Christians - Why the (by default) hate?

[Solomon's Portico]

If I were you i would rebuke your Christian friend for not "witnessing" to you. the bible command this of all Christians do this.
I will assume you believe your a good person. Lets take a test and find out
"have you ever told a Lie"

answer this i will give you more questions and hopefully lead you do a better understanding. God bless friend

 

[rjc34]

If I were you i would rebuke your Christian friend for not "witnessing" to you. the bible command this of all Christians do this.
I will assume you believe your a good person. Lets take a test and find out
"have you ever told a Lie"

answer this i will give you more questions and hopefully lead you do a better understanding. God bless friend

Ah, the old 'you're not perfect therefore you need god or you're going to hell' test. Hm, sure, I'll bite.

Yes, I've lied, but since becoming an atheist, none that have violated my rule of 'Do no harm'.

 

[E.C.]

I was thinking this when talking to my (only) Christian friend a while ago:

If Christians believe I and about 80% of the world are going to spend eternity in Hell, then why aren't they doing more to stop that! I mean, if I truly thought that my friends was going to go to hell, I would do everything I could to stop them from doing so, but my friend hasn't even attempted to do that with me nor has anyone on this forum. I don't understand. What possible reason could there be to justify letting people go to hell?

Because the great majority of Christians forget that God is loving and merciful and would most likely show a bit of mercy for many people.

Protestantism has turned Christianity from being therapeutic to cure sin into a legal court matter before an all-intimidating judge who has no mercy. People forget that God shows mercy.

 

[rjc34]

Because the great majority of Christians forget that God is loving and merciful and would most likely show a bit of mercy for many people.

Protestantism has turned Christianity from being therapeutic to cure sin into a legal court matter before an all-intimidating judge who has no mercy. People forget that God shows mercy.

So you're of the 'if you live a good life, but can't believe because your brain won't let you, you can still go to heaven' crowd?

I like people like you.

 

[drich0150]

rjc34 was their some "reason or logic" that you skipped my response?

 

[rjc34]

then why are you here?

If you bring a valid point and everything I said can be chocked up to simple belief, then what is the purpose of trying to counter a belief of another? Is this in of itself not a "moot" exercise? If it is then why is it OK for you to practice a "moot" argument, and it a sin against your beliefs for me to do the same?

The exercise is only moot if you refuse to take an agnostic position towards your views. If you claim knowledge, and believe with absolute faith, there is nothing I can say that will reason with your help position.

(And before you ask, yes, I've always held an agnostic position towards my beliefs.)

 

[rjc34]

rjc34 was their some "reason or logic" that you skipped my response?

My bad, I skimmed over it originally and forgot about it. Response posted.

 

[Walter Kovacs]

I'm curious as to how you've come to the conclusion that this is false. By definition any positive claim has a burden of proof. Please elaborate.

There is a burden of seeking, not evidence, that Christianity has. I'm not going to be able to give you any cold hard evidence to change your mind; the Scriptures attest that unless your heart, mind and soul are in a unified, honest, heartfelt search for Christ He will remain hidden.

"Your fountain, Lord, is hidden from the person who does not thirst for You." -Ephrem the Syrian (Faith 32:2-3)

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3)

"Biblically God hides Himself to all except to those who by His grace seek him with their whole heart, mind, soul, and strength sincerely and in truth. Not just the mind!!! If we seek Him fully He has promised to meet us on the road. There is no burden of proof, but a burden of seeking, not just with the mind, but with the whole being, a burden which cannot find fulfillment without grace. Grace not just to know, but to follow. Not just to enrich one's life, but to lose it."

Evidence leads us to an understanding of reality. It's when we put it together with facts, experiments, hypotheses and logical inferences do we get science.

Christianity is not a science experiment. Thankfully, there is more to life than logic, science, and evidence.

 

[Solomon's Portico]

Thank you for allowing me to share my faith. I have 2 questions for you.
You say you have lied-what does that make you? Hint: Begins with "L" and rimes with fire
next, have you ever stolen? Keeping in mind that things like goofing off at work (stealing time) and down loading something your not suppose to is also stealing. Perhaps when you were young? The amount does not matter , even if it's small. if i stole a dollar out of your wallet and left the twenty i still stole.
Thanks talk to you soon

 

[drich0150]

The exercise is only moot if you refuse to take an agnostic position to wards your views. If you claim knowledge, and believe with absolute faith, there is nothing I can say that will reason with your help position.

(And before you ask, yes, I've always held an agnostic position to wards my beliefs.)

So, it is your position that Christians should use a system of thought designed to preclude God, in order to engage in this discussion?? Why? You are aware this is not an exploring agnosticism sub forum are you not?

Now because it is indeed a exploring Christianity sub forum, that makes your line of thinking "moot." So again, why is my position to be considered sinfully moot from your perspective, (to the point where what I had to say was dismissed) When we are not even in an environment that supports your line of thinking, and yet my position is?

In what world does this hypocrisy truly work? Would you goto China and demand that everyone you spoke with adopted you language, diet, values and cultural norms? what would you do when they did not bend themselves to your will? Would you simply try and dismiss all you did not understand as not being valid? would you be little what they did, and how they did it? Because that is what you have done here.

 

[rjc34]

So, it is your position that Christians should use a system of thought designed to preclude God, in order to engage in this discussion?? Why? You are aware this is not an exploring agnosticism sub forum are you not?

Now because it is indeed a exploring Christianity sub forum, that makes your line of thinking "moot." So again, why is my position to be considered sinfully moot from your perspective, (to the point where what I had to say was dismissed) When we are not even in an environment that supports your line of thinking, and yet my position is?

