I can see that these beliefs give you comfort, but they are not stories that I believe. I see things very differently. The story of Christ’s sacrifice does not persuade me. I think something else was actually going on. I don’t believe in God so the death of Jesus on the cross could not, in my mind, be a human sacrifice; but that is another story, and it is a long one.
-
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.
Not all atheists would claim to know 100% that God cannot exist. At the risk of getting into trouble I will admit to being such a person, but in my experience most take Dawkins' view:
“Let us, then, take the idea of a spectrum of probabilities seriously, and place human judgements about the existence of God along it, between two extremes of opposite certainty. The spectrum is continuous, but it can be represented by the following seven milestones along the way.
1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung, ‘I do not believe, I know.’
2. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. ‘I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.’
3. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism. ‘I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.’
4. Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. ‘God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.’
5. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. ‘I don’t know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be sceptical.’
6. Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. ‘I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.’
7. Strong atheist. ‘I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung “knows” there is one.’
Further on Dawkins writes, “I count myself in category 6, but leaning towards 7....” (The God Delusion, p. 50-51)
Regarding his category 7 Dawkins further says, “I’d be surprised to meet many people in category 7, but I include it for symmetry with category 1, which is well populated.... Atheists do not have faith; and reason alone could not propel one to total conviction that anything definitely does not exist.” (The God Delusion, p. 50-51)
So there you have it. Dawkins thinks there should be very few atheists representing category seven.
Not all do. Ask the atheists you meet whether they are a 6 or a 7 on Dawkins religious scale.
The reason each person becomes an atheist is very often different every time. You might think we all lose faith for the same reason, but we don’t. If you want to know you have to ask. Don’t guess. Your guess will most likely be wrong.
Actually, I think that is exactly what happened.
I have proved it to my own satisfaction.
Another way to put your argument is to say that a negative cannot be proven, but there is another way to go about this. You may not be able to disprove the existence of a god, such as Quetzalcoatl, but you can ask yourself whether you have any reason to believe in him. Do you have any reason to believe Quetzalcoatl is a real being? Are you, like me, 100% convinced he does not exist? If you do believe in the reality of this god then for the sake of argument choose another in whose existence you do not believe. Once you have found such a god then perhaps you will grasp my rational even if you are not in a position to accept the certainty of my doubt.
It is true that science does not disprove God. Science is not in that business. My position on this is probably the same as most atheists. While science does not disprove God, the scientific arguments, for many of us, remove the necessity of God.
This is only the beginning of the 21 century. Don’t assume that those things you consider problematic today will be without answers tomorrow.
What evidence is there of this invisible force? HeIsRisen, this may only be wishful thinking on your part.
I am glad you are reasonable enough to accept the existence of atheists. I won’t speak for all atheists, only for myself, but I can tell you I have never seen evidence of God, and in the absence of evidence my belief simply faded away. I wouldn’t have you believe in Quetzalcoatl without reason and I hope you can see that for the atheist, in the absence of evidence, it is reasonable not to believe.
“Let us, then, take the idea of a spectrum of probabilities seriously, and place human judgements about the existence of God along it, between two extremes of opposite certainty. The spectrum is continuous, but it can be represented by the following seven milestones along the way.
1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung, ‘I do not believe, I know.’
2. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. ‘I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.’
3. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism. ‘I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.’
4. Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. ‘God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.’
5. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. ‘I don’t know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be sceptical.’
6. Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. ‘I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.’
7. Strong atheist. ‘I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung “knows” there is one.’
Further on Dawkins writes, “I count myself in category 6, but leaning towards 7....” (The God Delusion, p. 50-51)
Regarding his category 7 Dawkins further says, “I’d be surprised to meet many people in category 7, but I include it for symmetry with category 1, which is well populated.... Atheists do not have faith; and reason alone could not propel one to total conviction that anything definitely does not exist.” (The God Delusion, p. 50-51)
So there you have it. Dawkins thinks there should be very few atheists representing category seven.
Not all do. Ask the atheists you meet whether they are a 6 or a 7 on Dawkins religious scale.
The reason each person becomes an atheist is very often different every time. You might think we all lose faith for the same reason, but we don’t. If you want to know you have to ask. Don’t guess. Your guess will most likely be wrong.
Actually, I think that is exactly what happened.
I have proved it to my own satisfaction.
