Athiests: What do you do when....

  • Thread starter Thread starter Annemariels
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, rather than simply finding what I write “disturbing,” I would invite you to actually compose a logical argument against my words so that we can talk.

For example, if you wish to present a case for blood sacrifice being perfectly dandy when it’s ordered by the god you worship, I’d be very interested in hearing that argument (particularly if it takes some form other than, “Whatever he says goes because he’s the most powerful!”).

But you’re not going to do that, are you? As your holy book apparently tells you: “Have no more to do with man, whose life is only a breath, for he is of no value.”

How lovely that your text orders you to consider people like me of “no value.” If ever we needed an indication of the dangers of religious thinking, there it is.
I really don’t have an argument. I read the bible and accept it. No questions asked (for the most part). I guess this is why we are having a discussion in the first place.

You seem like a very educated person, pls answer me this:

What is your goal here? (in this Forum)
Seems to me that you are here to continue your lack of Love for He who created you in order to increase the amount of Love for your knowledge and self?
What are you trying to prove? That God does not exist?

I come to these forums to learn about others and how they interpret the things I read daily in the Bible, or to learn about different Religions and denominations, etc.etc…

You seem to have done all this research, but yet instead of getting close to He who Created you and Loves you, you seem far away and angry.

I don’t mean any disrespect with my questions - disregard and say nothing if I’ve crossed the line.

God bless.
 
I really don’t have an argument. I read the bible and accept it. No questions asked (for the most part). I guess this is why we are having a discussion in the first place.

You seem like a very educated person, pls answer me this:

What is your goal here? (in this Forum)
Seems to me that you are here to continue your lack of Love for He who created you in order to increase the amount of Love for your knowledge and self?
What are you trying to prove? That God does not exist?

I come to these forums to learn about others and how they interpret the things I read daily in the Bible, or to learn about different Religions and denominations, etc.etc…

You seem to have done all this research, but yet instead of getting close to He who Created you and Loves you, you seem far away and angry.

I don’t mean any disrespect with my questions - disregard and say nothing if I’ve crossed the line.

God bless.
Do you realise how much prejudice is loaded into the way you ask these simple questions?

Why is it that whenever an atheist demonstrates a flaw in a religious argument, you think he must be angry?
 
Do you realise how much prejudice is loaded into the way you ask these simple questions?

Why is it that whenever an atheist demonstrates a flaw in a religious argument, you think he must be angry?
My bad - I guess I meant angry in a sense of negativity against God and accepting His Word.

Sometime It’s tough to write showing the proper feeling on questions which I really don’t mean to disrespect or hurt anyone’s feelings.

Sorry again.

God Bless…
 
My bad - I guess I meant angry in a sense of negativity against God and accepting His Word.

Sometime It’s tough to write showing the proper feeling on questions which I really don’t mean to disrespect or hurt anyone’s feelings.

Sorry again.

God Bless…
I’m certainly not angry with God, given that I don’t believe in the existence of any such entity that would be absurd. I would rather say that I am skeptical of the claims of those who do believe in God.

I am interested in this subject, that’s why I’m here… That and I love the cut and thrust of a good debate.
 
I really don’t have an argument. I read the bible and accept it. No questions asked (for the most part).
It’s this attitude more than anything else I object to. What you’re saying is that you treat the Bible differently than you do other books – you simply accept everything in it without asking questions.

I question everything that I read, and I subject most things that people tell me – especially really extraordinary claims – to rational scrutiny.

I cannot read about, for example, a god creating a system that necessitates blood sacrifice and not ask some serious questions, both about the evidence that suggests the existence of this god and about the character of such a being (regardless of whether or not the being actually exists).

It’s a little shocking to me that others can read about such things and not ask those questions.
What is your goal here? (in this Forum)
To discuss ideas. I enjoy discussing ideas, I enjoy critiquing arguments, and I enjoy the subject of apologetics and counter-apologetics.

