Without the Shedding of Blood There is No Remission of Sin

[Harry Nevis]

Riiight.  I bet most of the atheists here were raised christian.  Just because you're satisfied with any answer that supports your bias doesn't mean they actually answer the questions.  You're like Trekkies arguing about discrepancies in the Star Trek Universe.

Don't confuse being 'raised Christian' as knowing anything about doctrine. If anything, your example of the atheists here prove that daily. 

Makes you wonder though. If "most of the atheists here were raised christian" obviously rejected Christianity, what did they actually reject if most can't even articulate the key doctrines correctly.

But they can.  You've just had to bathe yourself is a sea of apologetics to keep the rational part of your brain from recognizing that the only reason you believe is that it feels good.  I have no reason to keep up with the nonsense, as the fairy tale can't pass the simplest of tests for existence or reality.

---

This is astronomically more ridiculous when the builder is omniscient.

Or when the person I'm speaking with is far less omniscient than I myself am.

You can explain Christian doctrine all you want, but youcan't make it  coherent.

I can if you are willing to admit you know very little about biblical principle, and are willing to learn something new/you've probably never heard before.

So now there are degrees of omniscience?  You're a hoot.

If you can't make it coherent without someone grovelling to your higher knowledge, you're egotistical and self-righteous, things that are so apparant in your posts.  A typical american christian.

---

Could a similar observation be made about the theist members here in regards to their knowledge of atheism/agnosticism? How many times have theists made statements about atheism/agnosticism that were based on misconceptions or misunderstandings of what theists thought those terms meant? Hence, is it a tendency of any in-group to assume that it accurately understands the out-group without actually testing that understanding first hand?

I suppose. But atheism has no doctrines to learn that I can misunderstand.

They could try looking in the dictionary before opening their mouths.  But that would take all the fun out of the self-righteousness, wouldn't it?

[Rhondazvous]

If god’s definition of words like justice and love is so different from ours, then what was the purpose of writing a book that never means what it says or says what it means? The church offers no consensus of meaning since Christians adjust the meaning according to secular moral standards. [1]

Case in point: because it makes god look like a draconian psychopath to the secular mind, the church has now toned down its preaching of hellfire and brimstone, and now teaches that hell is just eternal separation from god. By disagreeing with this, you only betray the lack of consensus in the church, so be my guest. [2]

1. Where is the Bible inconsistent with the meaning of those two words? 
2. I don't believe the verses on Hell in the NT have been changed recently. Your logic is that if some Christians are wrong in their doctrine that proves then all Christians are wrong--and that's just nonsense.

1. I said the Church is inconsistent in its chameleon shifting from definition to definition depending on what is currently socially acceptable. The behavior of the biblical god offers no example of love and justice that resonates true to me.
2. Here is your logic: God is just, therefore everything the bible claims god did is just. None of the actions the bible attributes to god can make him unjust because everything god does is just. And around and round and round we go.
2b. The bible itself is inconsistent in its definition of what hell is. In fact, there is no place of eternal torment in the O.T. Hell is a N.T. concept that sprang out of apocalyptic Judaism during the last centuries of B.C.E. The term occasionally translate as hell in the O.T. is the Hebrew word “Lish·'O·Vl”, (sheol or hades) which means the underworld or place of the dead.

Steve, understand you are not talking to people who are ignorant of what the bible says or of Church history, so before you twist things around, remember that we will always catch you.

[Drich]

Or when the person I'm speaking with is far less omniscient than I myself am.
I can if you are willing to admit you know very little about biblical principle, and are willing to learn something new/you've probably never heard before.

So now there are degrees of omniscience?  You're a hoot.

---

Sorry if I seemingly speak... what's the thing the rest of you were calling me after my hate thread a few months back???
.
..
Sociopathicly (too logically for some to see the cold hard truth of compassion.)

For instance I was not saying there were degrees of omniscience. To me it is the true sociopath who uses this word to describe degrees to his upper level of intelligence in relation to someone elses's upper level/boarding God like knoweledge.

I was speaking to the other end of the spectrum which Is why said " far less omniscience than what I am." I was speaking to how far we (the op and I stood AWAY from God's knowledge)

On the surface this is a back handed to the op, but if you think it out. I am not only comparing lack of knowledge I am describing my own inability to communicate simply, if after everything that I said she still did not understand... Then how far do I stand Away from God to explain it simply?

