Why are there so many atheists on a Christian site?

[Archaeopteryx]

Atheism puffs up the self, because the Atheist exalts his own capacity to reason above any other source of truth. The root of atheism is not strict adherence to empirical evidence in the universe, but rather a personal unwillingness to give up that which God has said is sin. Atheists, be truly honest with yourselves and you will discover it is your love of sin that keeps your eyes blind to the truth. The creation itself speaks loudly and plainly of its Creator. Even your own body, Atheist, testifies of its creator, though your mind and mouth refuse.

This is such a lazy explanation. No, I'm not an atheist because I secretly want to "sin". I'm an atheist because I'm not convinced by the claims of theists.

Had you truly known Christ as your savior, you would still be such.

No True Scotsman would say such a thing.

 

[Scripture Police]

I mean, not that I want them gone, but it just seems strange to me that so many atheists would choose to spend their time and eergy on a site that is antithetical to their worldview. The interesting thing to me is that they don't seem to be here to proselytize, which would make sense to me. I assume that they, or many of them anyway, feela sense of community here if they've been here for a while. So, if not to show the poor theist the freedom of atheism, what is the draw?

Because God sent athiest to straighten out religion.

 

[Cearbhall]

Had you truly known Christ as your savior, you would still be such.

That's part of your religion. It's not a logical truth.

 

[Scripture Police]

This is such a lazy explanation. No, I'm not an atheist because I secretly want to "sin". I'm an atheist because I'm not convinced by the claims of theists.

It's lazy to blame people for the non-existence of God. You should only worry about the claims of Christ.

 

[Freodin]

It's lazy to blame people for the non-existence of God. You should only worry about the claims of Christ.

People make claims about Christ. Christ is not here to make any claims. So what?

 

[Scripture Police]

That's part of your religion. It's not a logical truth.

Believing in Christ is not about logic, it's about subjective faith. Even logic is subjective.

 

[Colter]

Unfortunately the original gospel of Jesus was contaminated by the older beliefs of Judaism and the Pagan compromises made by the followers of Jesus after he left. Jesus bluntly stated not to put the new wine into the old wineskins, or sew the new cloth onto the old, causing a worse tear. So today people confuse faith in Jesus was all the Bible baggage that goes along with it.​

 

[Scripture Police]

People make claims about Christ. Christ is not here to make any claims. So what?

Christ was here. That is a fact. Christ made claims. Stop looking to people to find God, you will get let down most times.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Believing in Christ is not about logic, it's about subjective faith. Even logic is subjective.

If that's the case, then I have no more reason to endorse Christianity than I do to endorse Islam or Judaism.

 

[Colter]

There was the gospel of Jesus

Then there was Paul's new gospel about----> Jesus. Almost the whole of the NT is about Paul's experiences with the purported Jesus of the Damascus road. The ENTIRE Jesus movement became heavily influenced by a man who never knew Jesus in the flesh, was never taught by him personally and had been a former persecutor of Christians.

Christianity became a second hand, third hand, Popes hand-religion, a mere shadow of the original.

 

[Freodin]

Christ was here. That is a fact.

No, that is one of the claims that people make.

Christ made claims.

People claimed that Christ made claims... in fact, you just did here.

Stop looking to people to find God, you will get let down most times.

Oh, I found God... long ago. It's just that it is a... theologically different God.

 

[Scripture Police]

If that's the case, then I have no more reason to endorse Christianity than I do to endorse Islam or Judaism.

Correct.

 

[Freodin]

There was the gospel of Jesus

Then there was Paul's new gospel about----> Jesus. Almost the whole of the NT is about Paul's experiences with the purported Jesus of the Damascus road. The ENTIRE Jesus movement became heavily influenced by a man who never knew Jesus in the flesh, was never taught by him personally and had been a former persecutor of Christians.

Christianity became a second hand, third hand, Popes hand-religion, a mere shadow of the original.

There never was a gospel OF Jesus. Everything that he alledgedly said is reported second and third and forth hand... and in many cases invented and attributed to him.
If it was so important for him to spread his "gospel"... he should have stayed around.

 

[Scripture Police]

No, that is one of the claims that people make.


People claimed that Christ made claims... in fact, you just did here.


Oh, I found God... long ago. It's just that it is a... theologically different God.

Christ's existence here is just as factual as evolution. Scientifically speaking of course. The way you know if it's true or not for yourself is by reading his words. Stop pointing flaws in people and start showing the flaws in Christ.

 

[Scripture Police]

If it was so important for him to spread his "gospel"... he should have stayed around.

He did, it's called the Holy Spirit. Haven't you read the bible?

 

[KCfromNC]

Hey, just a thought, but maybe the rude or condescending theists are not true believers in Christ, but are servants of deception designed to bolster your pride and keep you in unbelief. Or maybe some, who you perceive as rude, are telling you the painful truths you need to hear that you might escape the judgement of God?

Anything's possible, but the most likely explanation is that they actually believe what they say and are simply wrong. If there was better evidence for a different conclusion I'd love to see it.

 

[oi_antz]

I don't know why you expect me to play along with a confirmation bias, especially when it's part of a religion to which I don't belong. And no, I am not trying to encourage anyone else to convert one way or another.

Essentially it is because Jesus has made a promise, and everyone expects God to keep His promises. If you are saying that God has not kept His promise to you, that concerns me and I want to act on this to find out who is at fault. (FYI: Nobody can deny the action I take). Is that what you are saying?

 

[oi_antz]

Yes.

This is an interesting response. Can you please describe how you opened the door?

 

[Freodin]

Christ's existence here is just as factual as evolution. Scientifically speaking of course.

Well, no. Scientifically speaking, there is observable and testable evidence for evolution. There isn't any such thing for "Christ" or even for Jesus of Nazareth. There is historical evidence for such a figure, but even that can be debated. As for his claims (that's what we were talking about, not his 'existence').

The way you know if it's true or not for yourself is by reading his words. Stop pointing flaws in people and start showing the flaws in Christ.

When I read "his words", I cannot even be sure that they were "his". There are notable instances in what is claimed to be "his words" that we know weren't.

As for "showing the flaws in Christ": when you make a claim, you need to back it up. It is not up to the doubters to shoot it down.

 

[Colter]

There never was a gospel OF Jesus. Everything that he alledgedly said is reported second and third and forth hand... and in many cases invented and attributed to him.
If it was so important for him to spread his "gospel"... he should have stayed around.

How do you know all of this, where is your proof?

There never was a gospel OF Jesus. Everything that he alledgedly said is reported second and third and forth hand... and in many cases invented and attributed to him.
If it was so important for him to spread his "gospel"... he should have stayed around.