Why are there so many atheists on a Christian site?

[bhsmte]

I cannot imagine how this would be possible. Can you please describe how you imagine it?

I don't remember saying that, but I will address your question. A person living in healthy faithful relationship has very constant, intimate, loving bond with Him, even though it is a spiritual relationship. This means that the man's heart is always aligned toward God in love, praising Him, thanking Him, consulting Him, relying on Him etc. At some point in a person's life (quite frequently for some), this intimate relationship is broken, and He gets put outside of the person's heart. The man goes on in his life as he pleases, but without having this companionship with Him. (The same man can still be well educated in Christian matters and have good intentions to preach the truth they know). Anyhiw, at this point Jesus is standing outside and the person has closed the door. Jesus doesn't barge in and demand better treatment as I would, but instead just knocks to inform us that He desires reconciliation.

Correct. But it is a reliable test, that everyone is invited to perform without discrimination, that will produce proof beyond reasonable doubt. That is all I wanted to say to begin with.

Show us how it is a reliable test.

 

[oi_antz]

There seems to have been a little quotation-fail on your part, so I hope I do get this right...

The book is called "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist"... and you haven't read it? What a way to convert someone! Maybe I shouldn't read this book either... perhaps it will convert me.

You got that right. This person assumed from my comments in that discussion that the book would benefit me. At that moment I admitted I was not atheist but that I love God and the life He gave me. That was the beginning of my realisation that I did not know God, but that I wanted to, and I subconsciously sort of could see by the confidence those Christians had that it might be possible to do so. That was the turning point, yes because I only read the title of a book!

And the verse is about testing the spirits... where the test is whether "they" say agrees with doctrine? Yeah, that sounds convincing.

It is not clear to me what you imagine the impact of this was, but for me at that time, being prepared to give just one chance for the bible to prove its value to me, it was sufficiently effective. It showed me that I had misunderstood what the word "spirit" means, and that I had been getting coached by an Antichrist spirit. That was enough for me to accept that maybe the bible is not all wrong, and I began reading it, looking for more of that "truth". I found that as I read, it was describing to me how I had fallen from former faith and when I described what I was finding, someone said "it seems that you only believe the bible when God speaks to you", which was a useful revelation, that helped me to recognise His voice.

I won't make any judgements about your previous position... I can just assert that as truth: you have never been an atheist like I am.

That is correct. I have never been atheist in my life. I was only against Christianity because I was hurt that it was against my desire to sin, and I chose that I would rather desire sin instead.

The "shame" (what small shame there is) of walking down the street naked comes from my expectation of what others would think about me. I believe that others exist, and that they do make judgements about others.

I do not believe that there is a "holy God" who exists and makes judgement about my behaviour. So why would I feel shame here?

Sure, that is one way to find comfort about it. But tell you what, when you next go to open the door to Him, see whether you do feel ashamed. I just think it will benefit you to know it is natural and normal and that He was already aware of it anyway while He was knocking.

 

[oi_antz]

Show us how it is a reliable test.

You know what they say about forcing horses to drink. I cannot do it for you, only you can do that.

 

[oi_antz]

That wasn't my question and I think you know that.

You stated, it is obvious to tell whether someone loves the truth. So please demonstrate to us, what is your test to determine if someone loves the truth?

Whether they accept statements that are true or whether they turn to deceit instead.

 

[bhsmte]

You know what they say about forcing horses to drink. I cannot do it for you, only you can do that.

You say you have a reliable test and you can't demonstrate how it is reliable and only I can do it?

So, if I or someone else does it and doesn't get the same results as you, wouldn't that deem the test to be unreliable?

 

[bhsmte]

Whether they accept statements that are true or whether they turn to deceit instead.

Well, this would lead to an quite obvious question wouldn't it?

Can you guess what that would be?

 

[oi_antz]

No, but if it is true I will accept it.

Well, this would lead to an quite obvious question wouldn't it?

Can you guess what that would be?[/QQUOTE

 

[oi_antz]

You say you have a reliable test and you can't demonstrate how it is reliable and only I can do it?

So, if I or someone else does it and doesn't get the same results as you, wouldn't that deem the test to be unreliable?

