Atheist's Come One, Come All!

[Hyvent]

I've been a Christian for 6 years and I've been studying apologetics for about half of that time; but the one thing I seem to lack is a critical analysis of my beliefs. Up until now, I've really had no desire whatsoever to read books by Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett, etc; but I do want to hear the atheist's side. I've been talking to a few atheist's here and there over the last few days outside of the chat and want a broader perspective. I will not be offering any point of view, rebuttal, or refutation to what you say; for the point of this post is simply to listen to your side of the argument.


There are three essential topics and questions which I want you all to offer your points of view on:

1) The existence of God (why don't you believe that God exists?)

2) The reliability of the New Testament (do you believe the New Testament to be reliable? If not, why not?)

3) Jesus' resurrection (why don't you think that Jesus rose from the dead?)

I cannot help what other people say on this post and I cannot prevent other apologists from responding to what you post. I just want you to keep in mind that the purpose of you responding as an atheist on this post is to present your views; not defend them. I hope that the arguments the atheists post will not be edited. But due to my experience on this site, I am probably grasping at imaginary straws here.

Thank you all in advance who responds. Be so kind as to pm me when you have responded to ensure I see your post.

 

[Skeptic23]

First off, I would like to thank you for not automatically demeaning atheists as a whole. It is a hard stance to take but is a mature one. I would say I do not believe the new testament to be valid for 70-100 years passed before events (some before the birth of Christ) were published. If he validity of a story is based on eye witnesses.. the gospels are rife with inaccuracies

 

[TheAristocat]

the gospels are rife with inaccuracies

Historical or content-wise? I have about nine years of apologetics experience, and I can't remember a problem, content-wise, that was unresolvable. In fact I remember one time in the solving of one problem, another problem was automatically resolved. And I've seen some doozies that just scream, "CONTRADICTION," to the unscrupulous eye. Yet they also have solutions.

 

[cordiolus]

I've been a Christian for 6 years and I've been studying apologetics for about half of that time; but the one thing I seem to lack is a critical analysis of my beliefs. Up until now, I've really had no desire whatsoever to read books by Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett, etc; but I do want to hear the atheist's side. I've been talking to a few atheist's here and there over the last few days outside of the chat and want a broader perspective. I will not be offering any point of view, rebuttal, or refutation to what you say; for the point of this post is simply to listen to your side of the argument.


There are three essential topics and questions which I want you all to offer your points of view on:

1) The existence of God (why don't you believe that God exists?)

2) The reliability of the New Testament (do you believe the New Testament to be reliable? If not, why not?)

3) Jesus' resurrection (why don't you think that Jesus rose from the dead?)

I cannot help what other people say on this post and I cannot prevent other apologists from responding to what you post. I just want you to keep in mind that the purpose of you responding as an atheist on this post is to present your views; not defend them. I hope that the arguments the atheists post will not be edited. But due to my experience on this site, I am probably grasping at imaginary straws here.

Thank you all in advance who responds. Be so kind as to pm me when you have responded to ensure I see your post.

On the 1st question, I do believe in a higher being. A one. Someone or something that lit the spark that created the universe and oversaw it's infinite design but I don't believe that one can be contained within one book. Which brings me to question number two. The new testament (and the old) have a certain moral validity, a higher meaning. But only when they are taken along with all the symbolism and cultural understandings that they need be paired with. In short, they are largely a parabolic experience, in my eyes. Which brings me to the third question. I am on the fence about the resurrection, to be quite honest.

I don't know if Jesus resurrection is supposrd to be somehow a moral story, a message of hope or whether it is meant to be taken literally. But what I do know is that I believe that the resurrection of Jesus comes secondary to the lessons that he taught while he lived

For me, the bible is not so much a story of how to be a slave of God, as much as it is a tale of learning to live a wiselife in a state of personal freedom, and hence tranquility anr inner peace. An attribute which gives a person an ability to think selflessly.

But my primary argument for moral responsibility and its importance doesnt come from the bible, it comes from an innate sense of ewhat is right and what is wrong. I see truths in lots of religions because of this, but I also see pointless flaws, dogmas and rules which serve no purpose other than to satisfy the cultural norms that were present in the time and place that it was written.

I believe that every society has a moral code. And I see no reason why each cannot be right in it's intent, even if its means or its interpretations have changed or become awry. I don't believe that I could join in an elite class of belief, that sees me believing a certain ideal, having a moral highground under my feet, beleiving myself to be right and true and full of love yet holding to the idea that most of the humans who have ever existed will burn in an agonizing torment for all eternity just because they do not idealize the same way as I do. I find it repulsive.

I theorize that an infinite God has an infinite array of communicae and wisdom to be shared with a potentially infinite number of unique minds. Sometimes one rule for all just does not do the idea of good-will justice.