If you can't make it coherent without someone grovelling to your higher knowledge, you're egotistical and self-righteous, things that are so apparant in your posts.  A typical american christian.

and if I can then what? does that make me more typical Korean-American Christian? cause that I what I Gotz to Repo Zent sun!!

---

1. Where is the Bible inconsistent with the meaning of those two words? 
2. I don't believe the verses on Hell in the NT have been changed recently. Your logic is that if some Christians are wrong in their doctrine that proves then all Christians are wrong--and that's just nonsense.

1. I said the Church is inconsistent in its chameleon shifting from definition to definition depending on what is currently socially acceptable. The behavior of the biblical god offers no example of love and justice that resonates true to me.
2. Here is your logic: God is just, therefore everything the bible claims god did is just. None of the actions the bible attributes to god can make him unjust because everything god does is just. And around and round and round we go.
2b.  The bible itself is inconsistent in its definition of  what hell is. In fact, there is no place of eternal torment in the O.T. Hell is a N.T. concept that sprang out of apocalyptic Judaism during the last centuries of B.C.E. The term occasionally translate as hell in the O.T. is  the Hebrew word “Lish·'O·Vl”,  (sheol or hades) which means the underworld or place of the dead.

Steve, understand you are not talking to people who are ignorant of what the bible says or of Church history, so before you twist things around, remember that we will always catch you.

May I cut in?
1. What makes you the standard of love and justice? Matter of fact what seperates your love  and justice/What makes your version of love and justice "MORE RIGHT" than the love and justice found in sherria law concerning women? That 'love and justice' is your core righteousness. but again what makes your version of righteousness more righteous that an isis member practicing his version of sherria law? In both cases you only have yourselves or your peer groups to support what you think is right.

Now what if to God bothing of you and your ISIS friend's idea of righteousness is an abomination to everything Holy? What makes God's version of righteousness a standard and your version just another version of self righteousness?

2. Youre missing an element. God is all powerful, therefore whatever He says is Just is Just. Even if the unjust would disagree. Despite what some of your peers would say. All of man's history have always shown that might make right. God is the mightiest, so he is indeed the rightiest!
2b :Bwahahahaha: the bible is consistant through out concerning Hell. In the OT it is described as death, and in the new it is simply describes as the second death, where God sends the condemned to die, "fear not the one who can hurt the body bt the one who can destroy the soul in Hell..
What was added in the NT was HOW the soul is destroyed.. HOW the soul dies.. No matter how it dies the soul is still sheol..

I love it when you guys try to trivialize hell by using the bible to try and build a case. either you are trying to 'win souls' or yur still steeped in religion. That means if I can show you that you are wrong using the bible, you'll be wondering about this before you doze off!

So despite what your quoted guys thinks... the only thing that truly changed between the OT and NT decription of Hell was in the NT Jesus describes How the soul in destroyed in sheol.

[SteveII]

1. Where is the Bible inconsistent with the meaning of those two words? 
2. I don't believe the verses on Hell in the NT have been changed recently. Your logic is that if some Christians are wrong in their doctrine that proves then all Christians are wrong--and that's just nonsense.

1. I said the Church is inconsistent in its chameleon shifting from definition to definition depending on what is currently socially acceptable. The behavior of the biblical god offers no example of love and justice that resonates true to me.
2. Here is your logic: God is just, therefore everything the bible claims god did is just. None of the actions the bible attributes to god can make him unjust because everything god does is just. And around and round and round we go.
2b.  The bible itself is inconsistent in its definition of  what hell is. In fact, there is no place of eternal torment in the O.T. Hell is a N.T. concept that sprang out of apocalyptic Judaism during the last centuries of B.C.E. The term occasionally translate as hell in the O.T. is  the Hebrew word “Lish·'O·Vl”,  (sheol or hades) which means the underworld or place of the dead.

Steve, understand you are not talking to people who are ignorant of what the bible says or of Church history, so before you twist things around, remember that we will always catch you.

