It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Christians, some concensus please.

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on May, 3 2010 @ 11:38 PM
reply to post by Trexter Ziam

Would you place your personal views closer to pantheism or panentheism?

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 12:04 AM
reply to post by silent thunder

After a quick, very brief surveyal of your posted links (thank you for those!) I'm inclined to say both AND neither. My understanding combines a few elements of both, and rejects a few elements of both.

He IS personal, in that he is within and without. (within you and outside of you)

He is personal in that he answers prayer (in a manner of speaking) for those who have infallible, unshakeable faith - though - it's not in the way most perceive. There's no division. Perhaps, "I think, therefore I am" might fit here; but, no, nevermind, that doesn't explain what I'm trying to say here either. So, the answer to the prayer actually comes from within.

It's like an emulsifier of sorts. Eventually, the two are so entertwined that there is no separation.

Though this is NOT the "I am God" mentality of SOME egoists, Luciferians, Pagans, Satanists and pseudo-atheists.

While we are a product of His, our makeup includes an infitesimally small portion of Him (spirit energy).

I'll read your links in depth more.

Gee! You all (edit: add word "ask") some tough questions.

[edit on 4/5/2010 by Trexter Ziam]

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 01:18 AM

Originally posted by Loken68
I can't debate an atheist for the simple fact that none exist.

In science you must be able to prove facts or a subject or belief will stay at the hypothesis stage. Your idea that there is no God will not float simply because you have nothing to back up your suppositions. And in this we have to end this thread for there is no debatable material that you can apply.

I've already declared myself a Christian, but I'd just like to add that I'm also a former atheist.

The common Christian attempt to prove that atheists don't exist by manipulating definitions irritates me even now.

In any case, the very most you demonstrate in your argument is that atheists ought not to exist, which is not the same thing.

[edit on 4-5-2010 by DISRAELI]

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 01:29 AM
reply to post by Maddogkull

To debate the existence of the Christian god though, that would be a good debate!

I would remind Kull of a quote. "Moses God, is God"

Pharoah of Egypt. During the Exodus.

I agree with this.

In any case, the very most you demonstrate in your argument is that atheists ought not to exist, which is not the same thing.

This is why.

You have likely heard that it is impossible to prove that God exists. You have heard wrong. Not only can the existence of God be proven, denying the proof undermines rational thought. It is true that God does not need anyone, let alone me, to prove His existence.The existence of God is so obvious that we are without excuse for denying it. No one needs proof that God exists.

No one needs proof that God exists.

[edit on 4-5-2010 by randyvs]

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 04:12 PM
As should have become clear, a consensus on what or who god is is impossible, even when working with a group united by common principles. But it is not just god that suffers from subjectivity in its definition; try to get people to a consensus on what the universe is, what the mind is, what existence is.

Everything beyond what is regarded as perceivable is impossible to define objectively. The trick is finding what is beyond perception and what is not.

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 04:42 PM
God cannot be defined.

There are only descriptions of personal experiences, descriptions of how God has influenced people that have exposed themselves, taken the chance of faith, demanded the promises written.

God declared that He is the definition of Good.

Good is a very narrow path when considering. Beyond humanities capabilities and defying description.

Consider this, were you to be able to fully describe God wouldn't you have be one to know one?

Describing one person could seem infinitely complex; if you know yourself.

People are people and our languages can never fully define God.

Debating or coming to a (Christian) consensus... Might only be defined by describing what (our comparatively, tiny minds comprehend) Jesus was like. That's already written elsewhere.

Not attempting to be rude. Most people know that I'm extraordinarily rude. To define God is to expose yourself to allow God to define himself in you (and your actions.)

The instant you think that God is a wimp ... God Help You.

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 06:34 PM

Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by Loken68
I can't debate an atheist for the simple fact that none exist.

The common Christian attempt to prove that atheists don't exist by manipulating definitions irritates me even now.

I'm sorry I was speed reading and only went by the original op. I didn't see where you stated you were a Christian, but only the part where you said you were a atheist.

There are no atheist by true terms. To be an atheist you would have to show proof that there is no God by scientific means. We could go down the list but it would be a waste of time. However I will give you a thought if you would like one.

I call upon John 4:24
"God is a Spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth."-Jesus Christ The Son of God.

Now for a true "Atheist" to be able to provide undeniable scientific proof that this statement is false and that Jesus is a liar and there is no God, he would have to do the following.

1. The "atheist" would have to find away to become spiritual to the point to where he could conduct test.
2. The "atheist" would have to approach the subject of study to test theory.
3. The "atheist" upon approaching test subject would have to undergo certain changes to test targeted test subject.