Another way to put your argument is to say that a negative cannot be proven, but there is another way to go about this. You may not be able to disprove the existence of a god, such as Quetzalcoatl, but you can ask yourself whether you have any reason to believe in him. Do you have any reason to believe Quetzalcoatl is a real being? Are you, like me, 100% convinced he does not exist? If you do believe in the reality of this god then for the sake of argument choose another in whose existence you do not believe. Once you have found such a god then perhaps you will grasp my rational even if you are not in a position to accept the certainty of my doubt.
It is true that science does not disprove God. Science is not in that business. My position on this is probably the same as most atheists. While science does not disprove God, the scientific arguments, for many of us, remove the necessity of God.
This is only the beginning of the 21 century. Don’t assume that those things you consider problematic today will be without answers tomorrow.
What evidence is there of this invisible force? HeIsRisen, this may only be wishful thinking on your part.
I am glad you are reasonable enough to accept the existence of atheists. I won’t speak for all atheists, only for myself, but I can tell you I have never seen evidence of God, and in the absence of evidence my belief simply faded away. I wouldn’t have you believe in Quetzalcoatl without reason and I hope you can see that for the atheist, in the absence of evidence, it is reasonable not to believe.
Why is natural selection, a principle recognized by creationists, taught as ‘evolution’, as if it explains the origin of the diversity of life? By definition it is a selective process (selecting from already existing information), so is not a creative process. It might explain the survival of the fittest (why certain genes benefit creatures more in certain environments), but not the arrival of the fittest (where the genes and creatures came from in the first place). The death of individuals not adapted to an environment and the survival of those that are suited does not explain the origin of the traits that make an organism adapted to an environment. E.g., how do minor back-and-forth variations in finch beaks explain the origin of beaks or finches? How does natural selection explain goo-to-you evolution?
My parents were Christian, my school had regular Bible readings, we said the Lord's Prayer, and we were given religious instruction from a bona fide Protestant minister in grade eight. I attended Sunday school and church until the age of twelve. I've taken courses in Old and New Testament studies at university and one of my profs told me he would support me should I choose to peruse a masters degree in theology. A cousin, who is a United Church minister, told me the same thing. I am not approaching Christianity from a point of ignorance. However, to provide you with a rundown of my views would require a lengthy post. I would say, though, that I have come to rest in the camp of Robert Eisenman. I gravitated to him, not because I was persuaded by his arguments, but because I discovered in him views I had come to on my own accord. There are an extensive series of his university lectures on YouTube if you are interested. The first one: Christian Origins can be found at the following link: Christian Origins 1.1 Paul and James Robert Eisenman - YouTube
S
You may have been raised in Christian household, attended both church and Sunday school, even taking theological studies at a university; I can confirm that those things don't make a person any more than a lost sinner. I say that because those things don't necessarily make you a Christian. Even learning about it only doesn't help you understand it unless you are truly changed by it. You will find many in the church that have once been atheists, that once been skeptical, that once thought that what we preach is nothing more than nonsense. I do not exclude those raised in the church, but a lot of Christians come from every background. You must believe us that it is a change, not just a conversion. Many people may be converted to Christianity, but an actual Christian must be born again. We really don't take lightly this statement, even I can tell you that I once was skeptical but now been humbled in my criticism.
You have heard that parable that Jesus told us that there is four kinds of seeds. Some fell beside the road and the birds came and ate them up. Some fell on rocky places where there wasn't much soil; they sprang up immediately, but because it wasn't deep in the soil the sun came out and scorched it and it withered. Some fell among thorns, and the thorns came up and choked them out. The others fell on good soil and it yielded a crop, some hundred fold, some sixty, and some thirty.
Which of these seeds would you personally believe you might fall in? A reminder, the first is when the gospel is preached to these people it immediately is taken from their heart because of the devil. The second represents the gospel being preached to these people and they received it with joy at first, but because they weren't firm in the Word when persecution and afflictions came they fell away. The third represents the gospel being preached to these people and they hear it, but because they have the worries of the world the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word they become unfruitful. The fourth represents those who hears the Word and understand it and bears fruit of hundred fold, some sixty, and some thirty.
Which of these seeds would you personally believe you might fall in?
You have heard that parable that Jesus told us that there is four kinds of seeds. Some fell beside the road and the birds came and ate them up. Some fell on rocky places where there wasn't much soil; they sprang up immediately, but because it wasn't deep in the soil the sun came out and scorched it and it withered. Some fell among thorns, and the thorns came up and choked them out. The others fell on good soil and it yielded a crop, some hundred fold, some sixty, and some thirty.
