Religion
Ancient History
Christianity
Atheism
Responses: 13
4
4
0
When you are defined by what you do not believe you are only left to attack those that believe what you do not. It is an unfortunate position to be in but that is where many atheists are. Some handle it more gracefully than others. Some are on the attack trying to convince others their faith is wrong rather than being secure in their lack of faith in God.
Believers do not need to attack atheists, only present the gospel to them in some way. That is all we are commanded and expected to do. So Greg, if you are still reading: For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. I am sure those words are foolishness to you and you scoffed as you read them.
One day God may call you, but he may not. If he does, that call will be irresistible, just as it was for Saul on the road to Damascus. Saul who persecuted and tormented Christendom for most of his life was converted in a moment. I know it is possible because I have been in your shoes, perhaps not as virulent as you but a non believer and a doubter of God's existence and power. Your calling and salvation, should it happen, will not be your work but His. I hope that happens for your sake.
Believers do not need to attack atheists, only present the gospel to them in some way. That is all we are commanded and expected to do. So Greg, if you are still reading: For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. I am sure those words are foolishness to you and you scoffed as you read them.
One day God may call you, but he may not. If he does, that call will be irresistible, just as it was for Saul on the road to Damascus. Saul who persecuted and tormented Christendom for most of his life was converted in a moment. I know it is possible because I have been in your shoes, perhaps not as virulent as you but a non believer and a doubter of God's existence and power. Your calling and salvation, should it happen, will not be your work but His. I hope that happens for your sake.
(4)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
Capt Gregory Prickett - Greg, I am paying very close attention to what you write. My reading comprehension skills are well above average so don't attempt to patronize me by acting as though your writing skills are above my level of comprehension.
The two examples you used, you do not even believe. It is your opinion the two example you provided are more likely than a supernatural one only because you don't believe in God or the supernatural.
I did not make the argument Paul was as crazy as Schlosser. That is wholly disingenuous on your part. I only made the argument that you picking a clearly insane person as a counter argument was flaccid.
The entire "scientific" explanation of the universe and of human origins is not proven. They are theories that cannot be tested and proven. They are articles of faith of the secular humanist. You believe them because they are your counter argument to creation but you cannot prove them. The fact that you cannot prove your "scientific" theory is the same argument you use against the existence of God. Since it cannot be proven it must not be true. You can no more prove your theory on origins than I can prove to you God exists (scientifically). You believe what you do because it fits your world view not because it is proven.
You can read the pilgrims writings and story and they will tell you a different story that you are attempting to convey. The believed it was God that sustained them and tested them. There is no doubt their early relationship with the Wampanoag was pretty good although it did not remain that way. Their colony/settlement was the one that created the foothold for others to come and was the basis for many of the original settlements. You can deny it if you like but it is a fact. That does not mean everything they believed or did became codified in law or in our founding documents but their faith, perseverance and courage were the roots from which the Colonies that would become the United States began.
Finally, you may respond any way you like here on RP. I didn't challenge your "right to question others faith but asked who are you to question others faith. You have none, you practice no faith (except in scientific theories), you are not a believer but feel compelled to attack. I think if you hold the mirror up to yourself you will find many of your posts are antagonistic to those that believe in God in general and Christianity in particular. Perhaps I miss them but I do not see a bunch of posts directed at Atheists on RP. You mentioned an atheist page. I do not go there so I don't know what is there. I don't need to read what atheists write. Your arguments are as old as the hills. There is nothing new under the sun.
The two examples you used, you do not even believe. It is your opinion the two example you provided are more likely than a supernatural one only because you don't believe in God or the supernatural.
I did not make the argument Paul was as crazy as Schlosser. That is wholly disingenuous on your part. I only made the argument that you picking a clearly insane person as a counter argument was flaccid.
The entire "scientific" explanation of the universe and of human origins is not proven. They are theories that cannot be tested and proven. They are articles of faith of the secular humanist. You believe them because they are your counter argument to creation but you cannot prove them. The fact that you cannot prove your "scientific" theory is the same argument you use against the existence of God. Since it cannot be proven it must not be true. You can no more prove your theory on origins than I can prove to you God exists (scientifically). You believe what you do because it fits your world view not because it is proven.
You can read the pilgrims writings and story and they will tell you a different story that you are attempting to convey. The believed it was God that sustained them and tested them. There is no doubt their early relationship with the Wampanoag was pretty good although it did not remain that way. Their colony/settlement was the one that created the foothold for others to come and was the basis for many of the original settlements. You can deny it if you like but it is a fact. That does not mean everything they believed or did became codified in law or in our founding documents but their faith, perseverance and courage were the roots from which the Colonies that would become the United States began.
