The simple truth

[Mister Agenda]

I came here out of love, even knowing that I would be reviled. I don't hate people who are atheists and I don't see myself as more intelligent or more wise than they. In terms of scientific belief I definitely am not as intelligent as most. I know what it is like to not know God. For 21 years of my life I lived in the deception of my own sinfulness. Yet God revealed His grace to me by the power of the Holy Spirit. God forbid that I should not want others to know His grace.

Jacob practically has to beg us to revile him (he started a thread for it) because he knows how to engage in honest discourse.

Just because you're not using 'bad' words doesn't mean you're not being rude.

Common courtesy seems to be the first casualty of being born again.

When you register on a new forum, you should make an effort to read and understand the posted rules. You should do an introductory thread before launching any polemics. You should use your own words and thoughts instead of copying and pasting the words and thoughts of others to speak for you. If you're not open to the possibility that you might be wrong, you're not discussing, you're lecturing, and this isn't a place we go to in order to be lectured.

I understand you being enthusiastic about sharing your good news. That you care not at all whether you do it in a way likely to increase the probability that we'll actually pay close attention to what you have to say tells me you don't care if you actually reach anyone. You're just trying to score brownie points with God. If there is a God, I really doubt you've earned any with what you've shown us so far.

[Cyberman]

It also tells me that he doesn't really care about his good news or whether anyone wants to take him seriously, since the demanding way he's chosen to share it is inevitably counter-productive. Basically the more insistent someone is that I must buy what he's selling me, the more likely I'm going to be convinced he's trying to sell me shit. In this case, imaginary shit.

---

Hey, I just spotted: 9k posts!

[Mister Agenda]

Thank you for the correction. Though it could have been avoided if you had simply pointed it out in the last post as I requested. I have to say I do believe in abiogenesis. I believe God literally made man out of the dust of the ground. I also believe the Lord Jesus Christ rose from the dead, giving life to His dead body.

I know it isn't scientific abiogenesis, but I can work with a Christian who credits God with, say, creating the first cell and accepting the evidence for evolution thereafter. Frankly I've always been a little mystified that more Christians don't interpret 'raising Adam from the dust' as an understandable metaphor for ancient people about evolving humans from microbes.

Also I'd like to ask, at what point have I berated anyone? To be honest it seems it has been others who have been berating me. Though if you show where it is you feel I have berated anyone I will apologise to that person.

I don't know that what you were doing up to this post can reasonably be described as 'berating', but I respect your willingness to address it.

---

I wasn't playing anything. I will try to explain what I meant:

If I was to say to you that it is true that I am a human being that is typing on a computer, and you said "no, I don't believe it, you do not exist." Then I sent you a picture of myself but you still denied my existence, would I expect you to believe that I exist because I sent you that picture? No, I would expect you to believe I exist because I exist. If you don't believe I exist it is your own folly.

This comparison is a good example of folly. We know people use computers. We reasonably expect that no nonhuman using a computer can successfully pass as human (yet). Therefore, your existence is a trivial claim that we can take your word for. You claim that you are in contact with the supernatural creator and sustainer of the universe is not like claiming YOU exist, at all. If someone tells you they saw an elephant living at the zoo, it's reasonable to take their word for it. If someone tells you they have elephants living in their walls, it's reasonable to conclude they're delusional. The method we use to evaluate these claims is one you're asking us not to use in the case of this particular claim of yours. You need to justify why we should turn off our bullshit filters just for you.

---

Why do most atheist resort to insults instead of respectful discussion?

You don't know most atheists, so that's a strawman, and a strawman is a lie.

Christian discussion forums are notorious for how fast they ban atheists. Hearing you out and not making 'saying anything against atheism' a bannable offense is more courtesy than we get when the shoe is on our foot.

[Mister Agenda]

I'll give you two points: One for hiding the buld of text in your OP under a spoiler button, [...]

He didn't. A moderator did.

OK, one point.

[The Valkyrie]

When atheists try to tell a Christian that he is doing something wrong or unloving my only response can be, from where do you get your morals and will there be any major repercussions if one doesn't follow your morals? And I'm not speaking of crimes, I'm talking about such things as hatred or pride. Can an atheist really argue that these things are wrong? I believe it is foolish for an atheist if he attempts to do so.

Morality comes from social evolution. As social creatures we realise there's certain behaviours that can harm the community.