This place is one of the places I’ve stumbled across where it’s possible to discuss these things, and so I do. There’s really not any mystery to it or over-arching “goal” here. I come here because responding to these arguments is something I derive pleasure from – it’s how I enjoy spending some of my time.

As a side note, I realize that some things I write might inspire other people to start questioning things, or they might give someone on the fence a nudge in the direction of embracing reality. I’d be delighted if what I write is useful to other people, but that’s not my main intention.
you seem far away and angry.
Well, seeing as all you ever see of me is my critiques of arguments for something you cherish – many of those arguments taking rather offensive forms – it’s not surprising that I’m going to come off as “far away” and “angry” to you.

Really, if you take a moment to read my responses on this forum, I typically give respect to those who deserve it, and I give no respect to those who don’t deserve it. Right now, for example, I’m taking the time to write a post with a pretty pleasant tone because you seem sincere, if a little misguided.

Hope that clears some things up.
 
It’s this attitude more than anything else I object to. What you’re saying is that you treat the Bible differently than you do other books – you simply accept everything in it without asking questions.

I question everything that I read, and I subject most things that people tell me – especially really extraordinary claims – to rational scrutiny.

I cannot read about, for example, a god creating a system that necessitates blood sacrifice and not ask some serious questions, both about the evidence that suggests the existence of this god and about the character of such a being (regardless of whether or not the being actually exists).

It’s a little shocking to me that others can read about such things and not ask those questions.

To discuss ideas. I enjoy discussing ideas, I enjoy critiquing arguments, and I enjoy the subject of apologetics and counter-apologetics.

This place is one of the places I’ve stumbled across where it’s possible to discuss these things, and so I do. There’s really not any mystery to it or over-arching “goal” here. I come here because responding to these arguments is something I derive pleasure from – it’s how I enjoy spending some of my time.

As a side note, I realize that some things I write might inspire other people to start questioning things, or they might give someone on the fence a nudge in the direction of embracing reality. I’d be delighted if what I write is useful to other people, but that’s not my main intention.

Well, seeing as all you ever see of me is my critiques of arguments for something you cherish – many of those arguments taking rather offensive forms – it’s not surprising that I’m going to come off as “far away” and “angry” to you.

Really, if you take a moment to read my responses on this forum, I typically give respect to those who deserve it, and I give no respect to those who don’t deserve it. Right now, for example, I’m taking the time to write a post with a pretty pleasant tone because you seem sincere, if a little misguided.

Hope that clears some things up.
What I know/understand about the sacrifices:

In the OT, God requested His people to give them their “best of the best” animal(s) as an offering (for events at different times of the year, for sins, for personal requests, etc).
The idea behind this is to show “The Israelites” that God is and should be their main focus in life. By offering your best calf or animals to God, you are showing Him His importance and your obedience to Him.

In the NT, Jesus (both man and God) is sent to show people the new ways which we are to live with one another, Love one another, etc…Jesus is falsely convicted by man and crucified without doing any wrong or committing any sin. His teachings and life are so pure that we say that he “died for our sins” - He gave His life to teach us the ways of God (which He is also - and you probably understand the Trinity). This was the “Ultimate Sacrifice”, God gave His only son as a sacrifice to us - so we can learn his ways.

After Jesus, there were no other sacrifices, at least in Christianity.

— It took some time to grasp the overall idea and points behind the Bible and God’s teachings for me - I guess there are many things that I still don’t know all that well but little by little it’s becoming more and more clear.

— In my personal experience, I only understood and found God when I really “wanted and was ready to”. I used to question things and not accept them unless it had reason or much proof behind it. I’ve learned to accept many things which I did not before, this is a gift (I believe) called Faith.

Thanks for the answers above.

God Bless
 
I’m certainly not angry with God, given that I don’t believe in the existence of any such entity that would be absurd. I would rather say that I am skeptical of the claims of those who do believe in God.

I am interested in this subject, that’s why I’m here… That and I love the cut and thrust of a good debate.
Cool.
Which claims?
 
