Jesus' Mission....

[Bucky Ball]

No, I've been around the atheist forums for over 10 years. And really did most of my tooth cutting
and dues paying early on. I don't bother debating the drive by anti's anymore. There is no point. 
I'm not here to butter my ego, or evangelize anyone.

You actually contradicted yourself later in your post. You said you "felt inspired" to bla bla bla.
Clearly, by what you posted, (that simplistic nonsense about "sin") you DID intend to evangelize the nonsense you learned somewhere.
The nonsense is a pretty cheap childish version of atonement theology ... and I suspect you are in no way an expert in any of the theological systems.
(You do realize, I hope, that positing that Jesus *had* to die in our place ... means that your deity is SUBJECT to the laws of the universe, and not their master. He could have just said "You're forgiven" if he were actually a real god, master of reality, ... not subject to it, or a merciful god). Spare us "but he's also a *just god*". The fact is, there is not a shred of evidence for a "fall from grace". Evolutionary Biology knows nothing about humans who were ever alive who did not die. The entire Christian salvation paradigm is built on a pile of rubbish and non-historical and unscientific crap. There was no Adam, no Eve and no Garden. We know the myths the writers of Genesis took those concepts from, (Babylon).

So no .... you didn't bring your Medieval witch cucking stool .... what you brought here was more ancient and far worse.
Ancient superstitions. 

So... you came here to tell (yourself ??) you're a busy man. Bully for your busyness. 
Some of our academic posts on TTA had 70,000 + hits, so you can stop congratulating yourself. 
We know more about your religion than you do, so you can spare yourself the trouble.
Perhaps you should spend your busy time telling your priests to keep their busy hands off the little boys.

Speaking of witches, if I have evidence for an event which has FAR FAR FAR more evidence for it than your resurrection or ANYTHING about your Jesus has for it, .... do you agree, UP FRONT to accept it as true ?

I do have such an event.
See next post.

[Bucky Ball]

I present to you a series of events that occurred in what is now, one of the United States of America.

The Governor of the state in question became involved.
A court was established.
Witnesses were carefully examined and cross-examined, by the best experts of the day.
Evidence was gathered.
Many people confessed in public to the officials of the court.
The entire proceeding was documented with thousands of sworn affidavits, court documents, interviews and related proceedings.
Sufficient evidence was established by intelligent men and women of good faith, that the declarations of the witnesses were true, and that these declarations should in all reasonableness result in the established legal consequences that reasonable good adult men and women thought were perfectly legitimate.

What evidence did they have that the assertions concerning what they said they saw and were convinced of were really true ?

1. Hundreds if not thousands of people were involved in concluding that what they said they saw and concluded was actually true.
2. The witnesses provided sworn testimony in court, sworn affidavits which we can look at today, and affirmed they were completely utterly convinced that what they were saying was totally completely true.
3. The witnesses came from all social strata, and every diverse background, including the most highly educated of the day.
4. These witnesses included judges, magistrates, the governor of the state, and family members of those about whom the assertions were made.
5. Many involved had much to lose if the assertions were to be found true. The consequences would impact many in very personal ways, if found to be true, thus had no conflict of interest, or reasin to lie. Many could lose beloved spouses and family members and friends about whom they cared a great deal.
6. The proceedings were thorough, exhaustive investigations. They deliberately gathered evidence. They made every effort to sort out truth from fallacy. They went to every possible length to actually discern the facts.
7. There are numerous artifacts from the time, and many documents from the proceedings we can review in person today.
8. These proceedings happened, not 2000 years ago, but a mere few hundred years ago. The literacy rate was far far higher than in ancient Israel.
9. For claimed events from 2000 years ago, there are no actual original documents of any kind. None at all. Only copies from centuries later.
10. For the events in question we have sworn documented court testimony, not just word of mouth transmission.
11. A truck full of documents from the proceedings exists at the University of Virginia Library. You can go see the testimony of the eye-witnesses for yourself, today.
12. By any measure or method, the quantity and quality of the evidence for the events in question FAR FAR FAR outweigh the quality of the evidence for the events in Jerusalem 2000 years ago.
13. Anyone who claims they have good evidence to support belief in Jesus, his death, and resurrection, or any miracle thought to have happened today, IF they are in any way a consistent, honest, logical and a reasonably thoughtful person, they MUST also accept :

Show ContentSpoiler:

That of the 250 people accused, 19 women in Salem Massachusetts, including Sarah Goode, and Rebekah Nurse, The Witches of Salem, really were actually witches, and were justly condemned and executed for performing demon magic.