1. Then good thing we have the Bible to reign in the 'shifting' church. And that being the case, we have something objective to talk about rather than hiding behind "changing times". The example of redemption found in the NT resonates with most people (where love and justice are both present). 

2a. No, I think God is just because that is where the very definition must come from. Two reasons I say that: i) because without an objective measure of justice to compare something to, it becomes a matter of opinion as to what is just and ii) the definition of God is that for which no greater being can be conceived and I think that just is objectively better than unjust and therefore this attribute of God must be the highest form of justice.

2b. No, you are pointing out that the NT expounded on the concept--just as the NT expounds on hundreds of other concepts. 

I am talking to a group of people who very very often can't or don't care to accurately describe the things they object to in Christianity. In the context of a post, I don't care if you don't find Christian doctrine compelling or evidenced--I do care when people mischaracterize it or I see a chance to discuss a topic that I think I can explain why the proffered objection is not valid.

---

Personally I rejected the existence of a god, based on stories that are far from original or unique. [1] I also reject the core idea of an innocent person being murdered in the place of the guilty, [2] and eternal punishment for finite crimes [3]. I can't say that my church got things totally right, mainly because no one can say that. I see little reason to continue this faith exercise, though.[4]

1. Are you sure this is actually true? It smacks of a bullet list on an atheist blog that when you actually look in to it, is so thin as to only be believable if you presuppose the stories are wrong (which would be question begging).
2. Are you talking about Jesus? If so, see a note below from a post in another thread. 
3. I believe that the Bible teaches that we go to hell ultimately for rejecting God. Why do you think that reason is a finite crime? It seems that rejecting an eternal God and then experiencing eternal separating from him is a reasonable result. 
4. Perhaps God will use circumstances in your life to get you to reevaluate the Christian message and seek out people who can answer harder questions that your family or church were able to. 

NOTE: Nothing created could satisfy the justice attribute of an eternal God and bridge the gap to holy so God humbled himself in the person of Jesus and made a sacrifice of eternal substance with eternal significance for all time (past, present and future).

[Mystical]

So now there are degrees of omniscience?  You're a hoot.

---

Sorry if I seemingly speak... what's the thing the rest of you were calling me after my hate thread a few months back???
.
..
Sociopathicly (too logically for some to see the cold hard truth of compassion.)

I'll pay you a dollar to link me to that supposed "hate on Drich thread". Then you can pay me 10c to psychoanalyze it for you.
Wait hold on lemme guess first. Did you say atheists don't exist in foxholes again, something you can't possibly know despite your professed 'higher intelligence'?  Or or was it the good ol "I'd smash babies heads in for god and it would be righteous cuz everything god says and does is righteous" bit? 


I wonder how Lek and SteveII (what happened to SteveI i wonder?) feel about that one. Tell me guys, if your self professed god irrefutably came and told you personally, without any doubt of his validity or your perception of reality-- to rip a baby out of its mothers womb and smash its head across the rocks, would you do it???

I gander they called you a sociopath because we have been through countless conversations about these very things. Omniscience. Non omniscience. Justice, injustice. Who makes the definitions of such, is morality subjective or objective, etc. 

And every time, you are faced with the facts that indeed even according to your own brethren you are unwaveringly objectively and subjectively wrong. You seem to take pride in it, as a matter of fact. Like only you has the skinny on what god'man is thinking and doing. At least you have acknowledged the link between your superiority complex to the placement of god in your brain. I'm personally not convinced that you are a socuopath, that word is thrown around a lot online and abroad.
 Personally I think you like the prestige others may give you in your personal circles, for putting up with us "horrible" atheists for our "own good". You seem t have found a factory for those more sub-Drichy-like-intelligence beings who youve found you can easily manipulate as the basis of your self indulgent whim. That and just like anyone-- you like a challenge. I will admit your own version of Word salad is.. distatefull at best, but you're right. It's also very incoherent to a rational mind. 

For instance I was not saying there were degrees of omniscience. To me it is the true sociopath who uses this word to describe degrees to his upper level of intelligence in relation to someone elses's upper level/boarding God like knoweledge.