CORRECTION

What I know/understand about the sacrifices:

In the OT, God requested His people to give **Him **their “best of the best” animal(s) as an offering (for events at different times of the year, for sins, for personal requests, etc).
The idea behind this is to show “The Israelites” (the people God referred to as His) that God is and should be their main focus in life. By offering your best calf,sheep or animals to God, you are showing Him His importance and your obedience to Him.
This is what the creator wants - to be acknowledged as “The Father”, “The only God”, to have His children Love Him as He Loves them.

In the NT, Jesus (both man and God) is sent to show people the new ways which we are to live with one another, Love one another, etc…Jesus is falsely convicted by man and crucified without doing any wrong or committing any sin. His teachings and life are so pure that we say that he “died for our sins” - He gave His life to teach us the ways of God (which He is also - and you probably understand the Trinity). This was the “Ultimate Sacrifice”, God gave His only Son as a sacrifice to us - so we can learn His ways.

After Jesus, there were no other sacrifices, at least in Christianity.

— It took some time to grasp the overall idea and points behind the Bible and God’s teachings for me - I guess there are many things that I still don’t know all that well but little by little it’s becoming more and more clear.

— In my personal experience, I only understood and found God when I really “wanted and was ready to”. I used to question things and not accept them unless it had reason or much proof behind it. I’ve learned to accept many things which I did not before, this is a gift (I believe) called Faith.

Thanks for your answers above.

God Bless…
 
I understand the theology. I’m taking a look at it from a further step back.

That is, why is the nature of this god such that he deems sacrifice to be the best method of atonement? Why not just forgive everyone to begin with? If not forgive everyone, why not have humans atone by incarnating himself and helping them perform a major work of humanitarian aid?

Remember, according to the story, he’s an all-powerful being. He didn’t have to choose blood sacrifice as the method of atonement. He could just as easily have made the method of atonement something non-violent, but he chose to make blood sacrifice the method.

What’s so special about blood and blood sacrifices? (It says in the Old Testament that god finds the smell of blood pleasing…yikes)

I find the idea of a blood sacrifice appalling, and I find the idea of any being who thinks that blood sacrifice is a good idea to be appalling – I’m not trying to be offensive; I’m trying to express the disgust and outrage I feel at the practice.

Again, I’m not trying to say shocking things for the sake of saying shocking things, but it’s things like this that make me glad that there’s no evidence for the existence of such a god – because he appears to me to be monstrous.
 
I understand the theology. I’m taking a look at it from a further step back.

That is, why is the nature of this god such that he deems sacrifice to be the best method of atonement? Why not just forgive everyone to begin with? If not forgive everyone, why not have humans atone by incarnating himself and helping them perform a major work of humanitarian aid?
Forgiveness is given to those who repent. It’s hard to say but it looked like the Israelites were covered with sins back then (not that we aren’t today) - Idolatry was a big one, and very negative in God’s eyes. The reason he chose sacrifices? Couldn’t tell you.
God did incarnate - Through Jesus. Look where that got Him…His own chosen people crucified Him.
Jesus’ 2nd coming is the next step before the end of the world. This is in the Bible, so we don’t expect further visits other than Jesus.

Overall though, my understanding of the Bible leads me to believe that God has already planned everything. What He wants to happen, is going to happen. You and I cannot change it.
What we can do, is live our lives according to His Word so we can be saved. Being saved to a wonderful life that awaits us - right now, it’s just a 70-90 year passage. Just to make sure we pass the test.
This is what I’ve learned.
Remember, according to the story, he’s an all-powerful being. He didn’t have to choose blood sacrifice as the method of atonement. He could just as easily have made the method of atonement something non-violent, but he chose to make blood sacrifice the method.
I guess the reason or point for the offering is more important than the point you make about the sacrifice - That’s what the Church teaches. We really do not concentrate on explaining why God chooses blood and sacrifices…
What’s so special about blood and blood sacrifices? (It says in the Old Testament that god finds the smell of blood pleasing…yikes)
Very weird in today’s views - yes…
 
Very weird in today’s views - yes…
Yet most theists [and I’m pretty sure all Catholics] will posit that God is unchanging and morality is objective. Then why have His actions changed so much? Either today’s views are wrong - and blood sacrifice is a truly good thing - or they’re right and God did some ungodly stuff in the OT, which doesn’t make any sense.

