Why answering atheists?

[Spock]

Where did the laws *come from *that order the universe? If there was possibly at one time nothingness, how could nothingness beget something? Everything has received its existence from another, is it impossible for the universe to be made up only of receivers of existence? Logically must there be a source of existence, that gives existence to everything else, that has its own source of existence within itself?

Been there, done it, have a t-shirt to prove it. None of those “proofs” are acceptable. If they were, there would be no need for faith.

 

[Spock]

Novels could be written based on the cynicism and latent anger in this world today. I see a lot just in these two sentences. You realize that many of us had the exact same thoughts in our earlier lives? We were right where you are, viewing the world through your eyes. We saw the hypocrisy of “believers” around us and rejected not only the believers, but also that which they believed in. We were cynical and believed only in that which we could touch and see. We demanded proof before we would believe in anything.

If you suddenly discovered that a branch of empirical science provided all of the answers that you personally were searching for, would you keep it to yourself, or would you share it? You would most certainly share the good news. We interact with you because we have found “the Way”, as it was known in its earliest days. All we ask is that you consider it with an open mind - not looking at the behavior of its poor practitioners, but the core truths that it reveals. Once you realize that, despite all of the evil and hatred in this world, there is true hope, your heart can and will change.

Many of us simply became tired of perpetuating the old “misery loves company” stereotype. We sought more out of life. You need not ever agree with us, but we would be remiss if we did not tell you about the joy that is to be found in this life. It is just a matter of perspective, that’s all.

Peace be with you.

I am glad to report that I have a very happy life, and do not look any further. Yes, I confess that I am rather cynical, but never angry, nor bitter. (Funny thing. When I was still working, my co-workers kept on being amazed that I always had a cheerful disposition, always smiled and spread my happiness as much as I could. They kept asking: “why are you always so upbeat?”. My answer was: “why shouldn’t I be?”) As a matter of fact, I do not have a “low opinion” about the believers, though the reasoning powers of some of them leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[po18guy]

Besides, I do not deny God. I am unconvinced that such a being exists, having seen no reason for that hypothesis.

Consider that you might be projecting a little here. “Hypothesis” is your term for something that you disagree with or refuse to embrace. Science, which many atheists hope will produce an even longer meaningless life for them, contains all of the hypotheses in this world. Evidence of God exists in the beauty of a flower. Its beauty is certainly not evidence of science! You are surrounded by God’s work. What a joy to realize that.

I am simply interested in your arguments.

From where I sit, you seem ready only to refute them, rather than to entertain them.

These “bombastic” announcements really turn me off. How dare you make such claims about everyone who does not believe in your God??

Hey!, let’s try to keep that agnostic angst under control! He’s NOT our God. He’s your God as well. Your difficulty just might stem from the fact that we are weak enough to submit to Him.

Yep, the gullibility of children, who have no critical skills is lauded in the Bible.

If you mean that they have not yet LEARNED anger and cynicism, you are right. So, adults are somehow improved by exhibiting these traits? Please explain.

Of course Paul also said: “When I was a child, I spoke like a child and behaved like a child. When I grew up, I left childish things behind”. (Not a verbatim quote, if you want me, I can look it up).

But, Paul did not reject God as he matured - rather he embraced Him all the more.

I prefer to be grown up, and not swallow unconditionally what other people say

Unless they are fellow agnostics and atheists? Which leads only to anger and cynicism. Many of us proved it to the world ourselves, and now it’s your turn. But, are you truly happy, even while you sleep? I say that you are not - as evidenced by your presence here. I say that you want to believe in something, but are not comfortable with what you have found so far.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

The ten commandments are a mixture of reasonable and not reasonable commandments. And the Constitution can be amended if need be. Can the Cathechism be changed?

As long as the creator does not choose to show himself, I have no reason to believe his existence.

Your choice, my friend.

As is yours, to continue being ‘the smartest man in the room,’ but still not smart enough to discern that the Creator has revealed Himself not once, but many, many times.

This nation ran into big trouble when creatures began to believe themselves smarter than their Creator. The Word is Eternal, as is the old, old story of listening to the father of lies.

 

[Spock]

Consider that you might be projecting a little here. “Hypothesis” is your term for something that you disagree with or refuse to embrace.

Incorrect. A hypothesis is a proposition which has not been proven.

Science, which many atheists hope will produce an even longer meaningless life for them, contains all of the hypotheses in this world.

Again, my “meaningless” life. [edited] Well, guess what - you are dead wrong!

Evidence of God exists in the beauty of a flower.

