-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I would agree with you that self righteous condemning Christians, wars in the name of religion, money misused by religious organizations, children harmed by religious leaders, Christians misrepresenting God and the like do not make sense.
But what does make sense to me is John 3:16 & 17 which states. For God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world but that the world through Him might be saved.
Please reconsider your position towards God... It is we humans who do the misrepresenting not God Himself. God is a God of Love and He has more than proven that fact in sending His Son to save a sin sick world. Make no mistake GOD LOVES ALL OF YOU.
Almighty God is a God of Love but also a God of Justice. Excellence of character requires that He be full of both love and justice.
God loves righteousness and hates iniquity (sin, wickedness, etc.). See Psalm 45:7, Hebrews 1:9. Almighty God has many excellent attributes and love is one but justice is another. It is good to communicate the whole story and all the attributes of God.
God loves righteousness and hates iniquity (sin, wickedness, etc.). See Psalm 45:7, Hebrews 1:9. Almighty God has many excellent attributes and love is one but justice is another. It is good to communicate the whole story and all the attributes of God.
This is looking worryingly like a resolution!! 
Then by this account, can we accept that Atheists do exist and do no harm to others of faith-whatever by the decision or existence? If they do no intentional ill unto others, and we are wrong and there is a god, he would love them and as such so should those who believe, and if there is not it wouldn't matter to anyone apart from the society within which they exist. Good grief, peace in our times!
This resolution Phil
Then by this account, can we accept that Atheists do exist and do no harm to others of faith-whatever by the decision or existence? If they do no intentional ill unto others, and we are wrong and there is a god, he would love them and as such so should those who believe, and if there is not it wouldn't matter to anyone apart from the society within which they exist. Good grief, peace in our times!
This resolution Phil
D
Atheists claim to disbelieve in God yet they hang out at Christian venues all the time. Its like a hobby for them.
If politics meant nothing to you then you would not hang out in political forums, right?
If they really disbelieved in God they would not care to post here or debate with Christians.
If politics meant nothing to you then you would not hang out in political forums, right?
If they really disbelieved in God they would not care to post here or debate with Christians.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think this is an invalid comment. This topic has come up time and time again but here we go again:
There are people on both sides of the belief divide who investigate and ask questions. From Scientists (both christian and atheist) and biblical scholars and archaeologists. Further more, these people tend to have a very human desire to understand the world around them. Whether this is within the worlds of mythology or science the motivations are the same. To accept something without asking any questions is not faith, it is walking blind. Now I had a religious upbringing and education. Religion, it never made sense to me, even though for those early years, the education I had implied there was no choice. Needless to say I discovered there was a choice that made more sense to me. To be a part of a community where questioning things is not regarded as a sin was beyond liberating. So, to this day, that need to understand maintains. I can;t understand why people can't see clearly the logical universe that I and many others perceive. Ho you do not need religion or faith to be a good person. So to attempt to understand, here I am.
There are people on both sides of the belief divide who investigate and ask questions. From Scientists (both christian and atheist) and biblical scholars and archaeologists. Further more, these people tend to have a very human desire to understand the world around them. Whether this is within the worlds of mythology or science the motivations are the same. To accept something without asking any questions is not faith, it is walking blind. Now I had a religious upbringing and education. Religion, it never made sense to me, even though for those early years, the education I had implied there was no choice. Needless to say I discovered there was a choice that made more sense to me. To be a part of a community where questioning things is not regarded as a sin was beyond liberating. So, to this day, that need to understand maintains. I can;t understand why people can't see clearly the logical universe that I and many others perceive. Ho you do not need religion or faith to be a good person. So to attempt to understand, here I am.
Sorry for the repost but I ran out of time to edit my original post:
The question is invalid but a philosophical debate is not an attack. It is merely an invitation to question the things around you and confirm your confidence in the topic. Debate is a democratic process and any system which puts itself beyond debate is acting as an intellectual, social and spiritual dictatorship. Secondly, to accuse a group of people who do not believe in a mythological deity of being followers of another is a bit silly! Finally, the topic of why we are on here has come up many times before.