[TheGentlemanBastard]

Imaginary god, imaginary sin, imaginary sacrifice, imaginary salvation.

All to cover a very real fear of death.

[GenesisNemesis]

Stupid atheists, why can't they just accept that a father can be his son at the same time?  So frustrating!

[NorthernBen]

Stupid atheists, why can't they just accept that a father can be his son at the same time?  So frustrating!

I know right! Why can't they accept that the creator of the universe decided to impregnate a middle eastern virgin with himself? I mean how the hell else could he have gone about it? Stupid atheistic morons.

[skyking]

This is what the banhammer is for.

[Alan V]

I don't claim to know God's mind. As the scripture goes; "Your thoughts are not mine says the Lord...." I'm not foolish enough to think I have all the answers. And I think both sides could admit to that? If not, we can stop here.

Anyone who thinks the scripture reflects the mind of God thinks he knows God's mind. I don't know why you're quoting scripture to atheists otherwise.

I have all the answers I ever wanted, and none came from religion or mysticism even though I spent years studying both.

Perhaps your methods are holding you back from certain truths.

[grympy]

Stupid atheists, why can't they just accept that a father can be his son at the same time?  So frustrating!

I know right! Why can't they accept that the creator of the universe decided to impregnate a middle eastern virgin with himself? I mean how the hell else could he have gone about it? Stupid atheistic morons.
.

Indeed

 Might have posted this  before, so apologies if you've seen it.

[Dancefortwo]

Stupid atheists, why can't they just accept that a father can be his son at the same time?  So frustrating!

......and then have himself whipped and crucified for sins which he knew would happen even before the creation process, seeing as how he's omniscient and all that rot.

[Dancefortwo]

Stupid atheists, why can't they just accept that a father can be his son at the same time?  So frustrating!

I know right! Why can't they accept that the creator of the universe decided to impregnate a middle eastern virgin with himself? I mean how the hell else could he have gone about it? Stupid atheistic morons.
.

Indeed

 Might have posted this  before, so apologies if you've seen it.

I haven't seen that. That was very funny. LOLOL.      To me Christianity is just one big extortion plot. Believe in god or you'll burn in hell forever. There's little difference between a Mafia Godfather and the god of the bible.  I don't know about where you live but extortion is illegal around these parts.

[GenesisNemesis]

Stupid atheists, why can't they just accept that a father can be his son at the same time?  So frustrating!

......and then have himself whipped and crucified for sins which he knew would happen even before the creation process, seeing as how he's omniscient and all that rot.

And then, like an idiot, asks himself "why have you forsaken me?" 

Stupidass Jesus.

[Fireball]

*beep* "God morning, ronedee. Your mission is to carry the word of god to the atheists. If you are completely refuted in your arguments, persist, and claim victory anyway. This message will not self-destruct, since it is all in your head anyway." 

[adey67]

*beep* "God morning, ronedee. Your mission is to carry the word of god to the atheists. If you are completely refuted in your arguments, persist, and claim victory anyway. This message will not self-destruct, since it is all in your head anyway." 

LOL, just like playing chess with a pigeon.

[OakTree500]

Jesus' Mission....

 ...to explore strange new worlds. To seek out new life and new civilizations. To boldly go where no one has gone before!

[ronedee]

What debate do you want?  In my post #55 (and #60) I demonstrated why the doctrine God is good, creates all and is omniscient, free will is not possible.  A position numerous theologians from Augustine, Martin Luther, Jean Calvin and others have admitted must be true if we take the Bible as authoritative and a direct revelation from God or inspired by God.

We then have to abandon some parts of these claims that we derive from the Bible.

1.  That God is good, compassionate, merciful, fair and just.
2.  That God cares about us at all.
3.  That God creates all.
4.  That God is truly omnipotent.
5.  That God is omniscient, knowing the future in all details.

All of these claims have problems if we abandon them, in an attempt to save free will.  The God of the Bible and the Grand Theology of Christianity does not make logical sense.  If we follow all of these basic claims to their logical conclusion, it undermines a lot of theology, for example, Alvin Plantinga's Free Will Defense, or Molinism, the idea of God's middle knowledge.

I have yet to run into any theist who "wants a civil debate" who is willing to debate these issues.  This is not the only logical issue I have with the Judeo-Christian variety God.

If the bible is indeed "inspired" by God. That would mean, that man has his hand in it. So, which part of the OT (specifically) is actually God's words, and what part is "inspiration"?