:I was going to laugh,  but this isn't funny. .
You think.. sociopathic qualities are a sign of greater intelligence??!!
See this is why I was concerned about your mental health when we met. One day, like all us regular human beings, you may just slip full on into schitzophrenia with no warning and bash some babies' heads in fgs. I will admit I do believe that your belief system would make you a higher risk for violence were you to acquire this very real condition.

I was speaking to the other end of the spectrum which Is why said " far less omniscience than what I am." I was speaking to how far we (the op and I stood AWAY from God's knowledge)

Annnnndddd this is why people think you have a superiority complex. Are you not doing enough, Drich? Isn't that cross on your back heavy enough? Don't you suffer us enough? Isn't it just so damn hard to get on the Internet and reprimand others?

On the surface this is a back handed to the op, but if you think it out. I am not only comparing lack of knowledge I am describing my own inability to communicate simply, if after everything that I said she still did not understand... Then how far do I stand Away from God to explain it simply?

It supposedly didn't take Jesus much of his sociopathic god knowledge to say hey, this whore is better than all of you hypocrites, or for him to literally conjure a whipping stick to beat the Pharisees out of their money lending scheme at temple. Hell, he seemed pretty easily to traverse through the most stigmatized of sinners and undesirables of the time, and cure them of the horrors this world has to offer them


You, however, can't seem to say in comprehensible terms what you believe, why you believe it, and actually feel "put upon" because you wonder just how far you have to go to relate to us subhumans??? Here's a hint, drop the act. Speak english. try to relate to another human being.

Mostly though drop the act. It's not effective. Name a single user from this site, past or present, who has heard the call back to the bible and it's god and it's tenets, thanks to your "tough love" form of "missionaries".

]
If you can't make it coherent without someone grovelling to your higher knowledge, you're egotistical and self-righteous, things that are so apparant in your posts.  A typical american christian.

and if I can then what? does that make me more typical Korean-American Christian? cause that I what I Gotz to Repo Zent sun!!

Not funny. That's.. not funny. No way, in alleged hell or on earth, is that funny.

Sorry, I digress. You're from Florida, dude. And yeah we Americans are typically of more than one nationality.
How about you confront the actual point they were making, which is that you want anyone willing to aCtually know what you TRuly believe, to come to you with their tail between their legs and their hands up looking to you like you have the answers they surely do not! Otherwise you "don't waste your time" on us, do you? The sad fact is, that Without humbling those around you with utter nonsense--preying upon their hopes that you actually know what you're talking about.., you cant seem to communicate effectively. Which is a problem. Maybe you should mull that one over as you fall asleep tonight, chief.

1. I said the Church is inconsistent in its chameleon shifting from definition to definition depending on what is currently socially acceptable. The behavior of the biblical god offers no example of love and justice that resonates true to me.
2. Here is your logic: God is just, therefore everything the bible claims god did is just. None of the actions the bible attributes to god can make him unjust because everything god does is just. And around and round and round we go.
2b.  The bible itself is inconsistent in its definition of  what hell is. In fact, there is no place of eternal torment in the O.T. Hell is a N.T. concept that sprang out of apocalyptic Judaism during the last centuries of B.C.E. The term occasionally translate as hell in the O.T. is  the Hebrew word “Lish·'O·Vl”,  (sheol or hades) which means the underworld or place of the dead.

Steve, understand you are not talking to people who are ignorant of what the bible says or of Church history, so before you twist things around, remember that we will always catch you.

May I cut in?
1. What makes you the standard of love and justice? Matter of fact what seperates your love  and justice/What makes your version of love and justice "MORE RIGHT" than the love and justice found in sherria law concerning women? That 'love and justice' is your core righteousness. but again what makes your version of righteousness more righteous that an isis member practicing his version of sherria law? In both cases you only have yourselves or your peer groups to support what you think is right.

Now what if to God bothing of you and your ISIS friend's idea of righteousness is an abomination to everything Holy? What makes God's version of righteousness a standard and your version just another version of self righteousness?

2. Youre missing an element. God is all powerful, therefore whatever He says is Just is Just. Even if the unjust would disagree. Despite what some of your peers would say. All of man's history have always shown that might make right. God is the mightiest, so he is indeed the rightiest!
2b :Bwahahahaha: the bible is consistant through out concerning Hell. In the OT it is described as death, and in the new it is simply describes as the second death, where God sends the condemned to die, "fear not the one who can hurt the body bt the one who can destroy the soul in Hell..
What was added in the NT was HOW the soul is destroyed.. HOW the soul dies.. No matter how it dies the soul is still sheol..