I think that’s just an example of how it’s much simpler to assume that the Christian God isn’t real. Assuming that He is requires a lot of mental contortions and explaining-aways.
 
Remember, according to the story, he’s an all-powerful being. He didn’t have to choose blood sacrifice as the method of atonement. He could just as easily have made the method of atonement something non-violent, but he chose to make blood sacrifice the method.
I’ve tried this one before, many, many times…it goes nowhere. Christians will happily proclaim that there God is all powerful and all knowing…but they seem to think that this same God was incapable of devising any other means of salvation, other than a blood sacrifice. 🤷
 
We really do not concentrate on explaining why God chooses blood and sacrifices…Very weird in today’s views - yes…
I know that the church does not explain why God chooses blood and sacrifices, and I’m saying that that is one of the glaring problems with the story.

For me, even if I were somehow convinced that this god exists, his character, as revealed through his preference for blood and his choice of a blood sacrifice as a means of atonement (among other undesirable characteristics), would prevent me from considering him good or worshiping him.

Forget about “The Church says this” and “The Church says that” for a moment and ask yourself whether you think the choice of a blood sacrifice is a good one in and of itself. If you were in god’s position, would you choose that option?

I most certainly would not, and I dare say that you would not also.

Thankfully, not only is there zero evidence that this god exists, the idea of god as desiring sacrifices and gleefully sniffing blood spilled by his worshipers is exactly the kind of idea we would expect a primitive tribe of nomads back then to cook up. In other words, there is very good reason to think that this story is nothing more than a myth that reflects the values of the Bronze Age, when people considered blood sacrifices peachy keen.
 
Well put. I enjoyed the discussion and am glad it stayed civil (just caught up on the last 3 pages of posts since I last checked yesterday)…

I wrestle with this a lot. It seems to me that the only way to get past the contradictions is to assume that they have an explanation but that we just don’t know it. This is the case for many areas:
  • the Bible
  • the problem of evil
  • why god appears hidden
  • the low occurrence of miracles and why they also appear in other traditions and in no traditions at all (simple, inexplicable healing)
  • how the fall worked given evolution, finite human nature, etc. (if the fall did not happen in some sense, then we literally don’t need a redemption)
  • on an on
Currently, I have found that natural explanations do much better than supernatural ones. In fact, it seems that the supernatural ones always begin by, say, describing a painter and his setup: “Oh man. You’ve got to see this guy. He is unbelievable! He’s literally the best painter you’ll ever meet, he’s mastered the styles of Rembrandt, Monet, Van Gogh and all the greats. He’s better than them! His paints are the finest money can buy. Heck, money can’t even buy then because he makes them himself. His brushes are pure Alpaca whiskers, the best one can have.”

Then, we go visit him and imagine finding him either 1) unwilling to paint or 2) a finger painting in front of him made with chocolate and mayonnaise. I ask what gives and am given a plethora of reasons why it’s actually me who’s got it all wrong. I just don’t get it or am thinking about this all wrong. He really is that good and I just need to trust based on the white canvas or mixture of food while his arsenal of premium tools is off to the side, unused.

Perhaps bad analogy… but that’s the toughie for me. There’s so many objections easily discoverable with reason and I find that I actually do have to make a choice not to think about them and just assume that god has an answer even though no one has figured it out and he’s not revealing it to us.
Yes, I think that I understand you analogy - though I had to readit twice. 😛

I will just close with this.
you say that there are “many objections easily discoverable with reason”. To this I will agree. I will also submit that there are areas in Science where this can occur to the person who is just beginning to learn about some very highly complex subject where our normal everyday assumptions don’t apply (like quantum mechanics)
It does not make these things false. It just takes a lot of time, and a lot of study and a lot of dedication to come to understand.