Which of these seeds would you personally believe you might fall in? A reminder, the first is when the gospel is preached to these people it immediately is taken from their heart because of the devil. The second represents the gospel being preached to these people and they received it with joy at first, but because they weren't firm in the Word when persecution and afflictions came they fell away. The third represents the gospel being preached to these people and they hear it, but because they have the worries of the world the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word they become unfruitful. The fourth represents those who hears the Word and understand it and bears fruit of hundred fold, some sixty, and some thirty.
Which of these seeds would you personally believe you might fall in?
You all also know that rejection by other people is a common human experience. Much rejection that we experience is subtle and even silent and make take place outside of our presence. Some also feel rejected by God or at least that is their perception. Rejection can be an experience not easily forgotten.
As prophesied by Isaiah approximately 800 years before it happened (Isa 53:3-4), Jesus the Messiah experienced rejection. All of his apostles and disciples abandoned Him when he was arrested. Peter denied Him three times. Only John the Apostle was there at the foot of the cross.
The rejection of Jesus as foretold by Isaiah is remembered in movement #23 of Handel's Messiah.
Link: Worship Map Lyrics:Handel's Messiah (text)
Handel's Messiah is a magnificient piece of music by George Frideric Handel that presents a variety of aspects from the Bible upon the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. It conveys a variety of fulfilled and yet unfulfilled prophecies concerning Jesus the Messiah.
As prophesied by Isaiah approximately 800 years before it happened (Isa 53:3-4), Jesus the Messiah experienced rejection. All of his apostles and disciples abandoned Him when he was arrested. Peter denied Him three times. Only John the Apostle was there at the foot of the cross.
The rejection of Jesus as foretold by Isaiah is remembered in movement #23 of Handel's Messiah.
Link: Worship Map Lyrics:Handel's Messiah (text)
Handel's Messiah is a magnificient piece of music by George Frideric Handel that presents a variety of aspects from the Bible upon the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. It conveys a variety of fulfilled and yet unfulfilled prophecies concerning Jesus the Messiah.
Eisenman has been heavily involved in important developments in the study of early church history including the Dead Sea Scrolls, James ossuary, James the half-brother of Jesus, the Essenes as well as textual criticism of the NT canon. Cycel, thank you for the introduction and again advancing my education.
I understand your reasons for unbelief, believe me, they run through my head more than I'd like to admit. Jesus said that no man has seen God except for him. So I would say that it's reasonable to conclude based on what Jesus said, although some would disagree, that no Christian can say they know with 100% certainty that God does exist. This is where our faith comes in, Jesus says blessed is he who has not seen and yet have believed.
You may see this as delusion, but just as you, each person who believes have also been presented with a satisfiable amount of evidence to believe what they do. Some it's taken very little, and some people have had to witness what they would call a miracle to come to Christ, but we all have our reasons for belief and unbelief.
I can't prove God to you or anybody, and it doesn't seem that God feels He has to prove Himself or everybody would be a believer. God reveals himself to those who believe and don't believe. All I can do is share my experience, hope, love and compassion with others and let them see a part of God in me.
You may see this as delusion, but just as you, each person who believes have also been presented with a satisfiable amount of evidence to believe what they do. Some it's taken very little, and some people have had to witness what they would call a miracle to come to Christ, but we all have our reasons for belief and unbelief.
I can't prove God to you or anybody, and it doesn't seem that God feels He has to prove Himself or everybody would be a believer. God reveals himself to those who believe and don't believe. All I can do is share my experience, hope, love and compassion with others and let them see a part of God in me.
Last edited:
J
You are absolutely right. In the end it does come down to faith.
I read something interesting last night.
"And the peace of God, which passes all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus" (Philipians 4:7).
the Christian that has faith and peace doesn't need to understand everything. They know God is real in their hearts and "proof" or "evidence" is not nessecary, because of what they have already received in their hearts.
Like DoseofReality told me, I believe because I have faith, not because Biblical prophecy, miracles, or testimonies prove God to me, they just simply support what I already believe.
I read something interesting last night.
"And the peace of God, which passes all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus" (Philipians 4:7).
the Christian that has faith and peace doesn't need to understand everything. They know God is real in their hearts and "proof" or "evidence" is not nessecary, because of what they have already received in their hearts.
Like DoseofReality told me, I believe because I have faith, not because Biblical prophecy, miracles, or testimonies prove God to me, they just simply support what I already believe.
. What made you turn to God?I think this is a little unfair.