How about the “beauty” of a rotting carcass of some poor child who died in leprosy?

Hey!, let’s try to keep that agnostic angst under control! He’s NOT our God. He’s your God as well. Your difficulty just might stem from the fact that we are weak enough to submit to Him.

I don’t sumbit to an unknown entity, that is for sure.

Unless they are fellow agnostics and atheists? Which leads only to anger and cynicism. Many of us proved it to the world ourselves, and now it’s your turn. But, are you truly happy, even while you sleep?

How can anyone have any emotions while unconscious?

I say that you are not - as evidenced by your presence here. I say that you want to believe in something, but are not comfortable with what you have found so far.

You can say whatever you want to. I am very happy with what I found in my life, and rather dissatisfied with some of the posts I encountered here. Your post is the prime example of why I leave this board periodically. I would suggest to stop to make insinuations about me. That leads to the “ignore” button, or its equivalent.

 

[Spock]

As is yours, to continue being ‘the smartest man in the room,’ but still not smart enough to discern that the Creator has revealed Himself not once, but many, many times.

Not to me, he did not.

 

[davidv]

Because those ancient writs do not address our time.

Don’t they address their time? Can we understand their time and gain some understanding of what they were saying?

This response does not address my challenge to your assumption about their state of education (“uneducated”) and the why modern standards are better. Care to address them?

doubt it. A reasonable list (updated periodically - which is the buzzword here!) does not have to be long (unless of course it would be created by lawyers. ).

I reasonable list would have a better chance. I certainly agree with many of the Bible’s “recommendations” (not all).

So, why was the offer of the Catechism by another poster, not a “reasonable” list?

Because all of them require an a-priori acceptence of something that cannot be substantiated.

Why is this a problem? All world views “require an a-priori acceptence of something that cannot be substantiated”.

It is your conviction. I can tell you that I have an open mind, and I can be convinced. But no appeal to authority (alone) works for me. Reasonable premises and logical corollaries do.

Thank you. I doubt I have the knowledge and language skills to do much more than I have. I doubt we should meet in person so I could demonstrate my faith.

 

[po18guy]

You can say whatever you want to. I am very happy with what I found in my life, and rather dissatisfied with some of the posts I encountered here. Your post is the prime example of why I leave this board periodically. I would suggest to stop to make insinuations about me. That leads to the “ignore” button, or its equivalent.

I now know why you leave. Why do you return?

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**Atheist too often argue: “those ancient writs do not address our time”.

Right when they mean ancient literature about the age of the Old Testament like Homer, of about same age as the New Testament like Cicero only known by specialists, taught in Latin Classes and hated by most pupils.
An absolutely wrong claim when referred to the Holy Bible.

If it would be right that the Bible “does not address our time”, then the Bible wouldn’t only be the most red book of the world and greatest bestseller of all times, known at least in fragments by every person in he world, but never our whole western civilization would found on the Bible – on Christianity.

Well – it’s up to every single person to believe or not to believe. It was such even in the direct neighborhood of Jesus Christ. He told people, but he never forced people to believe Him, which would have been easy to Him who in His age of 12 taught the wisest of the time in the temple.

Not only by Christ’s never reached wisdom and knowledge of EVERYTHING (but one – Jesus did not know when the Father decides to stop this world - match Mt 24,36) but also by the Jesus given opportunity to call at once legions to smash His enemies (Mt 26,53) He never used force to believe in Him – to believe in God.

Everybody is free not to believe in the one and only Holy Trinity or to be a Christian. But everybody will be judged by Jesus Christ according to Mt 10,32/33

However; atheists exited engagement to fight for their disbelieve, proves the rightness of the word:

NEVER FINDS HIS PEACE, WHO BROKE OFF WITH GOD
**

 

[Spock]

Don’t they address their time? Can we understand their time and gain some understanding of what they were saying?

To a degree, yes we can. I never said that the Bible is “useless”, far from it. Certain pieces of it are just not applicable. For example, there is no accepted “indentured servitude” today. And I am sure we can agree on this. However, it is called cherry-picking, which is a subjective method.

This response does not address my challenge to your assumption about their state of education (“uneducated”) and the why modern standards are better. Care to address them?

Just look at the world today. Contrary to the usual nostalgia when looking at the old times, the “good old times” are today. Humanity did not change all that much since the dawn of time, when it comes to interpersonal relationships. However, there is definite increase in knowledge, there is an increase of well-being. There is more tolerance. Still a long way to go, for sure. I would not trade places with even the royalties of the middle ages.

So, why was the offer of the Catechism by another poster, not a “reasonable” list?