Yes. Just as putting a car in gear and accelerating will produce movement. But if the car is not put in gear and only accelerated, it won't. Everyone who performs this test properly does get the same result.

 

[In situ]

God is open to all of his children, he loves each one us with a divine affection.

Whenever I hear a Christian preach God Love, reality stick in my eyes. I have a notion of what love is, and I don't see any universal influence of a divine love in this world reaching all man kind. I also happen to be familiar with Christan apologetics and as well what the Bible says about God in this matter and the mere idea of accepting the Christan notion of a Loving God is the same thing as asking me to flush my brain down the toilet.

Put in another way; have you ever seen brain substance splashed all over a wall in a gymnastic hall? Traumatized children watching their parent been shoot in the head? Yea right, not Gods fault, I know... But could he had prevent it. Yes a Loving God would had but your "loving" "god" decided not to.

The only real gift we can give God is to do his will.

You mean God's will such as first creating a paradise in where man can live happy, then make man screws it up and accuse them for treachery, and accuse every human being that will be born after that for the same treachery. As a result of this, drown 99.999% of humankind. Then let them continue kill, slaughter and murder each other, even command them to do so. Then after a few thousand year of murder, slaughtering and genocide tell them it does not matter how immoral or evil they been as long you believe in His Son you will be granted a place back in paradise again - else you be tortured in hell forever, even if you lived your life as a good person.

Is that the will of the Loving God you refer to or did you mean to cherry pick some other, not quite as grotesque, picture from the Bible instead?

In fact the Westboro Baptist Church has a pretty good sense of what the Biblical God's "Love" actually is about. However no sane person will ever by into that kid of lunatic nonsense, instead more sane Christians delude them self with a cherry picked cuddling loving god, that has no factual representation in scripture.

There are plenty of Christians who do the ritual, half way believe some stuff, but live worldly lives. Its human.

And you are the one to judge on this? Did not the Bible tell you not to judge, else you would be judge yourself?

Besides that you did not even attempt to answer my question but avoided it completely. At least you could had said something that made sense; that God makes your life feel complete, or that you feel peace in your life or whatever personal reflections you may have had. Instead you opted, like a robot, to type some random dogmatic mantras you been taught to repeat for yourself to convince your self of your own self-delusions.

 

[oi_antz]

Yes, I would call that bias.

OK. Is that a bad thing?

 

[bhsmte]

Whether they accept statements that are true or whether they turn to deceit instead.

What is the test to determine which statements are true and what is deceit?

Truth of any quality, is going to be verifiable outside of a person's personal perceptions.

 

[John Templar]

I was a Christian my whole life... really devoted. When I hit college I decided I needed to live my life for God and enrolled in Bible College. I've read three Bibles, a room full of supporting literature and did research until I was sure my eyes would drop out... you know what I learned.

It's all not true. I'm sorry I wasted so much of my life on this fiction. Step back from your wishful thinking, childhood indoctrination and terrible apologetics... use just straight critical thinking/common sense and I'm sure you'll come to the same conclusion.

Don't waste any more of your life on these fictions. Jehovah is no more a real god than Odin, Zeus or the Jade Emperor. Jesus was no more a real Son of God than Krishna, Hercules or Osiris. There have been over 10,000 religions in the history of humanity and they've ALL been wrong, their holy books lies, their priests mistaken, their miracles just fictions and their congregations mislead. Why is Christianity any different?

My challenge to Christians is this... Please provide the sort of evidence for Christianity that if it came from another religion you would drop Christianity and join that religion immediately. Would you think it was a good argument if someone asked you to believe in Allah/Shariah law in order to believe in Allah/Shariah law? No. Would it impress you that someone had FAITH in Jim Jones? No. Would you be impressed with the early miracles of Buddha? No. What should impress you are the sorts of facts and evidences that would stand up in a trial.

 

[bhsmte]

OK. Is that a bad thing?

Depends what your goal is.

If the goal is to solidify your current bias, having bias to do the same will help you towards your goal.

If the goal is to validate claims and or beliefs in regards to reality, bias would not be what you should be shooting for.