I’m going to drop off this discussion now. As I said earlier, I don’t really have any more to offer. Keep studying…
Been fun. Hope to catch you around the boards again.

Peace
James
 
Hitler, Stalin, Mao. All in one century. I could go on and on.

Enough said?
Every non-believer. Ever. Since the beginning of time. Burning for infinity.

Enough said?

P.S. The fact that D’Souza and Hitchens debate along these lines all the time tells me that the answer is far from decided. One must show that it was an atheistic motivated belief that actually fed killing, not that they just ‘happened’ to be atheists. One may think that religion is damaging and dangerous and an obstacle to political power without requiring that this be motivated by hatred of god, for example.

Anyway, I don’t think arguing this point will get us anywhere. Truth is not found via numbers.

P.P.S. I was being facetious in the first place. You made a ridiculous generalizing statement and I played along. Didn’t you catch that?
 
“I” believe, but I also believe the issue of God existing is a stalemate. God cannot be proven or dis-proven. Faith and fact are very different. I am “struggling” because my faith is weak, it isn’t secure. I often wonder if I believe out of fear that it is possibly true, out of fear of possibly going to hell otherwise. My logical side thinks it’s a very good possibility God may not exist, but my emotional side is afraid to not believe. But I have no solid evidence to prove God does exist… it’s like an emotional tug-o-war. No matter how often I beg and plead for God to reveal Himself to me in some way as to remove all doubt, I come up empty.
Wow. Couldn’t have stated my own position any better:
  • I approached my struggles deciding to try and find sure answers once and for all.
  • I was then told that there was no hope to prove things to myself - it couldn’t be done.
  • This was extremely frustrating as pathetically insignificant things are easily provable: water’s boiling temperature, smoking is harmful, etc. Yet the most infinitely important thing is not provable!
  • This leaves me in a predicament: assume that god would want me to know he exists and therefore doesn’t exist… or believe that he really does care about faith (blind) belief more than anything else. I have not answered this yet.
  • I am intellectually a non-believer. You may find it interesting to read what I wrote to a believing friend of mine who asked me what my ‘disposition’ was via email:
How I got here, I’m not sure, but I would describe my current disposition as looking to disprove Christianity to the degree necessary to walk away in peace. In other words, my disposition against it seeks an emotional satisfaction with my efforts, dialogs, and research in order to be at peace with my decision to reject it. At present, I am ‘looking back over my shoulder’ and wondering if I missed something earth shattering and keep not finding it.
If you substitute ‘looking back over my shoulder…’ for ‘afraid to go to hell’… we’re probably pretty darned close. I also pray almost nightly something like, ‘Jesus how can I know you?’, ‘Jesus where will I find you?’, ‘Jesus I want to know you.’… you get the point. Since it is not a provable issue, I’m content with anything god can provide me that surpasses my ‘skeptical threshold.’ We have a ‘skeptical threshold’ about all kinds of things. If a friend tells you he won $20,000 playing poker in one night, any number of people might 1) believe him outright 2) believe him based on some evidence or 3) assume he’s a liar and not stick around to even see evidence.

Since we are like this in countless worldly things, god, who fashioned us, must know what our genetic and environmentally developed thresholds of belief are and thus be easily able to satisfy them. I would prefer to believe based on external evidence, but if it needs to be some voice, sign, or miracle that only will matter to me – so be it. I have yet to receive such a sign, despite asking.

The response by many believers is that ‘he cares about faith, not just belief.’ But they problem is that they unknowingly are talking from having their threshold met. If it had not, they wouldn’t believe. So their personality, upbringing, etc. has formed them in such a way that the Bible, resurrection evidence, miracles of Lourdes, etc. is convincing to them and perhaps they exercise faith everywhere else (ignoring contradictions or assuming there’s a good answer, the problem of evil, etc.). But they’ve been satisfied. I have not. That’s the only difference.