I love it when you guys try to trivialize hell by using the bible to try and build a case. either you are trying to 'win souls' or yur still steeped in religion. That means if I can show you that you are wrong using the bible, you'll be wondering about this before you doze off!

So despite what your quoted guys thinks... the only thing that truly changed between the OT and NT decription of Hell was in the NT Jesus describes How the soul in destroyed in sheol.

1. There you go, laughing overtly at someone truly willing to voice their concerns with the biblically provided definitions of certain premises. Like justice. And she has a very valid point, which you choose to turn around and throw into her face a bunch of superiority complex bullshit shrouded in non sequiturs about how SHE is mistaken in expecting the Biblical creator of all things including the bible, to actually fucking communicate effectively with his creation about his will and expectations. The ISIS bull crap has nothing to do with the things she takes issue with, so why bring it up??? 

2.Might make right in man world so that equates to.. god being the mightiest rightiest? Either you're talking down to her, or you're legitimately being lazy. If you don't have anything of content to say, maybe shut up for onciest.
And in case you missed it, she asked you a question. How do you legitimize a being who says they are just, even though their professed actions tell a different story? For that matter how do you even begin to believe someone you cannot heAR smell or touch, exists in the first place? You'd be far more reasonable to believe the homeless guy with a sign who says he's god who lives at the trainstation, is just and righteous when he says it, because at least youcan confirm that he exists in the first place.

2b. I'm.. not getting into this time sink again. I will pull up an old threwd for u maybe though with my proofs for why youre wrong. Again. 
I will say however "just because you say it's so does not mean it is so, so if you're going to get in a debate about this issue-back it up with some evidence and quit being lazy.

Lastly, hell or the concept of it, is a very serious part of why you are despised. I despise you. You take pleasure in the belief that the vast majority of humans won't be as smart as you, or as good as you, and will end up in a fiery pit of forever torment. YOU can trivialize hell all you want, but we've all read Revelations, Drich. I'll get that thread to you that I made for Catfish when he was around, re: my actual references for why hell should be taken at face value from the bible as eternal and as described.

 If it makes you feel better to know your mom or dad or uncle or kids won't go to an actual eternal fiery hell--then all that means is youve negotiated your conscience with the bible so you don't have to feel like a monster for advocating the fantasy of such evidently evil bullshit about your fellow man, in the first place.

[Harry Nevis]

If you can't make it coherent without someone grovelling to your higher knowledge, you're egotistical and self-righteous, things that are so apparant in your posts.  A typical american christian.

and if I can then what? does that make me more typical Korean-American Christian? cause that I what I Gotz to Repo Zent sun!!

---

I dunno. Try it and we'll see what it looks like.

---

I love it when you guys try to trivialize hell by using the bible to try and build a case. either you are trying to 'win souls' or yur still steeped in religion. That means if I can show you that you are wrong using the bible, you'll be wondering about this before you doze off!

So despite what your quoted guys thinks... the only thing that truly changed between the OT and NT decription of Hell was in the NT Jesus describes How the soul in destroyed in sheol.

That's the thing...You CAN'T show us that we're wrong using the bible.  Because you'd have to prove the veracity of the bible.  Which you can't.

---

1. I said the Church is inconsistent in its chameleon shifting from definition to definition depending on what is currently socially acceptable. The behavior of the biblical god offers no example of love and justice that resonates true to me.
2. Here is your logic: God is just, therefore everything the bible claims god did is just. None of the actions the bible attributes to god can make him unjust because everything god does is just. And around and round and round we go.
2b.  The bible itself is inconsistent in its definition of  what hell is. In fact, there is no place of eternal torment in the O.T. Hell is a N.T. concept that sprang out of apocalyptic Judaism during the last centuries of B.C.E. The term occasionally translate as hell in the O.T. is  the Hebrew word “Lish·'O·Vl”,  (sheol or hades) which means the underworld or place of the dead.

Steve, understand you are not talking to people who are ignorant of what the bible says or of Church history, so before you twist things around, remember that we will always catch you.

