some fairly recently]

duh. Tell me what they are