What should happen to all the atheists?

[Hieronymus]

I do not recall any.

I wonder why...

 

[Oncedeceived]

Yes, thanks for the correction. That would be about 5 branches and 40,000 denominations, give or take.
That was my whole point, Christianity as a whole is now more uniform than ever. The things that are generally accepted as basic doctrine to most Christians took a millennia of time to be considred that. There was a lot of debate and going back and forth. They are considered heretics now, but that wasn't always so.

Again, I don't think it took millennia of time, we have many of the New Testament documents fairly soon after Christ's death.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Again, I don't think it took millennia of time, we have many of the New Testament documents fairly soon after Christ's death.

Hi Oncedeceived. I hope things have been well for you. I haven't seen you for a while here, so it's good to see you around.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

 

[Tigger45]

I voted for it to stay the same. It is a Christian forum after all and sometimes I want only Christian input. Sometimes I like it even narrowed down to specific denominations. Even with those restrictions the conversation gets pulled off the rails but then having an open fora has it’s advantages at times too.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Hi Oncedeceived. I hope things have been well for you. I haven't seen you for a while here, so it's good to see you around.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

Thank you. I am recovering from pneumonia so things are getting better. Its good to get back here but most summers I find I don't get on that much and once summer ends I have more time to come here.

 

[Motherofkittens]

Again, I don't think it took millennia of time, we have many of the New Testament documents fairly soon after Christ's death.

Yes, realtviely shortly there after Jesus, was suppose to have died. But which documents to include, which to exclude and how to interpret them is what took so long. It isn't all quite settled, but compared to before, it is uniform. I just thought it an interesting tidbit. As I was told that when Jesus was alive the church was stable and the truest, but as time has gone by wickedness took over and made all these different Christian beliefs. But if you look at the history it is the opposite.

I don't think the BioLogos view of Christianity suffers from any of the concerns you've voiced above.

Just something to think about.

Of course not! Although my family and Christians, church and community are anti intellectuals and anti science, I know very well most Christians and people from other religions are not like that. In real life I only have one atheist friend, all the rest are religious. Religious belief, or lack of religious belief are not important to me.

The group I speak of, is in modern days in the West a minority and getting smaller every generation.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Of course not! Although my family and Christians, church and community are anti intellectuals and anti science, I know very well most Christians and people from other religions are not like that. In real life I only have one atheist friend, all the rest are religious. Religious belief, or lack of religious belief are not important to me.

The group I speak of, is in modern days in the West a minority and getting smaller every generation.

Well, I'm sorry to hear that you have to put up with people--even family members--who have little interest even in basic education, whether that be of science, history, ethics or even as how to best interpret the Bible using the best (wide ranging, academic) hermeneutical practices.

I can see why you might be frustrated. I've had a number of fellow Christians give me negative razzle-dazzle for not towing the line on their Ultra-Fundamentalist views. I've always had a more BioLogos type approach to Christian faith.

Anyway, have a good weekend, Motherofkittens!

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

 

[Motherofkittens]

Well, I'm sorry to hear that you have to put up with people--even family members--who have little interest even in basic education, whether that be of science, history, ethics or even as how to best interpret the Bible using the best (wide ranging, academic) hermeneutical practices.

I can see why you might be frustrated. I've had a number of fellow Christians give me negative razzle-dazzle for not towing the line on their Ultra-Fundamentalist views. I've always had a more BioLogos type approach to Christian faith.

Anyway, have a good weekend, Motherofkittens!

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

Oops, the "Christian " part in the first sentence isn't suppose to be there. I just wanted to write "family, church and community ." I'm sure the misunderstandings were caused by me. I was, after all home schooled.
It is good you brought up this up, because there might be people that think most Christians, or at least American Christians are like that. And of course they are fortunately a minority.