Firstly, Cycel has provided you with, as requested, a breakdown of his education in biblical literature in addition to a list of witnesses who would referee as to his understanding of the texts. As the Christian faith is based upon the words of the bible. To derive understanding from text requires a combination of academic study and, depending upon the nature of the text, appreciation through performance in the vocal medium. This can be dramatical, like in preaching or analytical. However, dramatic interpretation adds a layer which may or may not have been wished by the author. Think about the works of William Shakespeare. He wrote his played to be performed, not read. He included limited directions as to how certain aspects should be portrayed and performed. But no such instructions exist in the bible. Therefore, an element of subjective, artistic license much be applied by the preacher. I work in theatre and have heard an amazing actor read a wine list and have every person in earshot hanging on every powerful word which emanated from his performance. Was this the power of the written word or the power of the performance?
Secondly, to say you have not understood the gospel unless they have had a profound effect on you, this is a self defeating argument, for if there is understanding to be gleaned beyond the 2 methods listed above, this would require a spiritual faith. If one does not have that faith, then one can not ever gain said faith by reading said gospels, as to be gain faith requires influence, influence requires understanding, understanding requires faith..... etc....etc. ad infinitum, et nauseum! Those of us who have been raised within a Christian education, Christian home life and Christian community can not be accused of ignorance when it comes to matters biblical. We have been exposed, analysed, assessed and been found to be wanting. My Ancestors include people of great faith, including a prestigious evangelical preacher Christmas Evans, but for my generation, my sister and I, we have decided that we can not believe in something as fantastical as some of the tales of the bible anymore than we can believe in any of the Gods of History any more than we could believe the words of Harry Potter or drawer upon divine influence in the evangelical preaching of a wine list.
As to why we as atheists are here, please do search the history of this board on the forum as it has come up and been explained umpteen times. Needless to say, it is with good reason and good intent.
Firstly, Cycel has provided you with, as requested, a breakdown of his education in biblical literature in addition to a list of witnesses who would referee as to his understanding of the texts. As the Christian faith is based upon the words of the bible. To derive understanding from text requires a combination of academic study and, depending upon the nature of the text, appreciation through performance in the vocal medium. This can be dramatical, like in preaching or analytical. However, dramatic interpretation adds a layer which may or may not have been wished by the author. Think about the works of William Shakespeare. He wrote his played to be performed, not read. He included limited directions as to how certain aspects should be portrayed and performed. But no such instructions exist in the bible. Therefore, an element of subjective, artistic license much be applied by the preacher. I work in theatre and have heard an amazing actor read a wine list and have every person in earshot hanging on every powerful word which emanated from his performance. Was this the power of the written word or the power of the performance?
Secondly, to say you have not understood the gospel unless they have had a profound effect on you, this is a self defeating argument, for if there is understanding to be gleaned beyond the 2 methods listed above, this would require a spiritual faith. If one does not have that faith, then one can not ever gain said faith by reading said gospels, as to be gain faith requires influence, influence requires understanding, understanding requires faith..... etc....etc. ad infinitum, et nauseum! Those of us who have been raised within a Christian education, Christian home life and Christian community can not be accused of ignorance when it comes to matters biblical. We have been exposed, analysed, assessed and been found to be wanting. My Ancestors include people of great faith, including a prestigious evangelical preacher Christmas Evans, but for my generation, my sister and I, we have decided that we can not believe in something as fantastical as some of the tales of the bible anymore than we can believe in any of the Gods of History any more than we could believe the words of Harry Potter or drawer upon divine influence in the evangelical preaching of a wine list.
As to why we as atheists are here, please do search the history of this board on the forum as it has come up and been explained umpteen times. Needless to say, it is with good reason and good intent.
S
Deepthought, simply knowing about Jesus doesn't do anything for even the demons are so...
Faith is not merely knowing, it's trusting what is presented. A man can grow up in the faith, but if he is led astray was he saved? You have read in the scriptures that Jesus gives eternal life to those who believe; eternal life isn't temporary, it's eternal. God doesn't take away something eternal, or else it isn't eternal. So if a man fell away from belief in Christ, what was his foundation? There is so many people who come back to faith in truth because they knew that they need it personal.
Plus there is 53 pages, I do not think or wish to read all of them so I apologize for that.
Faith is not merely knowing, it's trusting what is presented. A man can grow up in the faith, but if he is led astray was he saved? You have read in the scriptures that Jesus gives eternal life to those who believe; eternal life isn't temporary, it's eternal. God doesn't take away something eternal, or else it isn't eternal. So if a man fell away from belief in Christ, what was his foundation? There is so many people who come back to faith in truth because they knew that they need it personal.
Plus there is 53 pages, I do not think or wish to read all of them so I apologize for that.