1. Then good thing we have the Bible to reign in the 'shifting' church. And that being the case, we have something objective to talk about rather than hiding behind "changing times". The example of redemption found in the NT resonates with most people (where love and justice are both present). 

It would be a better thing if christians could agree on what the bible says.  The bible may be the least objective text in history, as everyone reads whatever they want into it.

2a. No, I think God is just because that is where the very definition must come from. Two reasons I say that: i) because without an objective measure of justice to compare something to, it becomes a matter of opinion as to what is just

So, you NEED and objective source of justice, so you invent one.

and ii) the definition of God is that for which no greater being can be conceived and I think that just is objectively better than unjust and therefore this attribute of God must be the highest form of justice.

And, by making up your own definition of god, you got one!  How convenient!

2b. No, you are pointing out that the NT expounded on the concept--just as the NT expounds on hundreds of other concepts. 

I am talking to a group of people who very very often can't or don't care to accurately describe the things they object to in Christianity. In the context of a post, I don't care if you don't find Christian doctrine compelling or evidenced--I do care when people mischaracterize it or I see a chance to discuss a topic that I think I can explain why the proffered objection is not valid.

And, of course, other christians who disagree with your interpretations are mischaracterizing it, right?

---

Personally I rejected the existence of a god, based on stories that are far from original or unique. [1] I also reject the core idea of an innocent person being murdered in the place of the guilty, [2] and eternal punishment for finite crimes [3]. I can't say that my church got things totally right, mainly because no one can say that. I see little reason to continue this faith exercise, though.[4]

1. Are you sure this is actually true? It smacks of a bullet list on an atheist blog that when you actually look in to it, is so thin as to only be believable if you presuppose the stories are wrong (which would be question begging).
2. Are you talking about Jesus? If so, see a note below from a post in another thread. 
3. I believe that the Bible teaches that we go to hell ultimately for rejecting God. Why do you think that reason is a finite crime? It seems that rejecting an eternal God and then experiencing eternal separating from him is a reasonable result. 
4. Perhaps God will use circumstances in your life to get you to reevaluate the Christian message and seek out people who can answer harder questions that your family or church were able to. 

NOTE: Nothing created could satisfy the justice attribute of an eternal God and bridge the gap to holy so God humbled himself in the person of Jesus and made a sacrifice of eternal substance with eternal significance for all time (past, present and future).

1. You're presupposing the stories are true.  Which one is looking for truth and which is looking for confirmation?
2. Not much of a sacrifice if you're god. 
3.  I'm sure you do believe this. It shows the self-righteous nature of christians.
4. The christian message is clear.  It's whatever someone who declares, "I'm a christian" decides it is.

[Drich]

I'll pay you a dollar to link me to that supposed "hate on Drich thread". 

67 pages of AF 'love.'
https://atheistforums.org/thread-45803.html

dolla plea-ja!!

Then you can pay me 10c to psychoanalyze it for you.

No need, I pretty much get what was being said.

Wait hold on lemme guess first. Did you say atheists don't exist in foxholes again, something you can't possibly know despite your professed 'higher intelligence'?  Or or was it the good ol "I'd smash babies heads in for god and it would be righteous cuz everything god says and does is righteous" bit? 

I called someone out for using the raped card too quickly.

I wonder how Lek and SteveII (what happened to SteveI i wonder?) feel about that one.

We are only resposible to what we can understand or process.

Tell me guys, if your self professed god irrefutably came and told you personally, without any doubt of his validity or your perception of reality-- to rip a baby out of its mothers womb and smash its head across the rocks, would you do it???

If God wanted that done I'm sure He simply direct the woman to a clinic that still does partial birth abortions.

(Get what I'm saying? you condemn God for commanding this one time 4000 years ago (what to maybe 100 babies) yet this is the common fate of millions of babies in this day and age. Irony much?

I gander they called you a sociopath because we have been through countless conversations about these very things. Omniscience. Non omniscience. Justice, injustice. Who makes the definitions of such, is morality subjective or objective, etc. 