To me, "inspiration" is a fancy word for; "what I think" to be God's words and commands. 

Understanding the bible takes Faith, and Wisdom through the Holy Spirit. Personally, I accept the bible as a historical document of man's interaction w/ God. And I can see man's frailty and stupidity in each chapter. So, then I must take that into account with the input and perspective of the writers.

As an example, in this verse of Exodus: 14:14 The Lord will fight for you; you need only to be still.”

But this advice isn't taken, and men go on to kill everyone! You can see the pattern and theme throughout.

So, what are we to believe here? We have to take the bible as a complete work, and look at the bigger picture. 

Not only are we to intensely discern the OT, but we are to look at the NT as the Hope for breaking all the bonds and trappings of the old.

Then there is personal experience. God is a "Living" God! Not one that is trapped in a time & space, and pages written by men! But in personal experience that is shaded by many things. If all you want to do is tear down God? That's what you will do! Tools are there to do that! But, IF you want to find Truth? You look, ask and never stop until you know!

Just as you can find an example to undermine my argument? So, can I to undermine yours. So, it becomes either a joint effort in finding the Truth. Or a fight for who has the last word. 

[Dancefortwo]

What debate do you want?  In my post #55 (and #60) I demonstrated why the doctrine God is good, creates all and is omniscient, free will is not possible.  A position numerous theologians from Augustine, Martin Luther, Jean Calvin and others have admitted must be true if we take the Bible as authoritative and a direct revelation from God or inspired by God.

We then have to abandon some parts of these claims that we derive from the Bible.

1.  That God is good, compassionate, merciful, fair and just.
2.  That God cares about us at all.
3.  That God creates all.
4.  That God is truly omnipotent.
5.  That God is omniscient, knowing the future in all details.

All of these claims have problems if we abandon them, in an attempt to save free will.  The God of the Bible and the Grand Theology of Christianity does not make logical sense.  If we follow all of these basic claims to their logical conclusion, it undermines a lot of theology, for example, Alvin Plantinga's Free Will Defense, or Molinism, the idea of God's middle knowledge.

I have yet to run into any theist who "wants a civil debate" who is willing to debate these issues.  This is not the only logical issue I have with the Judeo-Christian variety God.

If the bible is indeed "inspired" by God. That would mean, that man has his hand in it. So, which part of the OT (specifically) is actually God's words, and what part is "inspiration"?

To me, "inspiration" is a fancy word for; "what I think" to be God's words and commands. 

Understanding the bible takes Faith, and Wisdom through the Holy Spirit. Personally, I accept the bible as a historical document of man's interaction w/ God. And I can see man's frailty and stupidity in each chapter. So, then I must take that into account with the input and perspective of the writers.

As an example, in this verse of Exodus: 14:14 The Lord will fight for you; you need only to be still.”

But this advice isn't taken, and men go on to kill everyone! You can see the pattern and theme throughout.

So, what are we to believe here? We have to take the bible as a complete work, and look at the bigger picture. 

Not only are we to intensely discern the OT, but we are to look at the NT as the Hope for breaking all the bonds and trappings of the old.

Then there is personal experience. God is a "Living" God! Not one that is trapped in a time & space, and pages written by men! But in personal experience that is shaded by many things. If all you want to do is tear down God? That's what you will do! Tools are there to do that! But, IF you want to find Truth? You look, ask and never stop until you know!

Just as you can find an example to undermine my argument? So, can I to undermine yours. So, it becomes either a joint effort in finding the Truth. Or a fight for who has the last word. 

Understanding the Bible takes Faith..."

  

Faith is meaningless twattle. Every religion relies on faith as a means for belief.  But faith has nothing to do  with whether it's true or not because faith is defined as belief without evidence.  Every god people have ever believed in required faith as a path to belief, so if faith can just as easily lead you to believe in Odin, Zeus, Igaluk or hundreds of different gods then faith is meaningless.

Faith is the excuse religions give for not having any evidence for their god.

[ronedee]

If the best an omnipotent being can do is stage a dramatic sacrifice, then color me unimpressed.

It all has to do w/ Free Will. 

If a robot is what you would consider a viable companion for ETERNITY? Color me very impressed!

Question time!

How does it make a difference to an omniscient god whether we have free will or not? Either way he still knows every action we're going to make and we're still automatons. Free will makes no difference whatsoever. Secondly, since god is supposedly omnipotent, I'm sure he could handle an eternity with just "robots", lol. Oh also he could just skip the entire process of making humans altogether and make himself content with spending eternity alone, because, y'know, omnipotence. No reason whatsoever for all of the convoluted bullshit in the Bible.

