Dear Atheists

[Tonus]

One thing I don't understand is your constant rejection of God.

That term is confusing. I do not constantly reject God. I came to the realization that he does not exist and have not found a reason to change my mind.

As for defining terms, it seems to me that for most people God is a person, a living being with a mind and personality all his own. He exists outside of our reality but he can interact with our universe because he created it. He created it with humanity in mind and is concerned with how we behave in this life so that he can determine how to treat us when we die and cross over into another realm of existence.

The other concepts of God seem much more personal in nature and don't seem concerned with what we do in our bedrooms or what we teach our children in Biology 101. Those aren't the Gods that wrote the books that tell us that killing is bad except when it's okay (and similar pearls of wisdom) nor are they the Gods that people shout out to when they're flying airplanes into buildings. I don't know if those Gods exist and I'm not interested in figuring it out because conventional religious beliefs are difficult enough to untangle even after thousands of years of concerted effort.

As for personal evidence or visions or dreams or similar things... David Berkowitz shot and killed six people because his neighbor's dog told him to. For all I know, he is convinced that this happened and that it is a rock solid FACT. I suspect that most people just think he's insane. Others may decide to interpret his visions for him and claim that it was a wicked spirit that made him see these things. But that just points out a problem with such "evidence." Paul warned the Christians of Corinth that Satan "masquerades as an angel of light" and that "his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness." How do you know your personal witness of God was not Satan's deception? I have no doubt that Christians of other denominations believe that you are following the wrong version of your faith and thus your evidence is false and planted by God's enemies to lead you astray. And many of them would be just as sincere and devout as you, and just as convinced that they're right.

How would I know which of you has received the testimony of Jesus Christ via such an experience, and which one has been mislead by a false angel?

[robvalue]

Erm, I have no idea what you're talking about anymore. If "god" just means whatever you want it to mean, then what are we even discussing? You're either pulling our leg, or just injecting loaded terms into everyday experiences for no apparent reason.

[chimp3]

There is death crucifixion (being crucified after your death) and being crucified while being alive or just being impaled. Jesus took the worst possible route, which in my opinion he committed the worst possible treason.

The crucifixion myth is a horrid tale to tell to children. Christians should be ashamed of themselves for perpetuating that bloody orgy of torture and implying we should find spiritual meaning in it.

[Sal]

Dear Atheists,

A warm welcome from a friendly Christian who is interested to hear from you and is willing to listen deeply. I respect you so much, you have courage of your convictions and are truly free thinkers in a complicated world. One thing I don't understand is your constant rejection of God. Does that mean that your standards aren't met with the right definition of God? In classical Christianity God wasn't debated like it is today. One may ask back then "does God exist? "Well Yeah, I mean of course!". 

Lets get the Definitions of God right because I mean it in a plural sense, I do believe in multiple definitions. It could be the ground of being, a transcendent being wholly apart from the Universe but immanent and involved in the Universe. But how do you see God or feel him? Feeling is the key word and synonymous with personal experience. Let's forget about Christianity for a minute and look at wider cultures in our beautiful world traditions. Mystics though out the ages have practiced deep contemplation, meditation, and prayer. They have all reported findings that are so important when once experienced, may be one of the most life changing phenomenon we can have. Neuroscience is trying to understand prayer and meditation at the level of the brain so it's very much in concordance with evidence. Now the question is how creative are you going to be? Are you going to use your experience in prayer or meditation to link or confirm your experience or contact with God in Christ and believe he is Lord? Or Allah? It's up to you to interpret your experience in the confines of a religion or no religion at all, which is fine too.

The reason I'm a Christian is because I feel the presence of God and that is evidence. The second is I believe he historically existed but I don't believe he said everything the same way as reported in the gospels. I don't even think he considered himself God. Why am i placing so much importance in the presence of God in my life? I think because it correlates directly to the Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Disciples had a strong experience of the Lord after his death that he is a living reality in the present. But the reality they experienced was so strong that it was a "divine reality" being one with God and at the right hand of God.

Many of these experiences were visions or revelations. I don't believe in a physical or literal resurrection: as if the corpse of Jesus letter-to-letter transformed to another body. What are visions? I think it's unfair to classify them as hallucinations as if its a drug induced thing. But in a vision you can see a person, for example a passed away relative. You can see them and hold them and even talk to them. They can talk back and tell you things. Because the disciples had physical contact with the real Jesus in his real body when he was living on earth, I believe their memories of him telling them things was re introduced in their visions and experience: so I can imagine they're memory off shooting and repeating the phrase " I love you Peter" for example in the vision. So the Lord would have said that twice to Peter. Once in real life and once in the vision.

People might say well they're just visions, its just a experience they had why hold it to such high self esteem? Because anybody who's had a experience or a vision doesn't say "it's only a vision". It's rock solid fact, and it creates reality. And its one of the most important things they will ever remember even in their dying breath.