I am sure it is reasonable to you. Just one example why it is most unreasonable to me is the way how sexuality is treated.

Why is this a problem? All world views “require an a-priori acceptence of something that cannot be substantiated”.

Yes, you are right there. The basic assumptions (the universe exists, there are uniform laws of mature, our senses portray the world accurately, etc…) are unprovable basic assumptions, on which we ALL can agree. God’s existence is treated by the believers as another basic assumption, which is unnecessary for me. (By the way, this is an example of those rare instances when we can have an agreement - I hope.)

Thank you. I doubt I have the knowledge and language skills to do much more than I have. I doubt we should meet in person so I could demonstrate my faith.

Possibly. But we can have a mutually respectful conversation. At least for a while. Soon I will be gone for an extended period, since I will not have access to the internet.

 

[twb1621]

We have a misunderstanding. It is not the actual unit of measurement which is problematic. It is the ratio of the circumference of the circle compared to it diameter, which is “pi” (3.1415…) and which is given as “3”. Even back in those days the value was known to be about “3.15”. The author was obviously not familiar with the best approximation of his day… so it could not have been God. That is all. Bruno Schulz challenged me to point out an error in the Bible, which I did. He never responded to this… I wonder why?

Not 3.15"… A cubit was 18" to 20" based on the length between the elbow to the tip of the middle finger specifically of the person who was the master of that which was being constructed. That is an historic fact. 18" would have made it ‘3’. Now as far as using PI to discredit the word of God in the verse you refer to, you are wrong again on this one. There is no significance of the ratio of pie to the construction of a “sea” which is a tank to hold water, as they were not constructed to a specific mandatory volume, the Word of God was not wrong and the dimensions were not mandated by God.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**

Just one example why it is most unreasonable to me is the way how sexuality is treated.

Very funny indeed

tell us a single point where Catechism represses sexuality.

By the way: Atheists worldwide united these days in blaming the Pope for saying Condoms rather spread Aids then stems Aids.

Of course that is so!
With condoms for everyone adultery becomes common and so spread Aids. But well, atheists think sex ranges over faith.
Apes think alike.
Both don’t know that sex doesn’t stand for itself, but is strongly connected to love and marriage.

I know that atheists find that funny, they find God funny too – at least as long as they live
**

 

[twb1621]

Not to me, he did not.

Spock, For every doubt you have been countered and can be countered with even more depth if room allowed… you seem to be a relatively intelligent person so I ask you, for a person of your obvious interest to learn certain things, why have you never researched God and Christianity. And if you feel you did I can tell you, you haven’t gone deeply enough. I know this from experience. You are a person very reliant on your physical senses yet I would be willing to say under certain conditions you would be inclined to believe without seeing.

Let’s say we cross each other walking through the woods and you come upon a dark cave. As I pass you I tell you, you shouldn’t go into the cave because there is a bear inside. You are interested in going into the cave to explore it but you haven’t seen the bear for yourself. You can’t hear anything of it and can’t smell it. Would you go in or choose not to? In this case you do not know me personally but have to choose sight unseen. By the way, this is not uncommon in West Virginia so it is a real possibility.

 

[Spock]

Not 3.15"… A cubit was 18" to 20" based on the length between the elbow to the tip of the middle finger specifically of the person who was the master of that which was being constructed. That is an historic fact. 18" would have made it ‘3’. Now as far as using PI to discredit the word of God in the verse you refer to, you are wrong again on this one. There is no significance of the ratio of pie to the construction of a “sea” which is a tank to hold water, as they were not constructed to a specific mandatory volume, the Word of God was not wrong and the dimensions were not mandated by God.

A circle is a circle. The circumference of a circle is not 3 times its diameter. The verse clearly says: 10 cubits for from rim to rim and 30 cubits around it. That is a mathematical error, regardless what the structure was intended to be used. Even in those times people knew a better approximation for the value of “pi”.

 

[Spock]

Spock, For every doubt you have been countered and can be countered with even more depth if room allowed… you seem to be a relatively intelligent person so I ask you, for a person of your obvious interest to learn certain things, why have you never researched God and Christianity. And if you feel you did I can tell you, you haven’t gone deeply enough. I know this from experience. You are a person very reliant on your physical senses yet I would be willing to say under certain conditions you would be inclined to believe without seeing.

Sure I would. But the warning has to be reasonable to follow, just like in your example. You might not be aware of it, but I was a believer for quite a long time, and only when I started to apply my critical skills, did the whole system of Christianity fall apart - for me.

