CALLING ALL ATHEISTS TO A CHALLENGE!!!

  • 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.
R

Ramon

Guest
You totally took what I said out of context and seemingly didnt read the rest of it...

What I meant was that EVERYONE should be happy....or, if happiness isnt possible, atleast the easiest possible lifestyle should be the lifestyle of choice. Again, morality such as Don't kill eachother. Don't steal from eachother. The Golden Rule is good, so we'll keep that in there. Survival of the fittest is still very much around, except people dont really see it the same way. It's a bit more psychological. Any way you choose to look at it, the upper 1% still control the whole world. You have no rights really. If the government enforces a draft, you have to go or be imprisonated. Look at "The Partriot Act". Americans agreeing to sign away their rights...if there were ever any rights to begin with.

Anyway, all I meant was the morals that exist or obvious things that we should do in order to keep the peace with one another i.e. dont kill, dont steal, dont rape, etc....

If it doesnt hurt you, or anybody, it's not wrong TO ME.
Okay Michelle94, is rape wrong? I am sure you say yes. And I am sure you say stealing and killing is wrong.

Is lust wrong? Is coveting wrong? Is anger wrong?

If so, have you done these things? And if so, does that make you evil or good? Judge yourself.
 
A

Audball

Guest
I would just like to point out that you guys are going about it all wrong. You see, when stating your beliefs (and why they are correct) to an atheist, quoting Bible verses is useless. I know, it sounds horrible, but this is a situation in which it's true.

Atheists don't believe in God's authority (and sometimes flat-out deny His existence, though not always). So why in the world would they trust God's Word as a reliable source?? From their point of view, it's just a bunch of stuff made up to support the "fairytale". How do I know this? I used to subscribe to my (atheist PhD) father's thinking.

So give them real proof. Don't just quote the Word at them. It won't work.
 

Red_Tory

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2010
611
17
18
I don't think I've quoted any Bible verses.
 
A

AnandaHya

Guest
So give them real proof. Don't just quote the Word at them. It won't work.
true but God's word can help those talking to atheist remember that GOD is in control :)



Answers for Atheists and Agnostics

"A skeptic or atheist is governed by two main principles: 1) all beliefs must be supported by observational evidence, and 2) beliefs that contradict observational evidence cannot be tolerated. However, strong atheism states that there is no god, even though observational evidence indicates that the universe has a cause that cannot be detected observationally. So despite the lack of observational evidence for a naturalistic cause for the universe, the strong atheist believes that the universe has a naturalistic cause and that there is no god, contradicting the tenet that all beliefs should be based upon observational evidence"


Psalm 8:2-4 (New King James Version)


2 Out of the mouth of babes and nursing infants
You have ordained strength,
Because of Your enemies,
That You may silence the enemy and the avenger.

3 When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers,
The moon and the stars, which You have ordained,

4 What is man that You are mindful of him,
And the son of man that You visit him?
 
Feb 9, 2011
171
3
0
Okay Michelle94, is rape wrong? I am sure you say yes. And I am sure you say stealing and killing is wrong.

Is lust wrong? Is coveting wrong? Is anger wrong?

If so, have you done these things? And if so, does that make you evil or good? Judge yourself.

Lol, why have you guys not been reading my posts in it's entirety? If you had, you'd know that I said YES rape and killing/etc... is wrong...and I gave reasons to support my claim. Now, for your question...

Is lust/coveting/anger wrong? No. Of course not. It hurts no one. You could say "lust leads to rape!" Well, thats pure nonsense. And for anyone that it were true for, they clearly have other problems and should have counciling or possibly be hospitalized. No. Lust is not their problem. Coveting? Well, if you covet your neighbors items...thats a good thing. That keeps the money circulating. If your friend has a new (insert product here) and you are jealous, you go out and buy one and help the economy. And anger? It's good to let anger out. Pent up anger and aggression leads to all sorts of negative behaviour. If you get angry, you find good, healthy ways to release that anger. Anger is normal. And it is healthy. You cant be completely steril and live such a boring life. People get mad. It's all about how you deal with it.