Not to mention that in Genesis he FLOODED THE ENTIRE EARTH AND KILLED ALMOST ALL HUMANS because he was mad at them for exercising their "free will". There are in fact numerous examples in the Bible of Yahweh getting mad and punishing humans for disobeying him. You call that a "viable relationship"? And, by the way, he already knew they would disobey him beforehand. Your entire worldview is absurd.

First off.... I don't mind answering questions with any of you:

1. If it's w/o mocking, pointed foul language and condescending tones
2. If someone is seriously looking for my answer
3. If the question has some merit or point in fact

I can respect all of you, if it's mutual. I will just ignore the drive-by bullshit, and idiotic remarks.

As I've stated, I'm not here to change anyone's mind, or to evangelize. I'm here to challenge
my Faith. I want you to convince me to be an atheist! Should be easy! Right?
--------------------------------------

Just because God knows the end, doesn't mean that we don't have free will. 

And as far as God's creation? He makes the rules! It's ALL His! Free will, I'm sure doesn't
include mocking Him, and deviant behavior. A "few" chose not to. I guess they made the better
free will choice?

[Astreja]

As I've stated, I'm not here to change anyone's mind, or to evangelize. I'm here to challenge my Faith. I want you to convince me to be an atheist! Should be easy! Right?

Wrong.  Belief or disbelief cannot be consciously switched from one from the other, because they are the outcome of an internal evaluation that occurs partially at the unconscious level of the mind.

What you want (assuming you are sincere in wanting it) is not relevant to the process.  The world is full of people who wanted to believe but had their faith crumble to ashes when their perceptions failed to line up with what they were told to believe.

[ronedee]

What debate do you want?  In my post #55 (and #60) I demonstrated why the doctrine God is good, creates all and is omniscient, free will is not possible.  A position numerous theologians from Augustine, Martin Luther, Jean Calvin and others have admitted must be true if we take the Bible as authoritative and a direct revelation from God or inspired by God.

We then have to abandon some parts of these claims that we derive from the Bible.

1.  That God is good, compassionate, merciful, fair and just.
2.  That God cares about us at all.
3.  That God creates all.
4.  That God is truly omnipotent.
5.  That God is omniscient, knowing the future in all details.

All of these claims have problems if we abandon them, in an attempt to save free will.  The God of the Bible and the Grand Theology of Christianity does not make logical sense.  If we follow all of these basic claims to their logical conclusion, it undermines a lot of theology, for example, Alvin Plantinga's Free Will Defense, or Molinism, the idea of God's middle knowledge.

I have yet to run into any theist who "wants a civil debate" who is willing to debate these issues.  This is not the only logical issue I have with the Judeo-Christian variety God.

If the bible is indeed "inspired" by God. That would mean, that man has his hand in it. So, which part of the OT (specifically) is actually God's words, and what part is "inspiration"?

To me, "inspiration" is a fancy word for; "what I think" to be God's words and commands. 

Understanding the bible takes Faith, and Wisdom through the Holy Spirit. Personally, I accept the bible as a historical document of man's interaction w/ God. And I can see man's frailty and stupidity in each chapter. So, then I must take that into account with the input and perspective of the writers.

As an example, in this verse of Exodus: 14:14 The Lord will fight for you; you need only to be still.”

But this advice isn't taken, and men go on to kill everyone! You can see the pattern and theme throughout.

So, what are we to believe here? We have to take the bible as a complete work, and look at the bigger picture. 

Not only are we to intensely discern the OT, but we are to look at the NT as the Hope for breaking all the bonds and trappings of the old.

Then there is personal experience. God is a "Living" God! Not one that is trapped in a time & space, and pages written by men! But in personal experience that is shaded by many things. If all you want to do is tear down God? That's what you will do! Tools are there to do that! But, IF you want to find Truth? You look, ask and never stop until you know!

Just as you can find an example to undermine my argument? So, can I to undermine yours. So, it becomes either a joint effort in finding the Truth. Or a fight for who has the last word. 

Understanding the Bible takes Faith..."

  

Faith is meaningless twattle. Every religion relies on faith as a means for belief.  But faith has nothing to do  with whether it's true or not because faith is defined as belief without evidence.  Every god people have ever believed in required faith as a path to belief, so if faith can just as easily lead you to believe in Odin, Zeus, Igaluk or hundreds of different gods then faith is meaningless.