In what world does this hypocrisy truly work? Would you goto China and demand that everyone you spoke with adopted you language, diet, values and cultural norms? what would you do when they did not bend themselves to your will? Would you simply try and dismiss all you did not understand as not being valid? would you be little what they did, and how they did it? Because that is what you have done here.

You have twisted my words and turned them into something completely different. I said one must adopt a position of agnosticism towards their position. It's a position where ones mind is open to persuasion from ether way. It's not about norms, it's simply about having an open discussion.

 

[drich0150]

You have twisted my words and turned them into something completely different. I said one must adopt a position of agnosticism towards their position. It's a position where ones mind is open to persuasion from ether way. It's not about norms, it's simply about having an open discussion.

So, one must assume the position any knowledge of God is unknowable in order for a Christian to open his mind enough to have an "open" discussion with you.. on Christian web site?

As I said in my last post We are not here to "Explore Agnosticism." Because we are not here to Explore Agnosticism, your arguments can quickly be rendered "moot." This is the reason I ask you why is it you think it is OK for you to identify and dismiss a "moot" argument when it is presented in the proper context and sub-forum, when the works or line of thought you are promoting are not recognized here?

You have push and implied that your line of thought is superior to all others, for little to no other reason, than because you have brought it to the table. This is why I compared your actions to a culture smashing westerner who demands that the world must work around his own views, diet and out look. while pointing out the closed mindedness of the native people he closes Himself off to every avenue that he is not familiar with.

If this conversation is truly not about "the norms" then why haven't you made the effort to step outside of your box? after all you came to a "Exploring Christianity" section of a Christian Forum. why would you as a visitor demand that "we" change to fit your understanding of how the world works? Unless you are indeed that culture smashing westerner who has closed his mind and heart to anything not already familiar to himself.

I could see and understand a need for some latitude in changing my "norms" if I visited your faiths website and started posting. However as I have already pointed out, "we" are not there.

So i ask again why is it that you think you are able to point out what you believe to be the futility of another man's reasoning, when you yourself are mired in the same dilemma? If this is not a conversation about the "norms" then why not take the time and directly answer the question I now have asked in 3 different posts?

 

[rjc34]

As I said in my last post We are not here to "Explore Agnosticism." Because we are not here to Explore Agnosticism, your arguments can quickly be rendered "moot." This is the reason I ask you why is it you think it is OK for you to identify and dismiss a "moot" argument when it is presented in the proper context and sub-forum, when the works or line of thought you are promoting are not recognized here?

I'm just going to assume you don't understand what I mean when I say agnosticism then assume ignorance. I mean let's put outselves on a level playing field. No knowledge claims. Just beliefs and reasons for said beliefs.

So i ask again why is it that you think you are able to point out what you believe to be the futility of another man's reasoning, when you yourself are mired in the same dilemma?

I concede the point. Shall we wipe the slate clean and start anew?

 

[mulimulix]

I am confused about something irrelevant. When I posted a couple of replies a few months ago on this forum to a thread which I did not start and actually ADDED to the conversation, I was warned that if I did it again, I would be banned, but EVERY thread I start results in atheists (or in this case, humanists) replying without a problem.

Am I missing something?

 

[drich0150]

I am confused about something irrelevant. When I posted a couple of replies a few months ago on this forum to a thread which I did not start and actually ADDED to the conversation, I was warned that if I did it again, I would be banned, but EVERY thread I start results in atheists (or in this case, humanists) replying without a problem.

Am I missing something?

The mods don't read every post. Someone most likly flagged the post your talking about for content, and it was reviewed. If you would like to flag a post for review it can be done with the little red icon in the upper left.

 

[drich0150]

I'm just going to assume you don't understand what I mean when I say agnosticism then assume ignorance. I mean let's put ourselves on a level playing field. No knowledge claims. Just beliefs and reasons for said beliefs.




I concede the point. Shall we wipe the slate clean and start anew?

Now that you got your little stab in (because ignorance is the lack of knowledge, and that lacking knowledge would cause someone not to understand.) I would be more than happy to drop the fact that I caught you making the same ignorant (or in your case possiably hypocritical) statement in which you originally accused me of making.

So by all means let proceed.

 

[rjc34]

Now that you got your little stab in (because ignorance is the lack of knowledge, and that lacking knowledge would cause someone not to understand.) I would be more than happy to drop the fact that I caught you making the same ignorant (or in your case possiably hypocritical) statement in which you originally accused me of making.

It was not so much meant as a stab, more as a thinking point that telling someone about a beautiful afterlife in paradise doesn't do much for someone who has concluded that such claims have not met their burden of proof.

Point dropped.

So by all means let proceed.

Where would you like to take the discussion?

 

[solarwave]

If Christians believe I and about 80% of the world are going to spend eternity in Hell, then why aren't they doing more to stop that! I mean, if I truly thought that my friends was going to go to hell, I would do everything I could to stop them from doing so, but my friend hasn't even attempted to do that with me nor has anyone on this forum. I don't understand. What possible reason could there be to justify letting people go to hell?

Yeah I know its wierd. People can calmly say that people they know are likely to go to hell while sipping their tea. If people thought that their friends were going to burn forever it would make sense if they were in a state of immense distress and sadness.

When I realised this and the horrid sickness of eternal pain I started doubting hell. Now I still believe there could be a hell but not one of eternal pain. I think it is a state of mind and may be escapable if they turn towards God. Also I don't believe 80% of the world will ultimately be in hell forever, my understanding of salvation is much more inclusive and not based on accepting propositions either.

 

[Aibrean]

Plenty of people would rather have a personal pleasure trip and not care what happens when they die.

 

[rjc34]

Plenty of people would rather have a personal pleasure trip and not care what happens when they die.

Why worry what happens when I die when nobody can even give me a consistent answer on what might happen? Let alone give me a good reason to believe it. (And 'but you'll go to heaven!' is not a good reason)