Can you punish a child the same as an adult? A person who does not know the same as one who does? A lineal arab Muslim the same as an American Christian?

We are born into a place by simple chance. And our decisions, the paths we walk and the places the world takes us, are all just half chance too.

That's my two cents.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

...the one thing I seem to lack is a critical analysis of my beliefs.

Not an atheist (though I used to be one solely in terms of Christianity), but I'm curious what you consider to be critical analysis of your beliefs. Based on what frame of reference, and vis-a-vis who?

 

[cordiolus]

And to add to that.

I was a very scientifically minded child. I had an extroardinary IQ at a young age and I believed that everything has some sort of scientific or psychological explanation. That is a view that I believe I was born with.

I, personally, take far more pleasure in viewing and understanding a wide range of angles on any theological issue but I place much less importance on which of them can be termed 'right'. This is because, to me, the idea of a concrete, impermeable, immaleable, absolute truth seems to confound what I view as the very essence of being human; imperfection.

So it stands to reason that any hypothesis or theory that I or anybody else has on things which are subject to any degree of plausible doubt cannot be taken as a solid truth.

For instance, today I ate a sausage. Now I know that sausage was brown. That is a certainty. But for me to say that the Earth was created in seven 24 hour periods because a man wrote it thousands of years ago is only ever a theory. To me it would be an idea that I have assimilated. But as to its validity, who can know?

This is why the terms 'truth' and 'blind faith' completely contradict one another in my eyes.

I would have considered myself a budding christian for a few years, and they were the most confusing, turmultuous and unhappy years of my life.

 

[danschance]

I would say I do not believe the new testament to be valid for 70-100 years passed before events (some before the birth of Christ) were published.

Unfortunately you are perpetuating a myth. The new testament was written at or before 70 A.D. and Jesus died in A.D. 33. So the new Testament was written with in (i.e. no later than) 37 years after the death of Christ by people who knew Him personaly.

The book of Acts was written by Luke and he never mentioned:
1) the destruction of the Temple (A.D. 70 or 37 years after the death of Christ)
2) The death of James (A.D. 62 or 29 years after the death of Christ)
3) The death of Paul (A.D.63 or 30 years after the death of Christ)
4) The death of Peter (A.D. 65 or 34 years after the death of Christ)

That means Acts was written **BEFORE** A.D. 62, not at A.D. 62.

Obviously, the writings of the people above wrote parts of the bible before their deaths. So your claim of "the bible was written 70-100 years" is an epic fail and no doubt from a biased hate filled troll on the internet with an ax to grind with Christianity.

It is completely plausible that the Gospels were written in a few year of Christ's death. Proving the exact date when they were written is currently not possible. All we can do to date the New Testament is to look at internal evidence and archaeological evidence, both of which do not pin point a date.

 

[BeanieD]

Back then, people lived much longer lives than they do now. There were MANY who lived 125-900 years, and remembering that Abraham was 100 years old before Issac was born, then there were other children. I have not seen inaccuracies yet and have been through the Bible many, many times. Sometimes the writings are from different perspectives, but all the same outcome.

 

[Bowman]

First off, I would like to thank you for not automatically demeaning atheists as a whole. It is a hard stance to take but is a mature one. I would say I do not believe the new testament to be valid for 70-100 years passed before events (some before the birth of Christ) were published. If he validity of a story is based on eye witnesses.. the gospels are rife with inaccuracies

Why stop with the NT?

Surely the OT must be the same in your view...I mean, who could have actually witnessed the heavens and the earth being created? But then their creation is accurately described in scripture billions of years AFTER the events took place.

Your position is not very well thought out...

 

[TheAristocat]

Unfortunately you are perpetuating a myth. The new testament was written at or before 70 A.D. and Jesus died in A.D. 33. So the new Testament was written with in (i.e. no later than) 37 years after the death of Christ by people who knew Him personaly.

The book of Acts was written by Luke and he never mentioned:
1) the destruction of the Temple (A.D. 70 or 37 years after the death of Christ)
2) The death of James (A.D. 62 or 29 years after the death of Christ)
3) The death of Paul (A.D.63 or 30 years after the death of Christ)
4) The death of Peter (A.D. 65 or 34 years after the death of Christ)

That means Acts was written **BEFORE** A.D. 62, not at A.D. 62.

Obviously, the writings of the people above wrote parts of the bible before their deaths. So your claim of "the bible was written 70-100 years" is an epic fail and no doubt from a biased hate filled troll on the internet with an ax to grind with Christianity.

It is completely plausible that the Gospels were written in a few year of Christ's death. Proving the exact date when they were written is currently not possible. All we can do to date the New Testament is to look at internal evidence and archaeological evidence, both of which do not pin point a date.