Faith is the excuse religions give for not having any evidence for their god.

Thanks for the reply. I'll consider it a question...

There is a little more to it than Faith. Although it is a big part.

Love is the key factor. And Jesus personifies that Love. 

Yes you can point to the OT as a tribute to hate and destruction. But, the theme is a "flawed man", and 
a very patient God. The point is getting man where he can be dependent on God's Grace and Love, rather
than man's own reliance. And it didn't work, then....or now! We are not dependent on God. Enter Jesus!

Jesus changed everything! And just saying His name, or repenting on your death bed, as some think isn't enough.
We need to believe in His Way of Love for one another! Really believe that helping and loving one another is the key.

"Whatever you do for the least of my brothers, you do for me." Amen

[ronedee]

As I've stated, I'm not here to change anyone's mind, or to evangelize. I'm here to challenge my Faith. I want you to convince me to be an atheist! Should be easy! Right?

Wrong.  Belief or disbelief cannot be consciously switched from one from the other, because they are the outcome of an internal evaluation that occurs partially at the unconscious level of the mind.

What you want (assuming you are sincere in wanting it) is not relevant to the process.  The world is full of people who wanted to believe but had their faith crumble to ashes when their perceptions failed to line up with what they were told to believe.

Ok. I respect your opinion. But, it's not mine!

[adey67]

So basically what you're saying is that God made us frail and stupid plus we have to interpret the bible using faith (which believing in something without evidence) and wisdom through the Holy spirit (which hasn't been determined to exist) which means interpretation will be different to each individual or group based on "feels" and will also likely incorporate what ever nasty prejudices are predominant in each individual or group. May I remind you also that the Bible is part of the claims for the abrahamic religions not the evidence and I'm sorry but all you have are a bunch of assertions and claims based on unprovable and unfalsifiable feelings and ancient writings . I don't buy it.

[ronedee]

So basically what you're saying is that God made us frail and stupid plus we have to interpret the bible using faith (which believing in something without evidence) and wisdom through the Holy spirit (which hasn't been determined to exist) which means interpretation will be different to each individual or group based on "feels" and will also likely incorporate what ever nasty prejudices are predominant in each individual or group. May I remind you also that the Bible is part of the claims for the abrahamic religions not the evidence and I'm sorry but all you have are a bunch of assertions and claims based on unprovable and unfalsifiable feelings and ancient writings . I don't buy it.

Being "frail & stupid" is also a choice. 

Faith is part of believing in God. It's not hard to "discern" right from wrong; or what's man or a "loving" God's
way or mission. Or.... what a man "might" have wrote, and what really seems a God would.

It's all part of "looking for the Truth".

And yes, the claims & assertions are not first hand! Is anything? That's where personal experience comes in.
But that only works for the "seeker". Not for casual bystanders.

[adey67]

May I gently point out Ronadee that no individual on the forum regardless of their belief system or lack thereof gets to set the tone of any thread or of any individual response, as on TTA ad hominems and naughty words are permitted and if you are just going to ignore responses that don't fall into the narrow cookie cutter of your personal sensibilities then you definitely won't be challenged, it's of course your personal right to do just that but I think you'll just self limit your experience and open yourself up to accusations of "playing chess like a pigeon"

[adey67]

So basically what you're saying is that God made us frail and stupid plus we have to interpret the bible using faith (which believing in something without evidence) and wisdom through the Holy spirit (which hasn't been determined to exist) which means interpretation will be different to each individual or group based on "feels" and will also likely incorporate what ever nasty prejudices are predominant in each individual or group. May I remind you also that the Bible is part of the claims for the abrahamic religions not the evidence and I'm sorry but all you have are a bunch of assertions and claims based on unprovable and unfalsifiable feelings and ancient writings . I don't buy it.

Being "frail & stupid" is also a choice. 

Faith is part of believing in God. It's not hard to "discern" right from wrong; or what's man or a "loving" God's
way or mission. Or.... what a man "might" have wrote, and what really seems a God would.

It's all part of "looking for the Truth".

And yes, the claims & assertions are not first hand! Is anything? That's where personal experience comes in.
But that only works for the "seeker". Not for casual bystanders.

Well if it works for you great  I guess, personally I find the scientific method the best way to look for and  determine the truth of things, after all we know that it works, its objective and its provable. Hell, without it we wouldn't be having this conversation over the interwebz.

[adey67]

Sorry double post.