Thank you so much for reading, I hope you Always stay blessed and think of Good.

Best Wishes

P.S I hope this doesn't come across as proyselytizing.

Emotive language and equally emotional argumentation. Garbage in, garbage out.

Present some evidence for your overly emotional bullshit god.

ktnxbye

[bennyboy]

Let me say two things:

1) If you are talking about experiences that you feel have value, and care less about source attributions (an existent God that has an identity), then I'm interested.
2) Refutations to your experience are a bit tricky, since there's no way for me to establish ANY experience as being truthful. Instead, I look at those experiences I have which are coherent enough and consistent enough to feel that the represent an objective truth, and go ahead and take the philosophical step of assuming them to do so.

I'm probably the most amenable one here to some of your ideas. I admire the tolerance for other denominations and the emphasis on experience over assertions of fact about things like miracles.

[Mister Agenda]

I wonder how Road Runner would interpret this 'anecdotal evidence'?

[The Grand Nudger]

Hi Rhythm, sorry for ignoring you in this thread.

No worries bud, no worries, we all choose what we do and don;t respond to.  I wouldn;t feel slighted or ignored in theleast if you didn;t respond - though I apprecate that you havbe.

Rhythm, believe it nor not, and this is without the supernatural or prophecy, but i think Jesus knew he was going to die.

Right, but I know that I'm going to die as well......I'm angling for something more than that. 

I believe he was a sacrifice. Now this isn't to be confused with substitution. I don't think that sacrifice in the old testament meant that you had to take a animal and hurt it unbearably so that your sins could be forgiven.

If you don't believe in substitution you don't believe in christ, regardless of whether or not you believe in jesus.  The term for the faith is christian, not jesusian.  It's a title, not a name.  It refers to his substitution and the subsequent vicarious redemption offered through it/him. This is one of the very few things christian sects agree upon, it defines them as such. Note that I'm not asking you to defend your view that jesus was a sacrificial offering, not looking to argue the truth of that matter - only expressing my confusion as to in what way you perceive yourself to be a christian if you do not subscribe to the central tenet of the faith, a faith very literally named after that tenet?

There is death crucifixion (being crucified after your death) and being crucified while being alive or just being impaled. Jesus took the worst possible route, which in my opinion he committed the worst possible treason.

That's an interesting way to look at things.

[ParagonLost]

---

---

Erm, I have no idea what you're talking about anymore. If "god" just means whatever you want it to mean, then what are we even discussing? You're either pulling our leg, or just injecting loaded terms into everyday experiences for no apparent reason.

Have you read Sam Harris? Just curious, because he describes the same phenomenon although more in a Buddhist context

[Tonus]

The argument is about God who is devastated by sin, and that sin was a offense to his divinity. God sent his son to take our place on the cross and bear the world's sins.

This is what doesn't make sense to me. Was God really "devastated" by something that was built into the creatures that he created to populate a world he created that exists in the universe that he created? And if he was --if the exercise of the freedom to act by his creation was so offensive-- why were his options so limited that only a long and complicated plan that ended with the sacrifice of a temporary human body would do? People forgive one another all the time (for offenses far worse than ignoring their wishes!) without having to spill a single drop of blood. God cannot possibly be forced into anything. The possible solutions to Eve's disobedience are endless, and none of them were outside of the reach of God.

Starting with making sure that snakes couldn't talk a young woman into believing that God was a liar.

[ParagonLost]

---

The argument is about God who is devastated by sin, and that sin was a offense to his divinity. God sent his son to take our place on the cross and bear the world's sins.

This is what doesn't make sense to me.  Was God really "devastated" by something that was built into the creatures that he created to populate a world he created that exists in the universe that he created?  And if he was --if the exercise of the freedom to act by his creation was so offensive-- why were his options so limited that only a long and complicated plan that ended with the sacrifice of a temporary human body would do?  People forgive one another all the time (for offenses far worse than ignoring their wishes!) without having to spill a single drop of blood.  God cannot possibly be forced into anything.  The possible solutions to Eve's disobedience are endless, and none of them were outside of the reach of God.

Starting with making sure that snakes couldn't talk a young woman into believing that God was a liar.

Good point, I think you got it right about penal substitution atonement. I don't believe in a God that has foreknowledge of future events. Except for the fact that i think Jesus knew if he continued doing what he did, raising awareness for the kingdom of God: he would get killed.

What i think of the distinction is that it has to do with sins, Jesus died by our sins, not for our sins. But we all know how some people interpret sin. The idea that  someone is obsessed with their sin, or the idea that sin is so cosmic and we should be worried about what sex you sleep with, constantly eager to claim what is a sin or not. I think sin is absence of love and when we don't love or be compassionate we are sinning. Am i doing what is lovely? John mentions that love has no greater place in the heart than to sacrifice ones life for their friends.