 

[Freodin]

You got that right. This person assumed from my comments in that discussion that the book would benefit me. At that moment I admitted I was not atheist but that I love God and the life He gave me. That was the beginning of my realisation that I did not know God, but that I wanted to, and I subconsciously sort of could see by the confidence those Christians had that it might be possible to do so. That was the turning point, yes because I only read the title of a book!

Well, I am an atheist, I admitted to that for the last... 30 years or more, and I haven't encountered anything that changed that. Again, I can only state that obviously you have never been an atheist like me.

I have often seen believers find something that gave their already existing belief new fervor... up to the point where they completely denied even having been a believer previously. But I hope you can see how such an experience is unlikely to happen to a real unbeliever.

It is not clear to me what you imagine the impact of this was, but for me at that time, being prepared to give just one chance for the bible to prove its value to me, it was sufficiently effective. It showed me that I had misunderstood what the word "spirit" means, and that I had been getting coached by an Antichrist spirit. That was enough for me to accept that maybe the bible is not all wrong, and I began reading it, looking for more of that "truth". I found that as I read, it was describing to me how I had fallen from former faith and when I described what I was finding, someone said "it seems that you only believe the bible when God speaks to you", which was a useful revelation, that helped me to recognise His voice.

I apologize if that may offend you: but I just find it astonishing how believers can exaggerate the smallest things into "divine truth". I have read the Bible multiple times, and I have never assumed that it was "all wrong". Yet all I have found in this book were very human, very mundane "truths". Why this would anyone lead to believe that it contains anything "divine" is beyond me.

That is correct. I have never been atheist in my life. I was only against Christianity because I was hurt that it was against my desire to sin, and I chose that I would rather desire sin instead.

That might be the difference between us. I don't "desire to sin". I just don't believe in deities.

Sure, that is one way to find comfort about it. But tell you what, when you next go to open the door to Him, see whether you do feel ashamed. I just think it will benefit you to know it is natural and normal and that He was already aware of it anyway while He was knocking.

As I do not even know how to "open the door to Him"... and you won't tell me... I doubt that I will feel anything. Though even considering this... I don't see why I would feel ashamed. The only reason to feel shame is when you already buy into all this sin / fall / evil concept. I don't. So why would I feel ashamed?

 

[Randall1022]

Some of Gods greatest gifts are unanswered prayer. These sweet non believers know somewhere deep in their heart that there is an ultimate being. They don't pray. They search. Sooner or later as c.s. Lewis said it best you have to make a real choice.

 

[Colter]

"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people".

If religion is the opiate of the people, it's not the religion of Jesus of Nazereth.

 

[Freodin]

Yes. Just as putting a car in gear and accelerating will produce movement. But if the car is not put in gear and only accelerated, it won't. Everyone who performs this test properly does get the same result.

So when you accelerate, and the car won't move, you assume - no! Assert! - that it is because it is not in gear.

You have excluded any other options.

And in contrast to your suggestes "reliable test"... here you can check whether you followed the rules of the test correctly. You don't have to look at "car not moving" to deduced "car not in gear"... you can check the gear.

Do you see the difference? And do you see why we reject your test as "reliable"?

 

[bhsmte]

So when you accelerate, and the car won't move, you assume - no! Assert! - that it is because it is not in gear.

You have excluded any other options.

And in contrast to your suggestes "reliable test"... here you can check whether you followed the rules of the test correctly. You don't have to look at "car not moving" to deduced "car not in gear"... you can check the gear.

Do you see the difference? And do you see why we reject your test as "reliable"?

This test thing is getting more hilarious as it goes on.

 

[bhsmte]

Some of Gods greatest gifts are unanswered prayer. These sweet non believers know somewhere deep in their heart that there is an ultimate being. They don't pray. They search. Sooner or later as c.s. Lewis said it best you have to make a real choice.

And you know what non believers feel how exactly?

 

[Colter]

The heart of the matter, is you claim god/s exist, atheists claim they don't. Until such time as you provide evidence for your claim, and quit asking us to dismiss evidence of the contrary, then atheism remains the default position.

You can't even prove yourself in words adequate to distinguish yourself from others in a line up, so it's not possible to provide proof of the God we know. We envite you to find him on your own, he lives within you.