athiests! why christianity?

reply to post by sirnex


You know what? i've been thinking about it and I dont see you and me coming eye to eye on this... so do the following.. you go ahead and believe that the old mozaic law still needs to be enforced and stone whoever decides to not honour saturday as sabbath and I will believe that Jesus is the only one who can provide salvation. You would do well to read matthew 21:42-45. I have given all evidence needed to show what I wanted to show. Its up to you wether you're willing to keep an open mind or stick to your beliefs... for one your arguments were not nearly enough to prove my point to be false...
I feel I've kept an open mind but like you are as well, I'm not convinced you've got a point

reply to post by sirnex


Just forget jesus, forget god, you have reality, you don't need fairy tales to keep you interested in life. It's as simple as that.

reply to post by the illuminator


Because, misery loves company and true christians are mostly bubbly because of faith and someone who isn't happy wil always try to make others unhappy like them. I am guilty of this myself, but, life is a learning process and Jesus encouraged all who believe in Him, to "strive for perfection." He didn't say we would reach it during our lifetime, only promised a white robe at the ressurection, but, trying to be perfect is the christian goal! Jesus was and is perfect and we are to be like Him. Once we make that decsion to be perfect, we are seen as OCD by some...lol. I love America and we are covered by His blood! This will be my first thread started on ATS! Look for it if ya like. buh bye!

reply to post by faceoff85


Dude, if you want to say Jesus did away with the old laws then quote a verse where he explicitly states he is throwing them out. None of your verses say this at all. It's like your saying "Well, obviously God and Jesus don't want me to stone disobedient children anymore So we'll dismiss Jesus affirming his belief in the OT laws and how he wasn't throwing them out and use a pre-existing commandment worded differently by Jesus as proof positive that God decided he was wrong with his old laws".

Hey, like I said, God knows what your doing... If you want to read into the bible whatever you want based upon your own personal beliefs rather than God's, go for it. Hell, I kinda hope the dude exists now so I can shake your hand in hell.

Don't forget either, he said most people were going to hell, so chances are your not one of the meek and I'll be seeing you anyhow.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by sirnex

 

Just forget jesus, forget god, you have reality, you don't need fairy tales to keep you interested in life. It's as simple as that.

Oh, I don't believe in the fairytales at all, I just like discussing them with those who do, especially when they don't properly understand the fairytales.

reply to post by sirnex


I'm starting to wonder if you even took the trouble of reading up on the verses I provided a couple of posts ago. Romans 10:4 EXPLICITLY states Jesus is the end of the law. remember that at the time this was said the mozaic law was in effect.
In return can you provide me with the verse where Jesus explicitly states that the mozaic law and the 10 commandments were still in effect

[edit on 9-5-2010 by faceoff85]

[edit on 9-5-2010 by faceoff85]

Originally posted by faceoff85
Romans 10:4 EXPLICITLY states Jesus is the end of the law.

Atheism is the end of the law.

Try it. You'll like it!

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

yeah but the trouble with that is that it would assure me and my kids of certain death... either cause of age or cause this world will be destroyed by humanity. on the other hand if I believe in what the bible teaches and live accordingly there is a chance me and my kids and a whole lot of others could live a lot longer. Is there really a need to think this over?

Why Christianity?

I think most atheists in the US are more than a little annoyed at having found that the word God was added to the Pledge of Allegiance by the Christians in 1954 ........

.....Wiki

"The phrase "under God" was incorporated into the Pledge of Allegiance June 14, 1954, by a Joint Resolution of Congress amending §7 of the Flag Code enacted in 1942."


I have not seen atheists attack Christianity itself any more than they attack other religions, but they do go for Creationists, and I can see why with their ridiculous beliefs and statements! Creationists want evolution to be scrapped in schools and replaced by the "God created everything in 6 days....the earth is 4000 years old ....etc etc" as fact!. I wouldn't want my kids brainwashed by this either! They seem a viable target for the Atheists to me since they are spouting nonsense with their supernatural ideology!

Set yourself up as a target, you will be shot down!

Peace

Originally posted by faceoff85
reply to post by sirnex

 

I'm starting to wonder if you even took the trouble of reading up on the verses I provided a couple of posts ago. Romans 10:4 EXPLICITLY states Jesus is the end of the law. remember that at the time this was said the mozaic law was in effect.
In return can you provide me with the verse where Jesus explicitly states that the mozaic law and the 10 commandments were still in effect

[edit on 9-5-2010 by faceoff85]

[edit on 9-5-2010 by faceoff85]

Read this about the verse you just posted. end of law?

As for your request, someone posted a link a page or two ago on Jesus' views of OT law.

I rarely criticize Christianity, except when I feel it's followers are being hypocritical, which happens on occasion.

One of my favorite comics on the subject was done by someone with a rather off kilter sense of humor:
Something*Postive

I'd recommend reading the entire storyline, but I'm not sure how the terms and conditions may reflect it, rather colorful comic.
it reflects a lot of the views of the people I've met who have become a bit disgruntled with Christianity over time.
While I'm no longer Christian, I was raised similar to Fred, the older character in the comic, and what most of Christianity is, well... what I was taught and what sems to be common are separate things.