And so on and so on. However I believe that there is an alternate route in which the "atheist" could test theory without ever following these steps. And yes it remains within the realms of science.

1.The "atheist" can continue at same pace "denial" and just go to the end and die. Then he\she could test subject.

There will be no atheist in the end. There however will be some agnostics who would like a second chance.

[edit on 4-5-2010 by Loken68]

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 06:42 PM
This was my first thought,

The LORD Speaks
Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:

"Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?

Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.

"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.

Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?

On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone-

while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels shouted for joy?

"Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,

when I made the clouds its garment
and wrapped it in thick darkness,

when I fixed limits for it
and set its doors and bars in place,

when I said, 'This far you may come and no farther;
here is where your proud waves halt'?

"Have you ever given orders to the morning,
or shown the dawn its place,

that it might take the earth by the edges
and shake the wicked out of it?

The earth takes shape like clay under a seal;
its features stand out like those of a garment.

The wicked are denied their light,
and their upraised arm is broken.

"Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea
or walked in the recesses of the deep?

Have the gates of death been shown to you?
Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death ?

Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth?
Tell me, if you know all this.

"What is the way to the abode of light?
And where does darkness reside?

Can you take them to their places?
Do you know the paths to their dwellings?

Surely you know, for you were already born!
You have lived so many years!

"Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
or seen the storehouses of the hail,

which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?

What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?

Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a path for the thunderstorm,

to water a land where no man lives,
a desert with no one in it,

to satisfy a desolate wasteland
and make it sprout with grass?

Does the rain have a father?
Who fathers the drops of dew?

From whose womb comes the ice?
Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens

when the waters become hard as stone,
when the surface of the deep is frozen?

"Can you bind the beautiful Pleiades?
Can you loose the cords of Orion?

Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons
or lead out the Bear with its cubs?

Do you know the laws of the heavens?
Can you set up God's dominion over the earth?

"Can you raise your voice to the clouds
and cover yourself with a flood of water?

Do you send the lightning bolts on their way?
Do they report to you, 'Here we are'?

Who endowed the heart with wisdom
or gave understanding to the mind ?

Who has the wisdom to count the clouds?
Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens

when the dust becomes hard
and the clods of earth stick together?

"Do you hunt the prey for the lioness
and satisfy the hunger of the lions

when they crouch in their dens
or lie in wait in a thicket?
Who provides food for the raven
when its young cry out to God
and wander about for lack of food?

posted on May, 5 2010 @ 03:28 AM
reply to post by Loken68

My point was simply that;

Just as a Christian is defined by the fact that he believes in Christ-
and can still be a Christian even if he cannot prove to others that Christ is there.

So an atheist is defined by the fact that he has no belief in a god
and can still be an atheist even even if he cannot provide logical proof that there is no god.

This is what I meant when I said that your argument doesn't demonstrate that atheists don't exist. It only demonstrates ,at the most, that atheists ought not to exist. Which is not the same thing.

I've never quite understood why some Christians feel this need to prove that atheists are not what they claim to be. Having said that, it isn't just Christians. I remember, in my atheist days, having preciely the same argument with an agnostic room-mate at college. If it is meant, in the Christian case, to be a way of persuading the atheist to start believing in God, I'm pretty sure it doesn't work.

Incidentally, I'd better add that my remark about "irritation" wasn't really my feeling about your own post. I was just remembering my reaction when somebody,once, was stubbornly taking that line in a Biblestudy group.

Also, to clear up another possible confusion;
Although I reacted to your earlier post, I'm not the OP.
The OP really is an atheist.

[edit on 5-5-2010 by DISRAELI]

posted on May, 6 2010 @ 06:08 AM
N.B., both believers and unbelievers: It would be highly pompous, pretentious, presumptuous, and downright preposterous for me to actually attempt to speak for any other human on this board, never mind the entire community of the faithful. So please consider the use of the word "we" in the following strictly as a rhetorical trope -- perhaps a sort of "court-jesterly-we" as opposed to an acutal "royal we," to badly mangle an irresistible metaphor.


Dear OP, Atheists, and other assorted Unbelievers of ATS and everywhere else,

We, the community of the ATS Faithful, hereby confess.

You've got us. There is, in fact, a secret consensus on the nature of the Almighty.

Yes, despite two millennia of heresy, schism, internecine dispute, and downright violence -- from the gruesome martyrdoms of the early church to the Albegensian crusade to the current uneasy standoff in North Ireland -- it has all been an elaborate hoax. Underneath it all, as you have correctly guessed, there is a sooper-dooper secret consensus. From Augustine of Hippo's monumental simultaneous frontal attack on 80 different heresies to the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, all these centuries the secret consensus has stood firm. From the Gnostics to the Borobites to the Cathars and Adamites...all an elaborate put-on.

