Atheists do Not Exist?

[GuessWho]

Read your responses to my posts. I've mirrored your attitude and euphemisms. So if I was being rude, it was giving you back what you gave me. I personally have nothing against you, I don't know you.

I don't have nothing personally against you either. I just called stupid your claim that man made the physical laws. I didn't called you stupid. But your claim. I agreed with you that your wording was very bad. And you didn't liked that.

I am not here to pump people's pride. I am on this forum because I want to present a version of God that Americans (whether christians or not) are not very familiar with. If they find useful my comments, very good. If they find my understanding unorthodox or wrong, than I wait for them to explain what's wrong.

I've specifically tried to address your concerns and even gave you the benefit of any doubt and told you what you believe about god is accurate with Christian beliefs. This statement you've made about me is simply not true.

If you really understood than you would not have asked me about other religions gods. But you asked.

You speak of me not wanting to learn Christian beliefs (which I held for 20+ years) and yet when I ask a questions about Christian beliefs it becomes an issue?

It's not an issue at all to ask questions. It annoys me that you don't understand what I wrote. I felt really happy in sharing my thoughts because I felt very inspired and those thoughts came into my mind like a sort of revelation. Someone compared believing in God with believing in leprechauns and although I always thought the comparison to be retarded, I was never really able to put the finger on it. And on Saturday it happened! It's like in the cartoons when a little bulb is lit over your head.

I was finally able to understand the retardation of the comparison to its fullest, and understand better God.

You can't possibly know what is like when you say something and the other person doesn't even listen to what you say because it's too preoccupied with what he/she is going to say next. That's how I feel you read me.

Don't judge atheists to be intellectually dishonest. If you don't like your beliefs getting questioned, then don't respond to me.

You see? That's what I was talking earlier. Weirdest dialogue ever. And the worse part is that you still don't get it and you'll probably continue to post in the same spirit.

 

[GuessWho]

So Hinduism, being the oldest religion still being practiced today, would then be the true religion? In the evolution of religion we see polytheistic religions (Egyptian gods n' such) eventually being replaced with monotheistic religions. However, a lot of concepts are borrowed and reused from the different religions.
You know god to be real through personal experience, then you know why you do. I have conversations with people who are willing to be questioned. I apologize if you're reading my conversations with people and it makes you uncomfortable. I wouldn't try to challenge you about your faith unless you specifically addressed me. Feel free not to respond to my post, I don't take it as any type of victory for me.

Again. You see? I already addressed the hindu gods and the Egyptian gods etc. in my first post to you. All the atheist cliches have already been addressed.

Do I need to copy-paste the part when I talk about the big difference between pagan gods and the Christian God, or can you find it alone?

I will post it again.

 

[JackTheHatter]

Nope! God said it HIMSELF. Atheist do not exist! Just prideful humans who want their sin and want to be their own god.

Romans 1:18-20


18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.…

Proverbs 1:7
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.

So if there is a loving atheist family, interested in being good members of society and helping their community they are only atheist because "they love their sin"? What if you want to be a good person and do good for others but you don't believe in a god or any of the religions today, does this automatically make them a bad person?

 

[JackTheHatter]

Again. You see? I already addressed the hindu gods and the Egyptian gods etc. in my first post to you. All the atheist cliches have already been addressed.

Do I need to copy-paste the part when I talk about the big difference between pagan gods and the Christian God, or can you find it alone?

I will post it again.

I took this from your post.
"Although all ancient religions had intuitively presupposed a god they could not go beyond the natural world. None of the pagan gods are actually supra-natural. The pagan gods are either natural/created elements such as sun, moon, storm, trees, stones, individuals (the greek pagan gods), that religious people divinized, either combination of natural elements (lion with human head, for example)."
But I don't know that this accounts for some of the most famous borrowed concepts, like virgin birth or rising from the dead.
I did not find exactly where you discussed Hinduism and it's relation to the timeline of religious history. So if it's in the quotes and you remember where, feel free to re-post and I'll address it.