In any case, I have my own problems with religion in general, nothing against Christianity itself particularly, aside form it's governing structure.

Originally posted by faceoff85
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

yeah but the trouble with that is that it would assure me and my kids of certain death... either cause of age or cause this world will be destroyed by humanity. on the other hand if I believe in what the bible teaches and live accordingly there is a chance me and my kids and a whole lot of others could live a lot longer. Is there really a need to think this over?

Both you and your kids, and everything living, is assured of certain death. The difference is whether you want to spend your time before that complying with ancient texts, fearing and worshipping the god of a bronze age, nomadic, genital mutilation tribe.

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by sirnex

 

Read this about the verse you just posted. end of law?

For one thats jacob and not Jesus, 2nd the mentioned bible verse is dependant on interpretation. since this is something what is hard to discuss I dont find it a valuable addition. in my point of view that part states quite niceley how a law wich is no longer in effect still aplies to daily conduct. something in the lines of the following example: thou shallt not kill. when this line as a law would be updated into a new law wich states thou shalt love thy brother like thouself does that mean since the old law is no longer valid you can go out and kill? nope since that would mean breaking the new law wich still incorporates the old law.
However the same could not be said about something more trivial like the animal-sacrifices. they had nothing to do with any form of conduct as they were simply a formality.

[edit on 9-5-2010 by faceoff85]

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

Both you and your kids, and everything living, is assured of certain death. The difference is whether you want to spend your time before that complying with ancient texts, fearing and worshipping the god of a bronze age, nomadic, genital mutilation tribe.

well Yuo can also look at it from another perspective.. Me trying to lead my live in a socialy acceptable manner. the bible's moral teachings, like the 7 virtue's would prove a nice and respectfull way to live your life wouldn't it?

And I think its quite common these days for a person to find a suitable way to live, how many people dont use shrinks to help them live their lives in a better fashion. I merely chose to use a book of wich I believe our creator inspired it. keeping in mind that I believe in a creator isn't it common sence to look up to him for guidance? after all (I believe) he created me so he'll probably knows best...

I'm also gonna reject the statement of me and my children be assured of death. revelations 21:1-5 gives a pretty detailed description of what gods intentions arer. no more death as well...

[edit on 9-5-2010 by faceoff85]

Originally posted by faceoff85

well Yuo can also look at it from another perspective.. Me trying to lead my live in a socialy acceptable manner. the bible's moral teachings, like the 7 virtue's would prove a nice and respectfull way to live your life wouldn't it?

Are you telling us that you actually need a book to tell you how to be an ethical and socially acceptable person? And that other people use "shrinks"?

You are aware that people can be entirely ethical, socially acceptable, decent, caring and kindhearted human beings without using religious texts as a prompt?

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Are you telling us that you actually need a book to tell you how to be an ethical and socially acceptable person? And that other people use "shrinks"?

You are aware that people can be entirely ethical, socially acceptable, decent, caring and kindhearted human beings without using religious texts as a prompt?

Wow were are you taking that from. All I meant to say that this is just how I do things. I think there are alot of ways to become ethical, socially acceptable, decent, caring and kindhearted human beings. But to become a christian you need a bible, to become a muslim you need the Qu'ran. did that clear things up?

I'm probably going to be called a hate monger for this (lol), but whatever that's the "problem" with Christians we don't sugar coat it we tell you "our truth".

If you are a Christian (OP) than you should already know why atheists attack Christianity the most. Its because satin hates god and if you are a Christian then he hates you, and satin will use any tool he can to try and destroy Christians (this is where I'm a hate monger) and if you are not of god you are of satin ,so atheists are satins tools whether that sounds horrible or not it's the truth ( in the Christian belief system).

you can't really come out and discuss this from an earthly standpoint and say it's because there's more of us or that atheists had crappy Christian parents ,so it made them bitter toward Christianity and made them devote their life to destroying Christianity.

none of it really matters anyways it's all been set in place you can say Christianity is false but look at the world around you society is collapsing, constant earth quakes, floods, implantable chips that have all your info/money on them, you have to watch everything you say or your evil, and to top it all off you wanted a bowl of cereal for breakfast , but you don't have any milk, and you already poured the cereal in to the bowl and the box is in the trash with old spaghetti all over it and you don't have any plastic wrap to cover the bowl but like that matters the bowls too big to put in the cupboard !!!!

Originally posted by SpectreDC
Agnosticism is the belief that we don't have the ability to firmly determine the existence or non-existence of deities. Feel free to point out which definition of atheism I proposed suggests that atheism is the belief that we can't know the existence/non-existence of a deity.

Right here.

originally posted by SpectreDC
An atheist could be someone who does not worship a god but does acknowledge the possibility of a god existing.

You see those little numbers? Those are called sources. They give links from which the knowledge put down on the site come from.

Uh huh and where is the link from the liguistics professor? Where is the link to the etymology of the word? Where is the link for anything having to do with how the word is defined? What you have is a bunch of references to it's USE. Unfortunately most people these days use the word "I" incorrectly and if you make your little wikipedia page based off of selections of USE you will be just as wrong as you are now. Why would anyone use wikipedia to define a word over a dictionary?

