Why are there so many atheists on a Christian site?

[bhsmte]

Can you please reveal the point you wish to make?


My point is, we can really, really believe something be true and later on after we acquire knowledge, figure out, that it wasn't true.[/QUOTE]

 

[oi_antz]

And it wasn't really a matter of comfort. I'm just not well-versed in the type of spiritual language that you were using. It's a very different construction of Christianity than the type in which I was raised, and I have no motivation to bridge that gap for the sake of someone who wants to convert me.

I did not see this before. For the record, in response to this, I began this in response to your charge that the onus is on the believer to prove. But really it is not, it is on every one of us to explain to God why we did not respond to His invitation. I showed you this promise that Jesus has made, an example of a reliable test that if performed properly will produce sufficient evidence for anyone to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt. If you wish to not acknowledge this test then that is fine by me, as long as people are sufficiently informed that there is proof available should they desire to seek it.

 

[oi_antz]

Can you please reveal the point you wish to make?


My point is, we can really, really believe something be true and later on after we acquire knowledge, figure out, that it wasn't true.

[/QUOTE]
Yes, I know. "Seeing is believing" - but what if our attachment to existing beliefs dictate what we will allow ourselves to see?

 

[bhsmte]

Yes, I know. "Seeing is believing" - but what if our attachment to existing beliefs dictate what we will allow ourselves to see?[/QUOTE]

Sure, if you really want to believe something badly enough, your mind will figure out a way to convince yourself it is true.

 

[Cearbhall]

I did not see this before. For the record, in response to this, I began this in response to your charge that the onus is on the believer to prove. But really it is not, it is on every one of us to explain to God why we did not respond to His invitation. I showed you this promise that Jesus has made, an example of a reliable test that if performed properly will produce sufficient evidence for anyone to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt. If you wish to not acknowledge this test then that is fine by me, as long as people are sufficiently informed that there is proof available should they desire to seek it.

I already acknowledged the test and responded to that post. I was Christian and now am not, meaning that the test worked for me at one time and now does not. I also said that it has failed for millions of other people.

You are acting under the assumption that anyone who is not Christian has not tried the test. This is incorrect. The test is not reliable, and therefore does not prove what you want it to prove.

 

[oi_antz]

I already acknowledged the test and responded to that post. I was Christian and now am not, meaning that the test worked for me at one time and now does not. I also said that it has failed for millions of other people.

You are acting under the assumption that anyone who is not Christian has not tried the test. This is incorrect. The test is not reliable, and therefore does not prove what you want it to prove.

I am not acting under that assumption. I assume that many people who wish to defend their anti-Christian position will claim to have performed the test when they really haven't. I also know that it is possible that someone who has known Jesus might follow a conflicting desire. I have asked you actually whether you discussed your conflicting desires with Him before you abandoned Him. You didn't answer that question. You cannot defend your position and weasel out of it at the same time, only one or the other.

 

[bhsmte]

I am not acting under that assumption. I assume that many people who wish to defend their anti-Christian position will claim to have performed the test when they really haven't. I also know that it is possible that someone who has known Jesus might follow a conflicting desire. I have asked you actually whether you discussed your conflicting desires with Him before you abandoned Him. You didn't answer that question. You cannot defend your position and weasel out of it at the same time, only one or the other.

You just don't get how someone can think they believe something at one point in their lives and after time and acquiring knowledge, come to understand what they believed was not correct.

Instead, you have to insinuate someone who left a similar faith as yours, didn't do something they needed to do. This is highly arrogant and I'm sorry, you can't read other people's minds.

Also, if someone does not believe as you do, does that make them anti Christian?

 

[oi_antz]

You just don't get how someone can think they believe something at one point in their lives and after time and acquiring knowledge, come to understand what they believed was not correct.

Instead, you have to insinuate someone who left a similar faith as yours, didn't do something they needed to do. This is highly arrogant and I'm sorry, you can't read other people's minds.

I do get it actually, I have done it heaps and I am doing it all the time.

I also know that I can't read other people's minds, and that is why I ask questions. I see that my questions get ignored, so I make sure it is noted.