Thank you, 2PhiloVoid! You as well, I usually work workends, but I have Saturday off and I'm gonna party hardy... actually more like hardly party. I'm gonna read, go to this really great coffee house and this close by natural museum. I'm real happy about it.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Yes, realtviely shortly there after Jesus, was suppose to have died. But which documents to include, which to exclude and how to interpret them is what took so long. It isn't all quite settled, but compared to before, it is uniform. I just thought it an interesting tidbit. As I was told that when Jesus was alive the church was stable and the truest, but as time has gone by wickedness took over and made all these different Christian beliefs. But if you look at the history it is the opposite.

Actually, it wasn't that hard to determine which documents to choose. The main documents for the New Testament were already well established by the early church.

 

[Hieronymus]

Yes, realtviely shortly there after Jesus, was suppose to have died. But which documents to include, which to exclude and how to interpret them is what took so long.

No, that didn't take long either.

It isn't all quite settled, but compared to before, it is uniform.

No, it isn't.

I just thought it an interesting tidbit. As I was told that when Jesus was alive the church was stable and the truest, but as time has gone by wickedness took over and made all these different Christian beliefs. But if you look at the history it is the opposite.

No it isn't.
I don't know who or what your sources are, but they're either ignorant or they have an axe to grind.
But this is often the case with popular beliefs about Jesus Christ, the Bible and Christianity.
It's what you encounter first when you want to know a little more.
This shows you what a big controversy it all really is.
It's probably the biggest controversy in the world.

 

[Motherofkittens]

Actually, it wasn't that hard to determine which documents to choose. The main documents for the New Testament were already well established by the early church.

I suppose it is how you define "quickly", because for all the "gospels" to be written it took 100 years or so after Jesus was said to have died and risen. Just to get to the foundations of Christianity a little more stable it took until the 8th century. There were still quite a few disputes. Even now there are bibles with different books in them. What I find most interesting, was the dramatic changes and even going back and forth. For example X is a sanit, now he is a heretic, he is a sanit again,etc., it wasn't just with people but with writtings and ideas. All historians in the know agree that the new testament was pretty gradual. But even if it was quickly uniform, people were (and still are, but usually to a lesser degree) interrupting the "foundations " and they came up with quite some radically different ideas of what it said.

Christianity has evolved. If you go back to certain ages not too long ago and further, you'd probably think they were doing Christianity wrong (and they'd probably feel the same towards you), because it was so different.

There are denominations that think that about current denominations but nowadays they are more similar than ever.

 

[Radagast]

I suppose it is how you define "quickly", because for all the "gospels" to be written it took 100 years or so after Jesus was said to have died and risen.

That's just rubbish. We've got manuscript fragments older than 100 years after the Resurrection.

Just to get to the foundations of Christianity a little more stable it took until the 8th century.

Council of Nicaea: 325. Council of Constantinople: 381. Works of Augustine: before 430. Pretty much most things were settled by then.

 

[Glass*Soul]

There was a time that this discussion board was completely opened up. Everyone could post in every section. If I recall correctly, it was 07-07-07. I was quite excited. I consider myself a non-theistic Christian and wanted to discuss topics that had been more-or-less out of bounds to me until then.

It was not a good time. I was completely unprepared for the anger and vitriol I encountered from some corners.

So, even though I find myself on the side of opening the site up on a purely intellectual level, I think that on an emotional level I need the divisions. They protect me. I have the armor of being an outsider.

 

[Oncedeceived]

I suppose it is how you define "quickly", because for all the "gospels" to be written it took 100 years or so after Jesus was said to have died and risen. Just to get to the foundations of Christianity a little more stable it took until the 8th century. There were still quite a few disputes. Even now there are bibles with different books in them. What I find most interesting, was the dramatic changes and even going back and forth. For example X is a sanit, now he is a heretic, he is a sanit again,etc., it wasn't just with people but with writtings and ideas. All historians in the know agree that the new testament was pretty gradual. But even if it was quickly uniform, people were (and still are, but usually to a lesser degree) interrupting the "foundations " and they came up with quite some radically different ideas of what it said.

I agree with the rubbish comment by Radagast. Mark for instance was written around 70 AD (most scholars agree) and Matthew and Luke in the 80's or 90's.