To make it more convincing, we tossed out bodies to the Roman lions, splintered the Orthodox, Nestorian, and Coptic churches from the Church of Rome, and then went on to sunder the Catholics and the Protestants. Nor did the fun stop there. To further convince you, we shattered the fragile Calvinist and Lutheran traditions into myriad of separate churches. From the stoic Pilgrim Fathers and the sober presbyters to the Quakers, Shakers, and Amish...all these micro-differences...all to fool you into not suspecting a consensus.

We also, simultaneously, despite our differences, worked together to feed, clothe, and hospitalize centuries of the earth's wretched, and tirelessly spread the Good News to the four compass points: all to further confuse you. Two thousand years of proselytizing, pontificating, polemicizing, prognosicating, and downright begging you to accept the Word: All a ruse, to create an elaborate false-front to hide the true secret consensus.

Why? Maybe its just been our way of having a prank at the expense of the dour, humorless atheists. Or maybe not. Since you all have figured out everything else about the cosmos, we'll leave you to figure that out as well. It shouldn't be hard for you.

But I digress as usual.

At any rate, it seems all our efforts have been in vain. You, dear atheists, have called us out.

Therefore, in a spirit of pure humility and universal ecumenicalism, we are now prepared to reveal the secret consensus regarding the nature of the Divine.

We ask just one, teeny-tiny favor first: Since we spent 2,000 years creating an intricate facade of deception that you have punctured like a grubby balloon, please provide us with a small token of your sincerity and goodwill before we reveal our consensus.

It is truly a small thing we ask of you. We would like to know your consensus on a certain matter.

Again, most humbly and in the deepest spirit of brotherly love, we would not presume to ask you, the "winners" of the argument, any of the "big" questions, such as the origin of the universe, the nature of time, or even the fundamental outline of the Grand Unified Theory. No, our plea is much simpler and should be easy for you to toss off in an instant.

We simply want the atheist consensus on a single minor point regarding one single, small aspect of the physical universe. Moreover, we will even let you choose which question to answer.

That's right: We are going to give you *our* secret consensus on the nature of the most high, holy mysteries of the Godhead, which we've been keeping from you all these years. In return, as a mere gesture of good sportsmanship, we would like to know about the atheist consensus on one simple detail of physical reality.

Ontologically speaking, its a no-brainer. In return for your short answer, you get the true, definitive answer on the nature of the Infinite, Eternal, Unknowable, Infallible, and All-Loving Creator. To badly and baldly metaphorize yet again, its like trading the key to the local treehouse padlock for the master skeleton-key that unlocks the boardrooms of Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, the Fed, the Treasury, and the World Bank, say. (Actually, given the Infinite and Unfathomable nature of the Divine, it's so, so much more...yet please allow me to provide this wretched metaphor as the most meagre mere hint of a taste of an impossible comparison.)

Anyway, please select and answer any one of the following questions, and we will be happy to turn over our hidden consensus to you immediately thereafter.

1) What is the atheist consensus on the 90% of universal mass that appears to be so-called "dark matter?"

2) What is the atheist consensus on string theory? Good to go, or a counter-prank of your own? Many of us have been *dying* to know.

3) Perhaps we're being unfair. The above, while not infinite in scope, are pretty cosmic. So we'll lob you a soft ball: hmmm...let me think. Ah yes. Here's one I'm personally very curious about, and just round the corner from us in terms of distance. Please provide us with the atheist consensus on the Cydonia anomalies on the planet Mars.

Any of the above will do. Following your answer, we will provide you with the secret consensus you have so cleverly ferreted out from us.

Go ahead, take your time. We'll wait. (We're pretty good at waiting, you know.)

Yours in brotherly love,

The Unified and Completely All-Agreeing Community of ATS Faithful

[edit on 5/6/10 by silent thunder]

posted on May, 6 2010 @ 06:54 AM

Originally posted by silent thunder
In return, as a mere gesture of good sportsmanship, we would like to know about the atheist consensus on one simple detail of physical reality.

2) What is the atheist consensus on string theory?

A consensus on "how long is a piece of string?" would probably do.

posted on May, 6 2010 @ 07:14 AM
I'm not a member of any Christian corporate charter, but I do have a concept of God.

God is an expert in the areas of nuclear physics, law, economics, politics, health, sociology, education, biology, and military strategy.