 

[GuessWho]

So if there is a loving atheist family, interested in being good members of society and helping their community they are only atheist because "they love their sin"? What if you want to be a good person and do good for others but you don't believe in a god or any of the religions today, does this automatically make them a bad person?

That's what happens when someone grows up in a catholic family. They think christianity is a moral teaching. And that's it. God became man to tell us to be good kids on Sunday. And that's it. Then the intelligent atheist asks himself "hey can't I be a moral person without God? Do I need a God to tell me to not murder? Am I that barbarian or what?".

 

[GuessWho]

I took this from your post.
"Although all ancient religions had intuitively presupposed a god they could not go beyond the natural world. None of the pagan gods are actually supra-natural. The pagan gods are either natural/created elements such as sun, moon, storm, trees, stones, individuals (the greek pagan gods), that religious people divinized, either combination of natural elements (lion with human head, for example)."

But I don't know that this accounts for some of the most famous borrowed concepts, like virgin birth or rising from the dead.
I did not find exactly where you discussed Hinduism and it's relation to the timeline of religious history. So if it's in the quotes and you remember where, feel free to re-post and I'll address it.

Hindus don't have pagan gods or what?
Paganism is worship of nature, deification of nature, cosmos, of the created world.

Edit: they are not supra-natural.

 

[JackTheHatter]

I don't have nothing personally against you either. I just called stupid your claim that man made the physical laws. I didn't called you stupid. But your claim. I agreed with you that your wording was very bad. And you didn't liked that.

I am not here to pump people's pride. I am on this forum because I want to present a version of God that Americans (whether christians or not) are not very familiar with. If they find useful my comments, very good. If they find my understanding unorthodox or wrong, than I wait for them to explain what's wrong.



If you really understood than you would not have asked me about other religions gods. But you asked.



It's not an issue at all to ask questions. It annoys me that you don't understand what I wrote. I felt really happy in sharing my thoughts because I felt very inspired and those thoughts came into my mind like a sort of revelation. Someone compared believing in God with believing in leprechauns and although I always thought the comparison to be retarded, I was never really able to put the finger on it. And on Saturday it happened! It's like in the cartoons when a little bulb is lit over your head.

I was finally able to understand the retardation of the comparison to its fullest, and understand better God.

You can't possibly know what is like when you say something and the other person doesn't even listen to what you say because it's too preoccupied with what he/she is going to say next. That's how I feel you read me.



You see? That's what I was talking earlier. Weirdest dialogue ever. And the worse part is that you still don't get it and you'll probably continue to post in the same spirit.

I read what you said about how you see your god. I wanted to know how you came to those conclusions. I get that you think comparing god to a leprechaun seems absurd because you're saying that god is beyond any of our preconceived concepts, so a comparison can not be made. You say that god is not of our world and therefore can not be experienced in a tangible sense. He created everything but is not present to be studied like other natural forces. I'm intentionally not using your exact words because this is what I took from what you said. My concern with all of this comes in when I wonder, how have you established that something so unfathomably intangible by humans is in fact the god you profess? Do you take your facts from the bible? if so, do you believe that the bible is literally true?

 

[JackTheHatter]

That's what happens when someone grows up in a catholic family. They think christianity is a moral teaching. And that's it. God became man to tell us to be good kids on Sunday. And that's it. Then the intelligent atheist asks himself "hey can't I be a moral person without God? Do I need a God to tell me to not murder? Am I that barbarian or what?".

You criticize my family upbringing, as though you were there and know anything about it. You are intentionally rude to drive home the point that you don't like my definition. You call ideas and concepts retarded. Tell me more about what it means to be Christian?

 

[JackTheHatter]

Hindus don't have pagan gods or what?
Paganism is worship of nature, deification of nature, cosmos, of the created world.

Edit: they are not supra-natural.

The point I was making with Hinduism was that age of religion doesn't automatically imply validity. Not about what gods they do or do not believe in.