To be continued…
 
Continued…
That doesn’t really have any weight when you’re trying to prove a point, because that would be assuming the I have a strong enough faith to accept that as an answer. Imagine how silly that sounds to an atheist?.. It wouldn’t be much different if an atheist would defend their position by saying that our energy is reincarnated after we die, “because Lucky the Leprechaun” says so.
I could not agree more. My initial questions began when I had the idea to check for non-gospel historical accounts of Jesus. There are three generally regarded as the most reliable contemporary sources: Josephus, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger. They do mention Jesus, but what just plagued my brain was the fact that on one side I had the gospels speaking of preachings, miracles, causing all kinds of hoopla, 3 years of ministry, virgin births, raising at least 2-3 from the dead, and then rising from the dead himself. What do we get from the non-gospel historians? He lived, people think they saw him after he died, and he has followers now.

I was not impressed. They obviously knew enough of him to write his name down, but nothing came with the name to cause them to write it? Tacitus even called the following a ‘silly superstition.’ I just found this peculiar.

After further research I was shocked that I perceived it would be easier to defend ‘not Christianity’ than Christianity. I looked back on my campus ministry time (was in an outreach for about 5 years) and realized that I had never once felt comfortable evangelizing a non-Christian. It was easy to approach a nominal Christian and invite them to something, but I never believed I had justification to persuade a complete non-Christian, non-believing individual that god was real and in particular that he was Jesus Christ.

My research began because I wanted to be as certain as possible. I never wanted to feel embarrassment or shame or hesitancy ever again. Whatever the truth was, I wanted it and wanted to stand firmly on it.

I had to swallow the big pill that this might mean I would become an ‘evangelizer’ for atheism. I didn’t care. I realized that truth and certitude were more important than sticking with what I used to believe.
But thank you very much-- You are definitely one of the more respectful people around here. It’s a pleasure to read what you write, and I can sense the passion behind your posts.
Thanks. Same to you. I was surprised by your honesty and situation. I relate a lot. It has been about 5 months since my first doubts at Christmas (ironic?). It has been enthralling as well as miserable. Enthralling in that the part that is extremely satisfied by naturalistic explanations over supernatural ones is very excited to be liberated to take on life’s questions in a new way. I’m excited to look at why religions work, what’s good about them, as well as what’s bad. There are obviously saints, but there are a lot of individuals (like you and I) who have some dysfunctional aspects going on: being a bit too worried about hell, scrupulosity, obsessive about sexual matters, contemptuous about other religions, unwilling to compromise via the spirit of the law, etc. Make sense?

But there could be a lot of good as well: a ‘higher purpose’ that motivates people toward excellence, the communal aspect which is a human need vs. a purely religious one, reasons to love others (though I’d like to look into this and wonder if secular individuals do more actual work individually vs. religious individuals giving of money to others to do the work as well as praying), etc. So, the question then becomes what is healthy about religion and why does it work for some? It is clear that all religions produce outstanding individuals, not just Catholicism. Anyway, it’s exciting to be liberated to seek these answers vs. being confined to only one world view which says that they have it completely monopolized (aka the ‘fullness of truth’).

Why is it miserable? I hate not knowing for sure. I’m still not sure! I hate the idea that what matters most is most illusive and, like I said, have a hard time wrestling with whether that’s evidence of god’s nonexistence or whether he really cares supremely about faith… I am married with a daughter and one on the way. Not easy to have realized that Christianity may not be true in the midst of a Catholic marriage… All my friends are Catholic (almost entirely) and so this has become a sore spot. It’s aggravating to me that religion, which seeks to unify, ends up being so divisive. I think I’ve heard more divisive statements from them than I have even come close to making toward them. It’s also frustrating to be told that unless I read this list of 100 Catholic apologetics books, I’m not really making an informed decision. Someone else pointed out to me that it’s interesting that one doesn’t need a PhD in theology to join a religion; only to leave.