Calling people names is a simple way of trying to get someone to fall in social norms.. Like calling someone a jay walker 100 years ago. To call someone a jay was to call someone a bumpkin, and people back then really didn't like it. So by simply implying that someone who did not know any better than to walk on the street rather than the sidewalk was a jay walker was enough to get people to follow societal rule. and people began using sidewalks.

Calling me a sociopath rather than discussing points I may have made or behavior without much feeling, is a lazy way of making me conform rather than address the points I make. The only thing is I don't care what people think.

And every time, you are faced with the facts that indeed even according to your own brethren you are unwaveringly objectively and subjectively wrong. You seem to take pride in it, as a matter of fact. [/quote]So your question is How can I think I am right when those who represent traditional Christianity say that according to traditional belief I am wrong?

I don't want to call anyone out, but as far as I know... I'm the only one here bold enough to announce that my experience with God matches what the bible says our experience with God should be.

Why?

I think the answer to that is simple. I worship the God described in the bible. NOT The Traditional Christian God. Not a god or version belongig to a church or series of churches. Matter of fact from what I believe we have no such right to even identifi ourselves that way. We either follow the God of the bible or we do not. It is Christ who saves us therefore it is only Christ who can call us saved, or Christian or the redeemed (all of which are titles we award ourselves. But what I believe/why I get to interact with the Holy Spirit Goes far beyond salvation it gets into reward.

Most everyone is stuck getting us saved by their method so deeply nothing lese seems to matter. when in truth salvation is considered the 'milk' or what the very spiritually young need to survive, but Paul calls us to get past the need for Milk so we may learn to eat meat. This is the reward system God has in place. Not as in riches but as in relationship, powers and responsibility.

I award myself no title other than follower of the God of the bible and I seek to serve Him, as a direct result I found who it is and what I serve. As a result I have been given what we all have been promised!

So why do I feel/know I'm right??? I speak not for conventions or doctrine or copious amounts of study. I am speaking often time from first hand information, then I go back to scripture and find entire chapters to support contextually what it is I describe. I might have 3 bible verses memorized, but I know everything that is or is not in the bible, because God the Spirit who wrote the bible is literally with me. literally instructs me and gives me the words to use when I need them. then I go back google something I wrote and low and behold scripture comes up. and not scraps but whole chapters. I can speak the words of the bible and not know the bible. Does that makes sense? Then I can look it up and it is all there!!!

That is why I'm different. That is why I am confident and matter of fact. it is not arrogance as most of you know the word. it is simple logic for me. as in if a is right and I represent 'a' in the argument, then there is little point in discussing the plausibility of b. I'm not guessing. I've seen or have a greater understanding of a subject or verse and how it ties to a greater meaning. So when people come with cherry pick or fragmented theology I can even reverse engineer their work and re frame what they cherry picked verses actually meant to say. Rather not i but the one who works with me can.

How do I know a is right? The God of the bible is with me, and I am not ashamed to tell you that. That is not something you can fake, just look at how many fold under intense scrutiny, meaning they make an error repersenting the God of the bible or the make a mistake describing his nature.

Like only you has the skinny on what god'man is thinking and doing.

But Here's the thing. I'm not special. we all can have this knoweledge, if we seek Him and not some version of Him. In my last thread He stoped speaking/communicating with me for some time and my work here was nearly silenced because of it. I am nothing with out God's words, work and wisdom.

At least you have acknowledged the link between your superiority complex to the placement of god in your brain. I'm personally not convinced that you are a socuopath, that word is thrown around a lot online and abroad.

Well as above I have seperated the two. God is superior and when you deal with a superior force you will indeed feel... 'less." At the same time I know it's not the type of 'less' made or meant to make you feel bad. it is just humbling to see God work even though a broken vessle with as many problems as I have. I know without God I'm toast as I am very limited scholastically speaking.

 Personally I think you like the prestige others may give you in your personal circles, for putting up with us "horrible" atheists for our "own good".

Aside from my wife, one other person knows and he is constantly telling me I am waiting a tremendous resource with people who hate God. I get no praise no honor nor even acknoweledgement that what I am doing here can be considered to be God's work. I have all but been declared lost to the church.
In essence to most of them I am one of you. I try and talk to my wife about you guys and she hates to hear the bickering. I try and share with my mentor and he again points to this being a waist of time then he points to his church and asks me to put my efforts there.(could quickly gain title and position)
I simply say you can't save the saved, then I tell Him I am about my Father bid'ness.