I can be accused of all three and No I don't think there is anything wrong with it.
 
Feb 9, 2011
171
3
0
Are you sure I did? I'm taking the basis of morality that you propose to its extreme (i.e. logical conclusion).

You say that the fundamental basis of morality is to "keep the peace" within a society, but this naturally leads to the case in which we are faced with a situtation where something incredibly immoral must be done to keep the peace.

Essentially, the case is thus:

You establish that we have laws against murder, stealing etc. to promote social solidarity, which is often necessary for survival.

What happens when:

a) Prohibition of these activities no longer promotes social stability. A hypothetical society that is capable of existing in a state where murder is often regarded as acceptable or theft the norm (I say "hypothetical", but such societies have existed in the past, and I'd be willing to wager that some still do). Do they then become morally acceptable acts?


b) Overtly oppressive laws must be enacted or repressive social systems put into place to promote social solidarity. Society itself (typically the state) commits these activities in the name of social solidarity. Union-breaking, silencing demonstrations, political prisoners, a virtually endless list.
Or is the government incapable of committing murder/theft in the same way that an individual is?

You say that "If it doesnt hurt you, or anybody, it's not wrong TO ME", then cite "keeping the peace" within human societies as the fundamental basis for morality? Without natural law (Blackstone's concept, not your survival of the fittest), the sole source of authority in society - human or "animal" - is force. This is a huge idea in modern philosophy of law, it's referred to as the Monopoly on Violence.



tl;dr version:

If something fundamentally immoral or oppressive becomes part of a human structure designed to "keep the peace", does it automatically become morally right simply because it maintains social cohesion and stability?

Maybe I don't understand your arguement...I'll be the first to admit it if thats the case...but...your examples...they ARE what is currently in existence. Your "a" scenerio reminds me of Bin Laden. We killed him. In that particular case, certain rules are altered as needed. How about capitol punishment? We kill people all the time. It can be argued that Insurence companies steal from you (legally) all the time. The system is not perfect. And some things maybe should be changed....

I don't have all the answers. But my personal opinion is, as I said, I am extremely intolerant to intolerence. Everyone should mind their own business. Just because something exists, doesnt mean you have to partake in it. Like abortion or swearing on the radio...no ones forcing you to listen to it or to have an abortion. Or gay marriage. Marilyn Manson said something funny about that...it was something along the lines of "let them marry eachother. They will soon hate eachother and get a divorce anyway..some might even be turned straight after seeing what married life is like". Not an exact quote but it was similar. lol. People should have the freedom to buy or sell ANYTHING. Doesnt mean you have to join in.
 
A

AnandaHya

Guest
, I am extremely intolerant to intolerence. Everyone should mind their own business. Just because something exists, doesnt mean you have to partake in it. People should have the freedom to buy or sell ANYTHING. Doesnt mean you have to join in.
should they have the right/ freedom to sell children's bodies to be raped? should they have the freedom to harvest people's organs and sell them in the black market for the wealthy to live a few more years at the expense of the poor?

Hate to tell you but those crimes happen. should everyone just mind their own business?

I am a pretty tolerant person but there are some things I find intolerant and unacceptable. those are just two examples of what the world would be like if there was no morality or sense of rightness and justice God has innately given to every human being whether they "believe" in Him or not. kids have an innate sense of justice and fairness they are born with. if you treat two kids differently they will object, justices is an innate built in Godly thing.

I praise God that He gave people this blessing and standard of rightness and justice.
 
Last edited:

Red_Tory

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2010
611
17
18
Maybe I don't understand your arguement...I'll be the first to admit it if thats the case...but...your examples...they ARE what is currently in existence. Your "a" scenerio reminds me of Bin Laden. We killed him. In that particular case, certain rules are altered as needed. How about capitol punishment? We kill people all the time. It can be argued that Insurence companies steal from you (legally) all the time. The system is not perfect. And some things maybe should be changed....