Finally, you may respond any way you like here on RP. I didn't challenge your "right to question others faith but asked who are you to question others faith. You have none, you practice no faith (except in scientific theories), you are not a believer but feel compelled to attack. I think if you hold the mirror up to yourself you will find many of your posts are antagonistic to those that believe in God in general and Christianity in particular. Perhaps I miss them but I do not see a bunch of posts directed at Atheists on RP. You mentioned an atheist page. I do not go there so I don't know what is there. I don't need to read what atheists write. Your arguments are as old as the hills. There is nothing new under the sun.
(0)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Cpl Jeff N. - no, the two examples of a natural explanation are more likely because there has never been a supernatural explanation with sufficient evidence. For the reason why we should accept naturalistic explanations over supernatural ones, see Randall S. Firestone, Naturalistic vs Supernatural Explanations: “Charting” a Course away from a Belief in God by Utilizing Inference to the Best Explanation, 4 Open J. of Phil. 281 (2014), at http://file.scirp.org/pdf/OJPP_ [login to see] 562354.pdf
Next, on the comparison of Paul to Schlosser, if one talks to god, they are praying. If god talks to them, they are schizophrenic. Why would you accept that god spoke to Paul, but not accept that god spoke to Mohammad, or Joseph Smith, or Michael Servetus, or Vissarion, or even Jim Jones (of 'drink the koolaid' fame)? Why should I accept that Paul was somehow different? Even today there are those who claim that Paul changed the message into something different than what Jesus taught. If he was guided by god, why has the church split up into over 40,000 sects, all with differing beliefs?
As to the Pilgrims, you do realize that they weren't the first group to colonize here, don't you? Jamestown was before them, and there was a settlement in Newfoundland well before Jamestown. The Pilgrims were just one of many, and secondary to the Virginia settlements, and if they were actually the foundation of our nation, then we would not have religious freedom. You see, while they wanted freedom to practice their religion, they had no problem in oppressing others who did not believe as they did.
Finally, I have never denied that my views were antagonistic towards religion. They are, because religion is generally harmful to society.
Next, on the comparison of Paul to Schlosser, if one talks to god, they are praying. If god talks to them, they are schizophrenic. Why would you accept that god spoke to Paul, but not accept that god spoke to Mohammad, or Joseph Smith, or Michael Servetus, or Vissarion, or even Jim Jones (of 'drink the koolaid' fame)? Why should I accept that Paul was somehow different? Even today there are those who claim that Paul changed the message into something different than what Jesus taught. If he was guided by god, why has the church split up into over 40,000 sects, all with differing beliefs?
As to the Pilgrims, you do realize that they weren't the first group to colonize here, don't you? Jamestown was before them, and there was a settlement in Newfoundland well before Jamestown. The Pilgrims were just one of many, and secondary to the Virginia settlements, and if they were actually the foundation of our nation, then we would not have religious freedom. You see, while they wanted freedom to practice their religion, they had no problem in oppressing others who did not believe as they did.
Finally, I have never denied that my views were antagonistic towards religion. They are, because religion is generally harmful to society.
UýMs¿5ï«7f¿YÎúçÅ=.ºÕÀ\Iý0ÍMÐ{ÐvY'óVÓ"$fè%míåòT)T{%!R-;"újë7Çipæß\BíV[úÇ0 Ig OE%)EÕÌ ÐdÉ9FrÆçoãÍÙ|Îl_u|ÆíàÓa|ßûì/;Ü;wAlócØ(Ýqjq.nG\x(â4vVè:ÁSç6 oø«Ès@ºÑaÆzâsC)Â7(f!OHä%xÈB$ò·"GîÝJâ6ÁSMRZ(]§4âÄPê%¿#ZRä.MyS{K¡R)Â=l,óWÃZæÇ=8-éÄó|,OÇçâ৷G=3&Ô?òx^ûçÄgæÕ[~ÈØúíG}By*Ù&NQb)O5î!{S;FÍ+?@\8Z1ÔÒâGè1ÚNóëé[h6ªHÆ= :â.rÜ9ÊÚ5ÈYÅgîö72ÜqôtwĵÑÒUo¡Aõì \òµ(hB2ctB¿tcdl@*I/ÙàÀÐwºâJká'ÅOunÖJNµ·mÒ=Mö*GÖ'7Ðká-_Ï9Oq{êÝÈ.POÚ`Mpz_jQÇvôIÇ¿3A~Ö)âºíGk'á09Íá6âïYòÀX\CûÁ{àÎ...