[edit on 6-5-2010 by MKULTRA]

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 08:05 AM
you're unlikely to get a decent answer from any catholic/christian on this forum...most cant look past their own nose and dont even recognize islam/judaism etc is basically the same religion and same "God", just different interpretation. they are so stuck on the confines of their own translation/version of the holy book (which they hardly are able to interpret), that their faith has dwiddled and lost all meaning. God is not a person with a white beard sitting on a cloud, shaking his finger ferociously if you "disobey".

Every name in the bible is not a personal name, it is a concept. this is why reading the bible in any BUT the hebrew language is completely and utterly gematria & qaballah to discover the true meaning of what is being said and the truth shall be revealed to you.

so asking for a consensus of "god" amongst christians/catholics, is like asking what the sun looks like to a group of blind people. nomatter what they say, its not going to make much sense and every single one of them will have its "own" definition. Instead, give the blind man eyesight and he shall see the undeniable truth, and all of them shall speak of the same

havent you noticed how, from the 10 replies, all 10 of them basically differ and disagree? how can any of you profess to know GOD when you cannot agree on the basic premises?

if you want a working definition of God..choose the one that is reflected through the original essence and teachings of every religion..including christianity, judaism, islam, hinduism, buddhism, hermeticism, rosicrucianism, theosophy etc etc (because every religion DOES agree in essence and meaning. They speak of the same GOD)

The universe is in the MIND of the All, the universe is MENTAL
The microcosm of man and the macrocosm of the universe are ONE..AS Above, So Below, As Below, So Above..

Every Being is a part of GOD, the goal of existance is to find our way back to God (aka self-realization: realise that WE are GOD..all of us..GOD experiencing ITSELF)

this is the essence of every religion and every doctrine.

and every person of name in history has recognized this fundamental truth, including plato, pythagoras, aristotle, newton, ...


one last thing: It is true that Jesus is the way to GOD.
but so is mohammed, as a matter of fact..Every person himself has the potential to attain the consciousness of christ. (and become a true enlightened being)
that being said, there are various ways to self-realisation..the way of the Messiah is but 1.

[edit on 7-5-2010 by soul_of_light]

[edit on 7-5-2010 by soul_of_light]

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 08:30 AM
He is the Alpha an Omega! The Beginning and the End! None have been before Him and None will come after Him. He is the Birth of all knowledge, senses, and Spirit before any other. Without Him, there would be no us. Man, didn't you learn in college that there is now more proof of design than that science of random selection. Any man who can look upon this earth, then say 'there is no God' is a fool.

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 10:04 AM
reply to post by soul_of_light

powership has nothing to do with truth, what looks like happening is almost the opposition to what is really happening
because what objectively look like is false, logically all there is is nothing life, so since it looks as real things it means that they have a source that cant be but against truth life, and here where truth reality could be noticed like your true motivations in playing those movies god realize
showing how everyone end as a human being an opportunist consummer and that is all nothing about god experiencing himself, but true awareness driven from their wills to profit from powerful realisations life

it is like hollywood productions, if you have the budget and the will to realize something big you can find all kind of relative values that accept to give itself energy for it in exchange to something else like glamour and glory and a career in eternal life for every other chance

truth is always even where powers are all the sense of a place, like people the more they didnt know about god the more they were themselves means clearly, the more they knew about beyond and creations the more they became themselves means in accepting to play and aware of reality by being out free thinking their lives

like the image you can reach to realize by pushing ones in something while they dont see your hands and dont feel your presence, those persons would believe that they did what they meant there, but when you tell them in all different way how it is not, they are deceived but it cannot mean that you were them or them were you

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 10:21 AM
reply to post by imans

truth is positive realisations, powers are negative realisations from where powers kill freedom to be the source, and freedom is always the postive source
so the only fact positive is the will energy to end and finish the work story, so it is about one will only that is focusing on pretending something is there like an art object

truth is positive source result, from where if you do what you really enjoy doing then you accept that else would do what it enjoys doing, and the result would be of course absolute positive reality

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 10:25 AM
reply to post by imans

Are you a Christian?

...or is this an attempt to derail a thread?

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 10:35 AM
reply to post by jokei

what about you here, did the op assign you his representant judge on others contributions ? at least i wrote two clear posts replying on someone definition about god
but what did you do? you cannot mean anything by doing nothing

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 10:39 AM
reply to post by imans

um, imans, jokei is the one who wrote the OP. He wasn't assigned anything by the OP since he IS the thread starter.

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 10:40 AM
God: The Supreme Creator and life giver. The source from which everything everything exists, past, present, and future, who is not limited by time or space. He who is eternal and everlasting. He to whom we give account to at the end of days. God.

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in