 

[GuessWho]

I read what you said about how you see your god. I wanted to know how you came to those conclusions. I get that you think comparing god to a leprechaun seems absurd because you're saying that god is beyond any of our preconceived concepts, so a comparison can not be made.

Thank you! Yes, I am saying that comparing God to a leprechaun is very absurd because the very nature of God does not allow you to imagine Him. We all have more or less an image of what a leprechaun is. Why? Because it comes from the imagination of a people/or person and that person is capable to describe it. The leprechaun is the product of your creative imagination.

But no one ever has imagined God! Because that would be limiting Him. When Moses asked God who He was, God replied "I am that I am". Also, Moses knew God not because of his creative imagination, but because God revealed Himself to Him. The only way you can know God is if He reveals Himself.

Catholics have represented God as an old man. Although the image of a grandparent may appeal to sentimentalist people, this representation is a visual blasphemy and harmed very much the western mind and imagination.

You say that god is not of our world and therefore can not be experienced in a tangible sense. He created everything but is not present to be studied like other natural forces. I'm intentionally not using your exact words because this is what I took from what you said. My concern with all of this comes in when I wonder, how have you established that something so unfathomably intangible by humans is in fact the god you profess? Do you take your facts from the bible? if so, do you believe that the bible is literally true?

God is the Creator of the world, He is not the same thing with the world He created (He is not the sun, or a cow, or tooth fairy or another finite creature/creation).
Yes, you can't say "hey look, there's god, waiting for the bus".

I haven't established nothing. I choose to believe Jesus Christ. I choose to believe the Apostles (who rather died than deny the unique events they witnessed), I choose to believe the monks who experienced the grace (uncreated energy) of God.

 

[GuessWho]

You criticize my family upbringing, as though you were there and know anything about it. You are intentionally rude to drive home the point that you don't like my definition. You call ideas and concepts retarded. Tell me more about what it means to be Christian?

Being christian means saying that 2+2 equals 4.

 

[HQ]

My position is that we currently don't have solid evidence to say how the universe initially came into existence and to presuppose an answer before we have the evidence would be dishonest.

Fair enough. But noone here is stating anything as fact. We all put forth evidence for our positions and others can take it or leave it.

My point with regard to atheists (in the true sense of the word) is that they too have a faith based position but operate as if they have some sort of scientific high ground. They don't. We can all look at the science and evidence and draw our own conclusions.

 

[JackTheHatter]

Fair enough. But noone here is stating anything as fact. We all put forth evidence for our positions and others can take it or leave it.

My point with regard to atheists (in the true sense of the word) is that they too have a faith based position but operate as if they have some sort of scientific high ground. They don't. We can all look at the science and evidence and draw our own conclusions.

What is the faith base of the position? You are absolutely right that science is for everyone, it's a process that we all use to learn about our world.

 

[JackTheHatter]

Thank you! Yes, I am saying that comparing God to a leprechaun is very absurd because the very nature of God does not allow you to imagine Him. We all have more or less an image of what a leprechaun is. Why? Because it comes from the imagination of a people/or person and that person is capable to describe it. The leprechaun is the product of your creative imagination.

But no one ever has imagined God! Because that would be limiting Him. When Moses asked God who He was, God replied "I am that I am". Also, Moses knew God not because of his creative imagination, but because God revealed Himself to Him. The only way you can know God is if He reveals Himself.

Catholics have represented God as an old man. Although the image of a grandparent may appeal to sentimentalist people, this representation is a visual blasphemy and harmed very much the western mind and imagination.



God is the Creator of the world, He is not the same thing with the world He created (He is not the sun, or a cow, or tooth fairy or another finite creature/creation).
Yes, you can't say "hey look, there's god, waiting for the bus".

I haven't established nothing. I choose to believe Jesus Christ. I choose to believe the Apostles (who rather died than deny the unique events they witnessed), I choose to believe the monks who experienced the grace (uncreated energy) of God.

Do you feel like Christianity is a unified group with specific beliefs/ideals that are to be accepted by all who call themselves Christian? Or do you think that Christianity is entirely personal where the beliefs and ideals are open to individual interpretation?