Let me know if there’s anything I can do for you. I empathize sincerely with your journey.
 
Cool.
Which claims?
Omnipotence, virgin birth, ressurection, burning bushes, parting seas, original sin, men living in a whale’s entrails, God and the Devil getting together for a friendly wager on whether wrecking a man’s life woud shatter his faith…

All that kind of stuff…
 
I know that the church does not explain why God chooses blood and sacrifices, and I’m saying that that is one of the glaring problems with the story.

For me, even if I were somehow convinced that this god exists, his character, as revealed through his preference for blood and his choice of a blood sacrifice as a means of atonement (among other undesirable characteristics), would prevent me from considering him good or worshiping him.

Forget about “The Church says this” and “The Church says that” for a moment and ask yourself whether you think the choice of a blood sacrifice is a good one in and of itself. If you were in god’s position, would you choose that option?

I most certainly would not, and I dare say that you would not also.

Thankfully, not only is there zero evidence that this god exists, the idea of god as desiring sacrifices and gleefully sniffing blood spilled by his worshipers is exactly the kind of idea we would expect a primitive tribe of nomads back then to cook up. In other words, there is very good reason to think that this story is nothing more than a myth that reflects the values of the Bronze Age, when people considered blood sacrifices peachy keen.
I accept everything that comes from God. I can tell you that this wasn’t always the way I felt, but it’s the way I feel now. This approach comes from my general knowledge of events which occurred according to scriptures and also from the things we see happening today. To me, it makes sense.

I also had some pretty awful health problems which never went away until I gave my life to God. Although to some this would be a perfect reason to just “join the Church”, in my case, it still took some time, strong need for information, proof and reasoning. But God’s Grace and Love gave me the so needed Faith I have today to move in what I know was the right direction.

I spent many Sundays at Church, looking at my watch, waiting to get out of there. No clue what the priest said, no clue of the things the CC taught and the things I thought were right. Being at Church made my Mom happy - so I showed up - physically.

I guess my answers to you will never be satisfactory here… I’m not a scientist who can give you physical or visual proofs of God’s existence or why He does the things the way He does.
My answers would be purely based on the Church, Biblical writings and interpretations which I was taught. It’s likely you won’t accept my responses.

As most atheist would put it, “He’s been brainwashed” - and that’s fine - I accept that. As long as I’m a happier person with those around me seeing the positive changes, I’m ok with that. Today, I also tend not care too much on what others think - but only what God thinks - but…you’ve probably heard all of this before…

Again, good luck in your journey for answers - I found Him through a lot of pain and suffering - but I would do it all over again in a second.

God Bless.
 
I’ve tried this one before, many, many times…it goes nowhere. Christians will happily proclaim that there God is all powerful and all knowing…but they seem to think that this same God was incapable of devising any other means of salvation, other than a blood sacrifice. 🤷
What do you want to hear from Christians?
If the proof was clear, you’d know it and we’d all be singing in Church this Sunday.

The fact that it’s not clear is the challenge.
If you believe God, follow his rules (and info He left behind, as confusing as it may be) - you become part of His overall plan → Heaven. Otherwise → Hell.

He spoke to the Prophets, the Kings, the Angels, etc…
Sent His own Son (with his Spirit) to teach His ways; instead He was sacrificed by what He called “His People”. Died without committing a single sin…
Left his spirit on Earth for those who believe in Him (Holy Spirit)
I could go on…
Although there are many questions whether this info is 100% accurate, you get the bulk of the message/idea.

I think - to be stuck on a single “blood sacrifice” detail, which some say is part of the reason they do not accept God, is silly. Look at the message behind the sacrifice - not the actual ritual. What is not accepted by today’s standards and laws many years ago was everyday doing.

My 2 cents…(probably not even close to acceptable to those that need detailed proof)

Peace be with you - God Bless.👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top