I don't have all the answers. But my personal opinion is, as I said, I am extremely intolerant to intolerence. Everyone should mind their own business. Just because something exists, doesnt mean you have to partake in it. Like abortion or swearing on the radio...no ones forcing you to listen to it or to have an abortion. Or gay marriage. Marilyn Manson said something funny about that...it was something along the lines of "let them marry eachother. They will soon hate eachother and get a divorce anyway..some might even be turned straight after seeing what married life is like". Not an exact quote but it was similar. lol. People should have the freedom to buy or sell ANYTHING. Doesnt mean you have to join in.
Actually I was referring to societies that are relatively stable, yet murder/rape/theft are frequent and often regarded as normal activities. If a society is able to exist without directly prohibiting these things, then are they morally acceptable?

As for the Bin Laden issue, I assumed that by using the word "kill" you were referring to prohibitions against murder. There are those who would disagree with me, but I would not say that engaging enemy combatants. Don't want to be killed in a war? Don't bomb American warships and launch terrorist attacks. There are no laws against killing, there are laws against homicide; there's a difference.

At the same time, we must be wary of committing an is/ought fallacy; simply because it is the case that we are able to kill Osama or that insurance companies are able to steal from us, that does not imply that they/we ought to be able to.



As for this:

"because something exists, doesnt mean you have to partake in it. Like abortion or swearing on the radio...no ones forcing you to listen to it or to have an abortion."

Let's take this a step further.

You don't have to partake in something just because it exists. Take slavery as an example; nobody is forcing you to buy a slave.

Or better yet, why not tolerate intolerance? Nobody is forcing you to be intolerant.


See the objection?
 
R

Ramon

Guest
Lol, why have you guys not been reading my posts in it's entirety? If you had, you'd know that I said YES rape and killing/etc... is wrong...and I gave reasons to support my claim. Now, for your question...

Is lust/coveting/anger wrong? No. Of course not. It hurts no one. You could say "lust leads to rape!" Well, thats pure nonsense. And for anyone that it were true for, they clearly have other problems and should have counciling or possibly be hospitalized. No. Lust is not their problem. Coveting? Well, if you covet your neighbors items...thats a good thing. That keeps the money circulating. If your friend has a new (insert product here) and you are jealous, you go out and buy one and help the economy. And anger? It's good to let anger out. Pent up anger and aggression leads to all sorts of negative behaviour. If you get angry, you find good, healthy ways to release that anger. Anger is normal. And it is healthy. You cant be completely steril and live such a boring life. People get mad. It's all about how you deal with it.

I can be accused of all three and No I don't think there is anything wrong with it.
Ah, you see my friend. This is the error. If you believe Jesus Christ, you will know that these things are very evil. And if you have done any of them, you are in-fact evil. And Jesus testifies of this. Because Jesus has more knowledge than you do, even that the hearts of men are EVIL from birth. But now you justify yourself. Now it is clear.

The Lord sees, before murder, hate. The Lord sees, before rape, lust, even before adultery, lust. The Lord sees, before theft, coveting.

So, now I see that you worship another god, and not the true God. And you justify yourself in this. The eyes of the Spirit tries the hearts of man. And God has found no good in us. For this purpose Jesus had to die, to be our justification, cleansing us as if we had never sinned.

Jesus does not, however, care to win the war of the flesh, but of the heart. Once he deals with the heart then the flesh will become subject to him, by the Spirit of God. So, your righteousness is not good enough with God.

May Jesus bless you.
 
T

Tobby17

Guest
I think we are all constituting a nuisance to dis thread, going round d whole thing over and over again. Using d same circle. God exists, God doesn't exist. Let's relax and just watch. If u notice my earlier post where i was asking Forlorn questions, u will notice dat everything u scientists or atheist say to prove dat there is no GOD only goes ahead to prove d fact dat there really is a GOD. You will as well notice dat this atheist Forlorn couldn't answer my question. Because we christians are saying d *truth* and nothing but the *truth*
 
W

wolfywolfs

Guest
atheism.jpg i coldnt find one that say "we dont know about the begging yet so why argue" this will have to do
 
T

Timofree

Guest
Out of interest, whats the latest on where the space dust came from to cause the big bang. It takes a phoenomenal amount of faith to believe we came from nothing, and as much as I wanted to believe that as a non Christian, I could never get my head round it.........
 