Not to mention Pliny's Letter to Trajan in (111-113 AD): "Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years." 113 - 25 = 88 AD. 88 AD - 33 AD = 55 years. Not 70-100 years. And that's secular evidence for Christianity. Can't have Christianity without a Christ or a Gospel account. So when were the Gospels written?

 

[nogard]

There are three essential topics and questions which I want you all to offer your points of view on:

1) The existence of God (why don't you believe that God exists?)

Well, I am an agnostic, in which case I don't know for sure if some higher being exists, but I do believe that the Christian God does not exist. Without going into much detail, some of the main reasons are problems with evil and the randomness of God, credibility of the Bible, and other logical/philosophical arguments.

2) The reliability of the New Testament (do you believe the New Testament to be reliable? If not, why not?)

Reliable, well, not really. The New Testament and Christian doctrine that exists today was chosen during several church councils that occurred hundreds of years after these books were written. These councils decided which books and doctrines were included or excluded. Also, the Bible is littered with contradictions...actually, that's a perfect segue into the next question.

3) Jesus' resurrection (why don't you think that Jesus rose from the dead?)

Here's a simple assignment for all of you. Read through the resurrection accounts in all four gospels. While reading, have a pen and paper nearby and mark down each significant event in detail (who went down to the grave, how many angels were present, what was said, etc...). When you are done, compare the four accounts and see all the discrepancies between them. Pick out individual characters and see if it is possible to map out their day in light of all four accounts. Also, if Jesus did rise from the dead and spend roughly 40 days on earth preaching to hundreds, how on earth is this miraculous event not recorded anywhere in history except for the Bible?

 

[Abiding]

Hello Hyvent

 

[Cobus]

Ah the MORAL VALUES of every society....
If we look at what REAL OBEDIENT believers do as their GOD instruct, we will only find ONE GROUP to do as the ALMIGHTY wants.
Here is the thing atheists cannot grasp... There are only two groups of people on earth. There is no third group. There is ONE GROUP that are people that OBEY GOD, and then there is a group that do not obey God. They obey ANY THING AGAINST GOD!

Jesus made it very clear... The one GROUP GATHERS with Him for the Kingdom of God, and the OTHER SCATTER! I do not think ANY of us even Athiests deny that there was a Man that lived HOLY on this earth. A man thet NEVER SINNED or harmed another person by going against the will of a HOLY GOD, that CANNOT SIN!

You see, this is the thing about God, HE CANNOT SIN. God cannot go against HIS OWN WILL. God wills HMSELF to be HOLY and He is the HOLY GOD. Now if murder (killing) was not against HIS WILL, then MURDER would not have been sin. Same with not TRUSTING HIM. God says that He is Spirit, and whosoever believeth in HIM shall not perish... But God says for a person to have life eternal that person has to KNOW GOD!


Now! How do we know God if we do not SEEK Him? I searched and weighed some faiths on earth, and only ONE has love that even includes SATAN! There is only ONE faith on earth that says LOVE THINE ENIMY.... It is the ONE JESUS LIVED.


My problem is not whether Jesus did live or not, My problem is HOW DID HE LIVE! If you look at the POWER and the STRENGTH Jesus had, and yet HE DID NOT CALL ON IT ONCE TO DESTROY! When Peter chopped off the ear of a man, Jesus said there are MANY POWERFUL ANGLES THAT WILL ATTACH THE WHOLE WORLD IF HE CALLS THEM... but HE DID NOT!

I think they will come one day, but.... Jesus FIRST gave the people chance to REPENT from what they do against God's will. Against the LIFE HE LIVED.... You see this is the wonderful thing about this HOLY GOD and the GOSPEL of JESUS! God says if we want, HE WILL GIVE US THE SAME HOLINESS AS HE GAVE JESUS!!!

Now this is also AN ONLY TRUTH in Jesus! The Bible and the GOD OF THE BIBLE is the ONLY HOLY GOD THAT MAKES YUO ONE WITH HIM HERE ON EARTH!!!! There is ust no BETTER GOD in any other religion!

Jesus Christ IS GOD, and He showed how we can live when HE GIVES US HIS WILL! All we need to do, IS WANT IT! Want it so bad, that we will GIVE OUR SELVES UP TO BE LIKE HIM... What a GREAT GOD Christ Jesus is... the Muslim ALLAH falls WAY SHORT. The Athiest NO GOD falls way short. The Buddah and Hindu and and and and FALLS WAY SHORT...

BEST DEAL ON THE TABLE.... FATHER I WANT THEM TO BE PERFECTLY ONE, AS YOU ART IN ME AND I IN YOU... The LORD JESUS CHRIST.... AMEN!