Unlike, it seems, many Christian, we don't need the threat of an imaginary place of torment to keep us in line.

The more you repeat these strawmen arguments, the more you come across as a Poe.

[Esquilax]

When atheists try to tell a Christian that he is doing something wrong or unloving my only response can be, from where do you get your morals and will there be any major repercussions if one doesn't follow your morals? And I'm not speaking of crimes, I'm talking about such things as hatred or pride. Can an atheist really argue that these things are wrong? I believe it is foolish for an atheist if he attempts to do so.

To which my answer would be another question: how hard do you beat your slaves?

Since I already know what the answer is, my follow up question would be why you find slavery immoral, considering that the supposed source of your morality is all for it?

The sum product of these two questions demonstrates fairly clearly that wherever you're getting your morals from, it's definitely not the bible or god. You're in the same position we are, sunshine, so don't pretend like you're operating from some superior position.

[Revelation777]

Thank you for the correction. Though it could have been avoided if you had simply pointed it out in the last post as I requested. I have to say I do believe in abiogenesis. I believe God literally made man out of the dust of the ground. I also believe the Lord Jesus Christ rose from the dead, giving life to His dead body.

I know it isn't scientific abiogenesis, but I can work with a Christian who credits God with, say, creating the first cell and accepting the evidence for evolution thereafter. Frankly I've always been a little mystified that more Christians don't interpret 'raising Adam from the dust' as an understandable metaphor for ancient people about evolving humans from microbes.

Also I'd like to ask, at what point have I berated anyone? To be honest it seems it has been others who have been berating me. Though if you show where it is you feel I have berated anyone I will apologise to that person.

I don't know that what you were doing up to this post can reasonably be described as 'berating', but I respect your willingness to address it.

---

I wasn't playing anything. I will try to explain what I meant:

If I was to say to you that it is true that I am a human being that is typing on a computer, and you said "no, I don't believe it, you do not exist." Then I sent you a picture of myself but you still denied my existence, would I expect you to believe that I exist because I sent you that picture? No, I would expect you to believe I exist because I exist. If you don't believe I exist it is your own folly.

This comparison is a good example of folly. We know people use computers. We reasonably expect that no nonhuman using a computer can successfully pass as human (yet). Therefore, your existence is a trivial claim that we can take your word for. You claim that you are in contact with the supernatural creator and sustainer of the universe is not like claiming YOU exist, at all. If someone tells you they saw an elephant living at the zoo, it's reasonable to take their word for it. If someone tells you they have elephants living in their walls, it's reasonable to conclude they're delusional. The method we use to evaluate these claims is one you're asking us not to use in the case of this particular claim of yours. You need to justify why we should turn off our bullshit filters just for you.

---

Why do most atheist resort to insults instead of respectful discussion?

You don't know most atheists, so that's a strawman, and a strawman is a lie.

Christian discussion forums are notorious for how fast they ban atheists. Hearing you out and not making 'saying anything against atheism' a bannable offense is more courtesy than we get when the shoe is on our foot.

Ok, rather, the atheist I've encountered, though that may be a small sample

[Rahul]

When atheists try to tell a Christian that he is doing something wrong or unloving my only response can be, from where do you get your morals and will there be any major repercussions if one doesn't follow your morals? And I'm not speaking of crimes, I'm talking about such things as hatred or pride. Can an atheist really argue that these things are wrong? I believe it is foolish for an atheist if he attempts to do so.

All humans get their morals from their evolutionary history of being a social animal. Being full of hatred or pride will result in social ostracization from other members of our society.

I believe it is foolish to contend that we only get morals from a very immoral book written by a very primitive people thousands of years ago.

[Revelation777]

When atheists try to tell a Christian that he is doing something wrong or unloving my only response can be, from where do you get your morals and will there be any major repercussions if one doesn't follow your morals? And I'm not speaking of crimes, I'm talking about such things as hatred or pride. Can an atheist really argue that these things are wrong? I believe it is foolish for an atheist if he attempts to do so.

All humans get their morals from their evolutionary history of being a social animal. Being full of hatred or pride will result in social ostracization from other members of our society.

I believe it is foolish to contend that we only get morals from a very immoral book written by a very primitive people thousands of years ago.

If that be the case then some humans need to return back to lower life forms and relearn morals.

[Rahul]

If that be the case then some humans need to return back to lower life forms and relearn morals.

*sighs* Yeah. The Republicans...