 

[GuessWho]

Do you feel like Christianity is a unified group with specific beliefs/ideals that are to be accepted by all who call themselves Christian? Or do you think that Christianity is entirely personal where the beliefs and ideals are open to individual interpretation?

If christianity was entirely personal, opened to individual interpretation than ... what would christianity be? I mean, how could you identify the christian teachings and faith if every person who called herself a christian would say the opposite of the other one who calls herself a christian?

It's clear that it is absurd. But unfortunately, it happens a lot today. People who are parallel with christianity call themselves christians based on their personal interpretation of the Bible (for example).

Christianity is ecclesia, church, community of people who confessed the same faith even with the cost of their lives. The first christians were jews who accepted Jesus Christ as the Messiah based on His resurrection. They evangelized the gentiles (non-jews) who also accepted Jesus Christ as Messiah...and so on.

 

[JackTheHatter]

If christianity was entirely personal, opened to individual interpretation than ... what would christianity be? I mean, how could you identify the christian teachings and faith if every person who called herself a christian would say the opposite of the other one who calls herself a christian?

It's clear that it is absurd. But unfortunately, it happens a lot today. People who are parallel with christianity call themselves christians based on their personal interpretation of the Bible (for example).

Christianity is ecclesia, church, community of people who confessed the same faith even with the cost of their lives. The first christians were jews who accepted Jesus Christ as the Messiah based on His resurrection. They evangelized the gentiles (non-jews) who also accepted Jesus Christ as Messiah...and so on.

Why do you think people are taking it upon themselves to decide what aspects of the bible to follow? Do you think this trend will continue or eventually reshape modern Christianity? Finally, do you think there are ideas proposed in the bible that should be revised or discarded?

 

[GuessWho]

Why do you think people are taking it upon themselves to decide what aspects of the bible to follow? Do you think this trend will continue or eventually reshape modern Christianity?

Not only they decide what aspects to follow, but some people completely miss the point of the Bible and of christianity (Church). An example that comes to mind are the Jehovah's witnesses, the mormons, the adventists. These are extreme examples because in their cases, they discredit even the Bible, not only the Church. As to why do people do this? There are a lot of possible answers: deceit from the devil, ignorance, stupid pride, deliberate lie and scam to take the money from naive people who follow their false teachings etc. etc.

I don't really care if this trend will continue or not (probably it will, especially in USA and in Latin America) and how it reshape "modern christianity".

Finally, do you think there are ideas proposed in the bible that should be revised or discarded?

No, I don't.
I think Bible should be understood in its right context.

 

[HQ]

What is the faith base of the position?

Of whose position?

 

[JackTheHatter]

Of whose position?

What is the faith base of an atheist?

 

[JackTheHatter]

Not only they decide what aspects to follow, but some people completely miss the point of the Bible and of christianity (Church). An example that comes to mind are the Jehovah's witnesses, the mormons, the adventists. These are extreme examples because in their cases, they discredit even the Bible, not only the Church. As to why do people do this? There are a lot of possible answers: deceit from the devil, ignorance, stupid pride, deliberate lie and scam to take the money from naive people who follow their false teachings etc. etc.

I don't really care if this trend will continue or not (probably it will, especially in USA and in Latin America) and how it reshape "modern christianity".




No, I don't.
I think Bible should be understood in its right context.

The bible takes a lot of heat, especially from atheists who like to reference it (as I'm sure you know). One of the biggest issues people take with the bible are the rules and actions of god in the old testament. I've heard people in the past say that Jesus came to change the old ways but in Matthew 5:17-18 Jesus is quoted as saying
"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill." "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished"

How do you feel about the old testament? When you read it, do you ever take any issue with anything god does or says? Do you think knowing and practicing the laws in the old testament is crucial to what it means to be Christian?

(I know I have a ton of questions, but I think we are finally having a dialogue rather than simply arguing over semantics like before)