Let’s say we cross each other walking through the woods and you come upon a dark cave. As I pass you I tell you, you shouldn’t go into the cave because there is a bear inside. You are interested in going into the cave to explore it but you haven’t seen the bear for yourself. You can’t hear anything of it and can’t smell it. Would you go in or choose not to? In this case you do not know me personally but have to choose sight unseen. By the way, this is not uncommon in West Virginia so it is a real possibility.

Agreed. I know about caves, know about bears, know about the good possibility of danger. The trouble is that your analogy fails. Your warnings are more like advising me not to go into the cave because there is a purple, invisible, fire breathing dragon inside. That warning I would simply ignore.

Let me emphasise again: personal convictions, no matter how deeply felt, which cannot be substantiated by independent ways and means carry no weight at all. Authority is someone who can substantiate what they assert, so that a skeptic can be convinced by facts, and not just because the authority “says so”. The argument: “because I said so” may work on children, but not for adults.

And that is precisely what I meant when I said that I saw no actual arguments, only the expressions of deeply held convictions, which must be accepted on faith, just because “you” say so. In the previous sentence the word “you” is the generic version, including the Church, the Pope, the Cathecism, the Magistretium, the Bible and the whole kaboodle of the believers. None of these can offer any rational evidence, only dire warnings of what will happen if I go into that cave with the purple, invisible fire-breathing dragon inside.

I would love to see rational evidence. Yet I only see nonsense like: “the beauty of a flower is evidence of God”. Please do not take me for a complete fool. I resent that. It was not you who gave me that “evidence”, thank God. I simply ignore those who offer such childish “arguments”.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**What’s the point of all that pi biz?
A great red herring?
Here you see what pi is
youtube.com/watch?v=BUNDfyy2f5M
more here:
google.de/search?q=The+number+pi&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:defficial&client=firefox-a

**

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**

I would suggest to stop to make insinuations about me. That leads to the “ignore” button, or its equivalent.

Oh Dear, that wasn’t “insinuations” about you po18guy wrote, it was observations of atheist reactions when they hear the truth of Jesus Christ.
To is it’s most interesting how atheists react, and you present a paramount exampel.

Now without any of your sarcasm you admitted to use here, you really react in every way as “THE ATHEIST” as such

Same reproductive arguments, same sarcasm, same everything. Don’t then be surprised for having presented a mirror of yourself and stop refusing to look into that mirror to recognize yourself.

No one doubts you have a wonderful life. Have it now and have it to the outmost extend, for it’s all you have to be happy about.

Ignore button? Is this supposed to be a thread? Why don’t you simply ignore then. My posts - other Christians posts, everything that disturbs your wonderful life. How much have you left of it?

To tell you he truth; I’m not afraid of dying. In fact, roughly year ago, to be precise 14th of Dec. 2007 my heart stopped beating on the Operation-table. They brought me back, telling my wife before “your husband is dying”. Truly I wouldn’t mind, for then a Christians life begins!

**

 

[SimonArizona]

Been there, done it, have a t-shirt to prove it. None of those “proofs” are acceptable. If they were, there would be no need for faith.

They are acceptable just not sufficient. Faith is necessary. This way, those who don’t seek God wont find, those who seek will find, those who love God will find, those who hate God will not find. Proof of God would mean that those who don’t seek God togeth with those who hate God would find Him. That is unacceptable.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Spock
*
You might not be aware of it, but I was a believer for quite a long time, and only when I started to apply my critical skills, did the whole system of Christianity fall apart - for me.*

You probably haven’t considered the possibility that if you applied your thinking skills to atheism as fervently as you applied them to Christianity, atheism too would fall with a loud crash.

Please name an atheist thinker (other than yourself) whom you really admire.

 

[Spock]

They are acceptable just not sufficient.

Ok, let’s call them insufficient.

Faith is necessary.

No faith is needed to accept the existence of the external universe. No faith is needed in accepting the validity of the senses. No faith is needed to verify the results of science.

This way, those who don’t seek God wont find, those who seek will find, those who love God will find, those who hate God will not find. Proof of God would mean that those who don’t seek God togeth with those who hate God would find Him. That is unacceptable.

Why should I “seek” God? Why is he hiding? And of course I am just as unable to hate God as I am unable to love him. The fist prerequisite for either one of these emotions is an ironclad certainty that the object of love or hate exists.

Now I lead my life pretty much as any Christian does - with the exception of the worshipping part and those requirement which I find nonsensical. Many a time I was told that I am a “very good Christian”, based upon my behavior. When my lack of belief came out, people were very surprised. If that is not enough for God, well that is just too bad.