I have asked why this person left Jesus without discussing it with Him first, because I have assumed that he did in fact have a relationship with Jesus as he has claimed. So I am not making the insinuation that you think I am, I am saying there is a reason for the fact that he does not nowadays have that relationship with Him, and as far as I know, there can be only two reasons for that.

You seem to have been offended by this, and I now will be trying to figure out why. Would you like to explain why you have been offended by this?

 

[bhsmte]

I do get it actually, I have done it heaps and I am doing it all the time.

I also know that I can't read other people's minds, and that is why I ask questions. I see that my questions get ignored, so I make sure it is noted.

I have asked why this person left Jesus without discussing it with Him first, because I have assumed that he did in fact have a relationship with Jesus as he has claimed. So I am not making the insinuation that you think I am, I am saying there is a reason for the fact that he does not nowadays have that relationship with Him, and as far as I know, there can be only two reasons for that.

You seem to have been offended by this, and I now will be trying to figure out why. Would you like to explain why you have been offended by this?

Offend me?

It takes a bit more than this to offend me.

Just read his posts and take it for what it is. I would imagine, he is a better judge of why he left his faith than you are, would you agree.

If you can't get your head around why he left his faith, I would learn to deal with it, because people leave their faith all the time and people change their mind on important things in their life all the time and to acknowledge new information to do so, is healthy. To deny information to protect your belief, is not healthy.

 

[oi_antz]

Offend me?

It takes a bit more than this to offend me.

Just read his posts and take it for what it is. I would imagine, he is a better judge of why he left his faith than you are, would you agree.

If you can't get your head around why he left his faith, I would learn to deal with it, because people leave their faith all the time and people change their mind on important things in their life all the time and to acknowledge new information to do so, is healthy. To deny information to protect your belief, is not healthy.

You were provoked to call me arrogant. What word other than "offend" would you use to describe that reaction?

I have read his posts, I have noticed he is not addressing the questions. That's it. If he or you think I am wrong, you need to provide substance rather than baseless objections. I might have said this to you before.

I see that this guy is effectively saying Jesus did not keep His promise. I am confident that I can get my head around why he left his faith, but I will need information before I can understand it.

I cannot just accept a claim as true if it contradicts what I already have accepted to be true. There is a contradiction here, and I have asked him to explain it.

You said this:

"To deny information to protect your belief, is not healthy."

.. but you have not accepted that I have requested information that has not been provided. I feel that you have assumed that I have denied information when actually I have not been supplied the information I have requested. I think you are wrong to take this position, making me look wrong without a substantiated reason, which is unfair. Please be fair to me, as I am fair to you.

 

[bhsmte]

You were provoked to call me arrogant. What word other than "offend" would you use to describe that reaction?

I have read his posts, I have noticed he is not addressing the questions. That's it. If he or you think I am wrong, you need to provide substance rather than baseless objections. I might have said this to you before.

I see that this guy is effectively saying Jesus did not keep His promise. I am confident that I can get my head around why he left his faith, but I will need information before I can understand it.

I cannot just accept a claim as true if it contradicts what I already have accepted to be true. There is a contradiction here, and I have asked him to explain it.

You said this:

"To deny information to protect your belief, is not healthy."

.. but you have not accepted that I have requested information that has not been provided. I feel that you have assumed that I have denied information when actually I have not been supplied the information I have requested. I think you are wrong to take this position, making me look wrong without a substantiated reason, which is unfair. Please be fair to me, as I am fair to you.

Arrogant is a description of human behavior and is appropriate when one person appears to think they can judge another person's decision to leave their faith and or question whether they had adequate reasoning to do so.

You don't have to accept what he says if it suits you, but others don't have to put any validity into your claim that it goes against what you have accepted to be true. You see, everyone doesn't think exactly like you.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

I did not see this before. For the record, in response to this, I began this in response to your charge that the onus is on the believer to prove. But really it is not, it is on every one of us to explain to God why we did not respond to His invitation. I showed you this promise that Jesus has made, an example of a reliable test that if performed properly will produce sufficient evidence for anyone to be convinced beyond reasonable doubt. If you wish to not acknowledge this test then that is fine by me, as long as people are sufficiently informed that there is proof available should they desire to seek it.