Christianity has evolved. If you go back to certain ages not too long ago and further, you'd probably think they were doing Christianity wrong (and they'd probably feel the same towards you), because it was so different.

There will be and always has been those who stray from the Gospels, but the Gospels are at the foundation of the faith.

There are denominations that think that about current denominations but nowadays they are more similar than ever.

Again, the basic foundation of Christianity is based on the Gospels which have stayed the same throughout the ages.

 

[Radagast]

.

 

[Hank77]

I voted where they currently can because those with that authority have the experience to make those decisions and I don't. So whatever they decide is fine with me.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

As a discussion forum, it wouldn't be interesting. If you only associate with people who think and believe as you do, then you don't learn anything. You expand your horizons by exposure to different people, ideas, and viewpoints.

And anyway, if you're a Christian, excluding atheists is unbiblical. Jesus charged his followers to interact with non-believers and share the gospel.

The issue is that there are a lot of people who come to a Christian forum who just want fellowship and to interact with other Christians to develop their faith. I personally think the outreach section is appropriate for non-believers. However, I have been on many atheist forums and I have not found any that had any limitations to theists. Atheist forums seem to welcome theists and encourage debate.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Perhaps a more interesting question might be WHY do atheists come on here and post?

Personally I joined because I am in a relationship with a committed Christian, and I just wanted to see what views other Christians had, and how they show their faith. I think a measured discussion between people with different views is interesting and i hope that Christians and those of other faiths or none get something out of it.

I think it is reasonable that there are areas not open tp atheists or non Christians, and the current set up is fine.

From my experience, I have found that the great majority of atheist come to a Christian forum because they have genuine questions that they have been struggling with. Most atheist grew up in very religious homes, attend church regularly, some even have been to seminary school. Usually, after they grow an attachment with its members and choose to stay. Nihilist Virus is an example. Nihilist may come across as blunt or in some cases may appear to be argumentative. However, I believe he genuinely enjoys the people he interacts with here on the forum. I welcome the atheist perspective and arguments. It has only encouraged me to have a justifiable faith that is grounded in logic, reason, and sound biblical truths as opposed to merely a blind faith. It is important to note that there are a very few individuals who fall under the militant atheist category. These individuals believe that religion is a cause for many of the problems in the world. As a result, they seek to make the world a better place by destroying religion one apostate at a time. It is comparable to a Christian going to an atheist forum for evangelical purposes.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

In your opinion, do you think atheists should be allowed to post at all on CF?

Just curious.

Post = post/reply/start thread

Also, plz no atheists vote

I think it's clear that Christianity owes unbelievers something. If you fill a child's head with the terror of eternal hellfire, then you absolutely owe that child answers to the questions they inevitably pose back at you. Nearly all Christian parents are either uninterested or unequipped to accommodate reasonable inquiries, but since there is "one body" of Christ, others who are more capable should be tasked with this in a non-optional sense.

Christians indoctrinate children to the point that the fear of hellfire persists past deconversion, and yet neither parents nor the church offer any form of exit counseling whatsoever. In fact, they usually offer the opposite—hate, ostracizing, sabotaging of one's career or livelihood, and etc.

I think there should be laws in place forcing churches to provide this counseling (or the church would forfeit its tax-exempt status, which it should not even have in the first place), and indoctrination of children should be illegal. I think all of these things are totally reasonable, given how reckless Christianity is with the minds of our youth. But how does this translate to any kind of burden on christianforums.com?

I think that because these laws are not in place, and because Christians claim to be loving, they should already be doing these things without dictates from the law. I think that the Christians here on this site should express much more love for atheists than they currently do. I think that if we found out right now that Jesus Christ was real and actually did rise from the dead, 98% of this forum would still find themselves in hell.

 

[Rajni]

I voted “Open the flood gates!”

They make some good points and ask some very good questions. Especially
those who have been down the theistic path themselves at some point and
therefore are familiar with the material they question.

Besides, my faith is strong enough that I don’t need a “safe space” where
they – or anyone else whose beliefs differ from mine – are kept away.

But that’s just me.

-