(0)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
Capt Gregory Prickett - Sorry, been away for a bit and catching up.
The "scientific" explanation of the universe and origins are theories. You might want to look that word up. You must believe many things that cannot be proven (according to the scientific method) to accept the conclusion. I don't care that you believe those things but you can save the "more likely" description of these theories for someone else. They are more likely to you because they align with your world view not because they are any more provable than a creation theory.
Christians are commanded to pray to God. Doing so is neither unusual nor "crazy". If you believe God is physically speaking to you today and giving you very specific commands then you should canonize those commands so we can have them include in God's revealed word to us. God may act supernaturally (miracle) in his creation as he likes. It is His, of course, to do so. I do not subscribe to the idea that God is speaking directly (audibly or otherwise) to people today. God may put things on people's heart and they may feel he is calling them to do something but that us different than "God spoke to me and said XYZ etc."
I fully know the Pilgrims were not the first to settle here but they were the most successful settlement and lead directly to many of the settlements that formed our colonies. You can try to deny the direct line back to the settlements at Plymouth if you wish that does not make it true. They were very devout Christians and their mission, like all Christians, is to preach the word and convert others to their faith through the word.
As for the 40,000 sects question, the answer is very simple. This is the division in the Church over human interpretation of scripture.
The "scientific" explanation of the universe and origins are theories. You might want to look that word up. You must believe many things that cannot be proven (according to the scientific method) to accept the conclusion. I don't care that you believe those things but you can save the "more likely" description of these theories for someone else. They are more likely to you because they align with your world view not because they are any more provable than a creation theory.
Christians are commanded to pray to God. Doing so is neither unusual nor "crazy". If you believe God is physically speaking to you today and giving you very specific commands then you should canonize those commands so we can have them include in God's revealed word to us. God may act supernaturally (miracle) in his creation as he likes. It is His, of course, to do so. I do not subscribe to the idea that God is speaking directly (audibly or otherwise) to people today. God may put things on people's heart and they may feel he is calling them to do something but that us different than "God spoke to me and said XYZ etc."
I fully know the Pilgrims were not the first to settle here but they were the most successful settlement and lead directly to many of the settlements that formed our colonies. You can try to deny the direct line back to the settlements at Plymouth if you wish that does not make it true. They were very devout Christians and their mission, like all Christians, is to preach the word and convert others to their faith through the word.
As for the 40,000 sects question, the answer is very simple. This is the division in the Church over human interpretation of scripture.
(0)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Cpl Jeff N. - A theory is as high as you can get in science, and it does not have the colloquial meaning that most non-scientists believe that it does. It absolutely does not mean that you must believe in things unproven, that's faith, not the scientific method. BTW, the "creation theory" is not a theory as far as science is concerned, it is at most a hypothesis, the bottom rung of the scientific method. As a noted atheist once said, the scientific theory of evolution has earned its doctorate, and creation science is just starting kindergarten - and forgot its lunch...
If you believe that God is speaking to you in your brain, in an audible voice, that's schizophrenia.
The Pilgrims were not the most successful colony by any means, and I'm not trying to deny what they accomplished. One of my ancestors arrived on The Anne, the third ship (after the Mayflower and the Fortune). Another, John Proctor, was hung in Salem in 1692, for witchcraft. His wife would have been hung too, except she got a reprieve for being pregnant, and by the time she delivered the child the authorities had finally gotten enough sense to shut it down. I'm well aware of the history of the area, and to be frank, the Virginia Colony was formed earlier and proved much more successful than Plymouth Colony, which failed and had to be combined with the Massachusetts Bay Company to form a crown colony (Province of Massachusetts Bay). The Pilgrims never approached the success of the Virginians.
No, the 40,000 sects is an indication that god is not able to effectively communicate his message.
If you believe that God is speaking to you in your brain, in an audible voice, that's schizophrenia.
The Pilgrims were not the most successful colony by any means, and I'm not trying to deny what they accomplished. One of my ancestors arrived on The Anne, the third ship (after the Mayflower and the Fortune). Another, John Proctor, was hung in Salem in 1692, for witchcraft. His wife would have been hung too, except she got a reprieve for being pregnant, and by the time she delivered the child the authorities had finally gotten enough sense to shut it down. I'm well aware of the history of the area, and to be frank, the Virginia Colony was formed earlier and proved much more successful than Plymouth Colony, which failed and had to be combined with the Massachusetts Bay Company to form a crown colony (Province of Massachusetts Bay). The Pilgrims never approached the success of the Virginians.
No, the 40,000 sects is an indication that god is not able to effectively communicate his message.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google