Obviously you have no clue how wikipedia works or how that definition was hobbled together. You can find all kinds of examples of people using words incorrectly. Wikipedia did a good job of using that as sources.

Do you want the sources from the section I linked instead?

# ^ Britannica (1992). "Atheism as rejection of religious beliefs". Encyclopædia Britannica 1: 666. 0852294735. www.britannica.com... Retrieved 2006-10-27.
# ^ d'Holbach, P. H. T. (1772). Good Sense. www.gutenberg.org... Retrieved 2006-10-27.
# ^ Smith 1979, p. 14.
# ^ Cudworth, Ralph (1678). The True Intellectual System of the Universe: the first part, wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted and its impossibility demonstrated.
# ^ See, for instance, "Atheists call for church head to retract slur". 1996-09-03. www.lds-mormon.com... Retrieved 2008-07-02.
# ^ Lowder, Jeffery Jay (1997). "Atheism and Society". www.infidels.org... Retrieved 2007-01-10.
# ^ a b Flew, Antony. "The Presumption of Atheism". The Presumption of Atheism and other Philosophical Essays on God, Freedom, and Immortality. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1976. pp 14ff.
# ^ Rowe, William L. "Atheism". Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward Craig (editor). Routledge: June 1998. ISBN 0415187060. 530-534.
# ^ Cline, Austin (2006). "Strong Atheism vs. Weak Atheism: What's the Difference?". about.com. atheism.about.com... Retrieved 2006-10-21.
# ^ Maritain, Jacques (July 1949). "On the Meaning of Contemporary Atheism". The Review of Politics 11 (3): 267–280. doi:10.1017/S0034670500044168. www.nd.edu...
# ^ Stevens, Robert (1813). Sermons on our duty towards God, our neighbour, and ourselves (4th ed.). London: Self published. pp. 10–11. OCLC 26059549. books.google.com... Retrieved September 1, 2009.
# ^ Bishop Burnet (1813). "Discourse of the Pastoral Care". The young minister's companion: or, A collection of valuable and scarce treatises on the pastoral office.... Boston: Samuel T. Armstrong. pp. 166. OCLC 7381237. books.google.com... Retrieved September 1, 2009.
# ^ Kenny, Anthony (2006). "Why I Am Not an Atheist". What I believe. Continuum. ISBN 0-8264-8971-0. "The true default position is neither theism nor atheism, but agnosticism ... a claim to knowledge needs to be substantiated; ignorance need only be confessed."
# ^ "Many atheists I know would be certain of a high place in heaven". Irish Times. www.irishtimes.com... Retrieved 2009-08-19.
# ^ Baggini 2003, pp. 30–34. "Who seriously claims we should say 'I neither believe nor disbelieve that the Pope is a robot', or 'As to whether or not eating this piece of chocolate will turn me into an elephant I am completely agnostic'. In the absence of any good reasons to believe these outlandish claims, we rightly disbelieve them, we don't just suspend judgement."
# ^ Baggini 2003, p. 22. "A lack of proof is no grounds for the suspension of belief. This is because when we have a lack of absolute proof we can still have overwhelming evidence or one explanation which is far superior to the alternatives."
# ^ a b Smart, J.C.C. (2004-03-09). "Atheism and Agnosticism". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. plato.stanford.edu... Retrieved 2007-04-12.
# ^ Cudworth, Ralph. The true intellectual system of the universe. 1678. Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. Bantam Books: 2006, p. 50. (ISBN 0-618-68000-4)
# ^ Rao, Goparaju (1972). Positive Atheism. Vijayawada, India: Atheist Centre, Patamata, Vijayawada, India.
# ^ Walker, Cliff. "The Philosophy of Positive Atheism". www.positiveatheism.org... Retrieved 2008-11-19.

There you go.

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!

You need to go through them.


[edit on 9-5-2010 by K J Gunderson]

Originally posted by faceoff85
All I meant to say that this is just how I do things.

Cool. To each his own. I was curious because I have encountered people online who actually stated that they absolutely could not be decent people without a fear of god and the adherence to religious guidelines. I found that disturbing.

reply to post by faceoff85

For one thats jacob and not Jesus, 2nd the mentioned bible verse is dependant on interpretation.

Uh... For one, you just gave me that verse as "proof" that the Mosaic laws were done away with by Jesus. For two, it's a mistranslation that led to that faulty belief. For three, there is a link someone posted within the last page or two with a plethora of verses quoting Jesus himself as still respecting Mosaic law.

Your argument is weak and sounds as if it's a tad dismissive.

Mosaic law was never abolished by Jesus who himself obeyed such law. There is no Messianic prophecy stating that the Messiah will abolish God's law. And if both you and I are going to point out mistranslations, then technically Jesus is not the Messiah as the Messiah was not supposed to be born of a virgin birth, one of the many reasons the Jews never excepted Jesus as the Messiah. God forewarns of false prophets. The Messiah wasn't supposed to usher in a new religion where it's adherents worshiped the Messiah over God, which breaks a few commandments as this worship is idol worship, which God specifically forbids.

Case in point, all you Christians are hell bound.