The question is invalid but a philosophical debate is not an attack. It is merely an invitation to question the things around you and confirm your confidence in the topic. Debate is a democratic process and any system which puts itself beyond debate is acting as an intellectual, social and spiritual dictatorship. Secondly, to accuse a group of people who do not believe in a mythological deity of being followers of another is a bit silly! Finally, the topic of why we are on here has come up many times before.
I think here is a classic example of the unobtainable absolute and borderline arrogance which causes people to want to debate. There is no way that this can be known by any human. Hoped? Yes of course. Desired? Very much so. But known? No. As a result, should it be questioned? In my eyes, of course. Furthermore, this frequesntly quoted sentiment implies that the faith relies upon bribery or fear approach to establish and maintain it's following. Do what I say....live forever. Don't do what I say.... suffer forever.
Considering the beautiful sentiment by the young lady in the video it's a shame more of you don't follow her lead.
Considering the beautiful sentiment by the young lady in the video it's a shame more of you don't follow her lead.
Then by this account, can we accept that Atheists do exist and do no harm to others of faith-whatever by the decision or existence? If they do no intentional ill unto others, and we are wrong and there is a god, he would love them and as such so should those who believe, and if there is not it wouldn't matter to anyone apart from the society within which they exist. Good grief, peace in our times! | This resolution
| This resolution
It's brave to take a position and offer a resolution because you expose yourself to the risk of being critiqued. In my observation, many will critique the position of others readily while offering little or none of their own position to be open to being critiqued.
critique verb transitive
cri•tiqued; cri•tiqu•ing 1751 : to examine critically : REVIEW 〈critique the plan)
Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc.
As some have said: the only way to avoid criticism is to say nothing, do nothing and be nothing.
How, exactly, do you imagine this will happen? My great grandmother, the Jehovah's Witness, shared this same belief and my aunt remembered her father teasing his mother about this. Once, at the supper table, he suggested Jesus was waiting till everyone owned their own TV before returning. Her indignant reply was that Jesus wouldn't need televisions for everyone to see his return. Was she right? How will Jesus make himself known to all the world?
Of course I know how both of you came to this belief, for it is written, “Behold, he is coming with the clouds! Every eye shall see him, and among them those who pierced him; and all peoples of the world shall lament in remorse. So it shall be. Amen” (Rev. 1:7 NEB).
I recognize that most versions translate ‘peoples’ as ‘tribes’. So possibly tribes is closer to the original meaning, though now-a-days there are not so many tribes anymore. I would point out that the author of Revelation includes ‘those who pierced him’ among future witnesses of his return. I suspect this may mean those who drove in the nails as well as he who thrust his spear in Christ’s side. I believe this shows the author expected Christ would return during the lifetime of those who placed him on the cross, unless you prefer to demonstrate otherwise?
I would ask you to explain how, “Every eye shall see him, and among them those who pierced him” if this event occurs two thousand years after their deaths?
Of course I know how both of you came to this belief, for it is written, “Behold, he is coming with the clouds! Every eye shall see him, and among them those who pierced him; and all peoples of the world shall lament in remorse. So it shall be. Amen” (Rev. 1:7 NEB).
I recognize that most versions translate ‘peoples’ as ‘tribes’. So possibly tribes is closer to the original meaning, though now-a-days there are not so many tribes anymore. I would point out that the author of Revelation includes ‘those who pierced him’ among future witnesses of his return. I suspect this may mean those who drove in the nails as well as he who thrust his spear in Christ’s side. I believe this shows the author expected Christ would return during the lifetime of those who placed him on the cross, unless you prefer to demonstrate otherwise?
I would ask you to explain how, “Every eye shall see him, and among them those who pierced him” if this event occurs two thousand years after their deaths?
Thank you for your kind reply. I would consider myself a pretty poor (nay hypocritical!) skeptic were I not willing to open myself to the position of criticism. I make no offer of absolute, but merely an opinion to be shared or refuted. On a personal level, though I do deny conflict between people of our differing stances, I prefer a possibility of a peaceful coexistence . A simple being that I am
. A simple being that I am
Thank you for your kind reply. I would consider myself a pretty poor (nay hypocritical!) skeptic were I not willing to open myself to the position of criticism. I make no offer of absolute, but merely an opinion to be shared or refuted. On a personal level, though I do deny conflict between people of our differing stances, I prefer a possibility of a peaceful coexistence . A simple being that I am
. A simple being that I am