Read my Sig. I think I'll have an answer if it comes up.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Are you listening to yourself? I am always asked to define our God. We partly define him to be all-knowing and all-loving...that are some of the characteristics of the God we proclaim to exist. The problem of evil argument is saying that the God as defined does not exist. You seem to be agreeing with that. Therefore, you have now taken on a burden of proof to back that claim up...you are no longer allowed to simply claim that you "lack of belief"...that ship has sailed.

You seem to have difficulty following. I have already made clear that it is a problem for the way in which Christians characterise God (i.e., as omnipotent and omnibenevolent). Christians either have to reconcile this or otherwise abandon one (or both) of the omni- claims. Again, it bears repeating, the argument relates to a particular concept of God. If you present a definition that is contradictory, then in showing you the contradiction we have already meet the burden of proof. That's all that is required of us. What you do then, whether you attempt to remove the contradiction or abandon the definition altogether, is up to you.

 

[oi_antz]

Arrogant is a description of human behavior and is appropriate when one person appears to think they can judge another person's decision to leave their faith and or question whether they had adequate reasoning to do so.

You don't have to accept what he says if it suits you, but others don't have to put any validity into your claim that it goes against what you have accepted to be true. You see, everyone doesn't think exactly like you.

I have noticed that. But I still think I am entitled to information that supports a claim if I am expected to accept it. If that information is not provided, I then need to request it. I do not think that is arrogant.

 

[oi_antz]

Read my Sig. I think I'll have an answer if it comes up.

I cannot see that I asked question, but I assume that you wish to comment on the reliability of the promise Jesus makes at Revelation 3:20. Please go ahead and offer the information that you think is helpful, thank you.

 

[oi_antz]

Also, if someone does not believe as you do, does that make them anti Christian?

Hi, I almost missed this again. I think the new forum software doesn't make edits as obvious as it used to.

Well my answer to this question, I wonder why you need to ask, is not necessarily, but sometimes yes.

 

[Kingspawn]

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?

Perhaps they see that time is short?

 

[ResoluteShaman]

I believe they are here because In their hearts they are seeking the truth. Their disdain of spiritual matters is a smoke screen as they continue to glean evidence they so desparatly desire. They dog this website, throwing every imaginable trick they can at believers to achieve clarification on matters that haunt them. After all, they are cold....not lukewarm. A lukewarm person would not waste their time. They are the ones who have been inoculated with just enough of The Good News to prevent becoming infected. But not these guys.

I say stay in there swinging, guys. You know if you hang around a barbershop long enough, eventually you're going to get a haircut.
To believers I say they may very well someday be some of the most powerful and effective preachers of the Gospel among us.
Besides, they do a great job of honing our faith. What would we do without them?

No, not looking for some fantasy 'truth', nor desperate about anything No tricks, as evidenced by my not posting although I have been a member for some time. I have no want or desire to worship a man who died 2000+ years ago, and nor do I believe it the mythical return. It's a great story, but so is The Hobbit.

Why do I read this site? Hoping my reply doesn't get deleted, but for sheer amusement. This site has had me rocking with laughter more often than I can count.

And then there are those who set the bar so low as proof of some omnipotent being: Praising 'God' for the miracle of finding your misplaced car keys while thousands die of starvation, or in an earthquake. Sorry, no.

 

[bhsmte]

Hi, I almost missed this again. I think the new forum software doesn't make edits as obvious as it used to.

Well my answer to this question, I wonder why you need to ask, is not necessarily, but sometimes yes.

Who on this thread do you think is anti Christian and why?

 

[CO2]

I have to say, I came here a few years back, just to see what everyone was talking about. I think someone might have originally pointed me in this direction, to read something, but I don't remember. I stayed hidden in my atheism, for quite a while, until I realized I wasn't going to be eaten alive. I stuck around for a while longer, then somehow I forgot about the site, minus the once a year emails wishing me a happy birthday and the occasional updates (like this time).