W

wolfywolfs

Guest
Out of interest, whats the latest on where the space dust came from to cause the big bang. It takes a phoenomenal amount of faith to believe we came from nothing, and as much as I wanted to believe that as a non Christian, I could never get my head round it.........
whats the difference saying athesist saying we have more faith to belive we came from nothing when christian belive god came from nothing its pretty much the same thing
 
May 5, 2011
25
0
0
Ramon you reply is incoherent nonsense. If I have no way of knowing if Washington existed then how did you even know to ask about the first president. Obviously there are ways of knowing things. But you make claims about knowing things that make no sense. Please type your answers in a well thought out manor, so that they make sense.
 
R

Ramon

Guest
Ramon you reply is incoherent nonsense. If I have no way of knowing if Washington existed then how did you even know to ask about the first president. Obviously there are ways of knowing things. But you make claims about knowing things that make no sense. Please type your answers in a well thought out manor, so that they make sense.
Yeah, this is an attempt to dodge yourself. I will try to make it more simple. I will give you some trivia.

1) Who was the first man to land on the moon?

2) When did the first man land on the moon?

3) When was World War 2?

4) Is Adolf Hitler dead?

5) Who created the Assembly line?

Find the answers to these question yourself. Go back to the year he landed on the moon and watch him. Go back to WW2 and watch them land on the moon. Go ask Hitler if he is dead. Ask the guy who created the assembly line.

If this is how you get your information, then it is easy for you to say you know there is no God, since you would have first hand experience that God doesn't exist. Again, what did you know out of the womb that you were not taught? Or do you even know it? Or do you just believe what people say? If that is the case, then you have to have faith to believe in people.

We hear the reports of other men who have encountered God, and some believe and some don't. But I don't stop with men, who are more likely to lie than know the Truth, so I went and searched for him. And as surely as it was written: Seek and ye shall find, knock and the door will be opened,'' it was so. And not only that he revealed himself to me by power also, not that I needed it because I first had faith to believe in him, but he showed up in power to confirm my faith in him, that HE is the only one True God, and not these phonies people make up in the name of god. Go figure.
 
R

Ramon

Guest
Out of interest, whats the latest on where the space dust came from to cause the big bang. It takes a phoenomenal amount of faith to believe we came from nothing, and as much as I wanted to believe that as a non Christian, I could never get my head round it.........
Cause it is just plain silly. Furthermore they try to explain the complexity of humans with the same silly logic.
 
R

Ramon

Guest
whats the difference saying athesist saying we have more faith to belive we came from nothing when christian belive god came from nothing its pretty much the same thing
Because whether Atheist or Christian both are limited in knowledge. But God isn't. Do you think Christians know everything? NO!!!! NOT BY A LONG SHOT!! And anyone who does claim this is silly too. But it is not the same with us as with you, we know God is True, because as I said, he reveals himself to those who first humble themselves and seek him. He doesn't obey your commands as if he is your child, just as a Father wouldn't.

But you are limited to time, whereas the concepts of God exceed time. Because you have a beginning and an end, you are trapped in the sphere of time and chance. But God said, '' I AM THE ALPHA AND OMEGA.

Yet scientists continue to explore infinity, and they have almost done well, but not so well, because I know their ideas will change.

I took calculus in college, and this subject intrigued me (I was in school for Engineering). When we came to the part about infinity and holes, and limits.

It is funny how they think, rather brilliant but rather ignorant. Everything is based on what they know, not on what they don't know. So now we see the limit. If you have ever taken calculus, you know that they can presume the limit of a graph based on what it seems to be going to as x values get closer and closer to another x value. Like, ''The Limit as x approaches 2.''

Anyhow, enough calculus talk. Most science and math is derived with the pre-implication that God does not exist. So this is how you get, ''Matter can be neither created nor destroyed.'' But here is a limit, because that MEN cannot create and destroy matter, they say it CANNOT be created nor destroyed. LIMIT! And I will say, foolishness.