No body else cares.
Well God cares.

You seem t have found a factory for those more sub-Drichy-like-intelligence beings who youve found you can easily manipulate

???

 as the basis of your self indulgent whim. That and just like anyone-- you like a challenge. I will admit your own version of Word salad is.. distatefull at best, but you're right. It's also very incoherent to a rational mind. 

??? Not sure what you mean here either.

For instance I was not saying there were degrees of omniscience. To me it is the true sociopath who uses this word to describe degrees to his upper level of intelligence in relation to someone elses's upper level/boarding God like knoweledge.

:I was going to laugh,  but this isn't funny. .
You think.. sociopathic qualities are a sign of greater intelligence??!!
See this is why I was concerned about your mental health when we met. One day, like all us regular human beings, you may just slip full on into schitzophrenia with no warning and bash some babies' heads in fgs. I will admit I do believe that your belief system would make you a higher risk for violence were you to acquire this very real condition.

Think the BBC's Sherlock Holems. True Sociopath represented through and through. So where then is his propensity for violence? If you actually look up the word it does not automatically mean one has to be violent. It simply desribes one who does not socialize well nor manfests a conscience.

This does not automatically mean one must be evil, just because they do not empathise or feel remorse. It simply means one is not controlled by feeling. If that person has a naturally good inclination then there is no reason to expect him to manifest ill will or evil. How ever if the sociopath seeks to only serve self as soceity would have, then there would be no reason to expect any good out of him.

For me and mine I serve God. That means there is much grace and mercy to be found, but it also means I am not ashamed when sin meets it's final punishment either.

I was speaking to the other end of the spectrum which Is why said " far less omniscience than what I am." I was speaking to how far we (the op and I stood AWAY from God's knowledge)

Annnnndddd this is why people think you have a superiority complex. Are you not doing enough, Drich? Isn't that cross on your back heavy enough? Don't you suffer us enough? Isn't it just so damn hard to get on the Internet and reprimand others?

Just thought it was a neat way of explaining how little we know when we hold up our greatest accomplishments against the idea of Omniscience.

On the surface this is a back handed to the op, but if you think it out. I am not only comparing lack of knowledge I am describing my own inability to communicate simply, if after everything that I said she still did not understand... Then how far do I stand Away from God to explain it simply?

that.

It supposedly didn't take Jesus much of his sociopathic god knowledge to say hey, this whore is better than all of you hypocrites, or for him to literally conjure a whipping stick to beat the Pharisees out of their money lending scheme at temple. Hell, he seemed pretty easily to traverse through the most stigmatized of sinners and undesirables of the time, and cure them of the horrors this world has to offer them

You, however, can't seem to say in comprehensible terms what you believe, why you believe it, and actually feel "put upon" because you wonder just how far you have to go to relate to us subhumans??? Here's a hint, drop the act. Speak english. try to relate to another human being.

It's sometimes hard for me to tell if people are being serious. or if they are trolling. I found if I put some verbal ques in the mix it will hange up the troll and allow the sincere push through.
After all if all that I am is being question then would it not be fair to check to see how serious someone actually is?

Mostly though drop the act. It's not effective. Name a single user from this site, past or present, who has heard the call back to the bible and it's god and it's tenets, thanks to your "tough love" form of "missionaries".

If I did that a pattern might arise. one that even you guys would be able to see what is going on.

Besides my 'job here is not to reap the harvest (welcome people back) it is to cast the seed/ plant the field with the good seed. (give you an idea of what the God of the bible is really like)

My biggest regret in my 'Hell experience' was not the sin or the life lived or even being in Hell, but the fact that I was so far off.. That I never knew any better, and neither did the church.. That maybe if I had a chance at the real God/The God of the bible I would have taken it. I see now most likly not as I like you had convinced myself based on what I knew to be true, no one would change my mind... But that was my biggest what if/ regret. So I spend my time here so that thought does not haunt your time in Hell. (If that is you fate) Because that thought was worse than the fire itself!

and if I can then what? does that make me more typical Korean-American Christian? cause that I what I Gotz to Repo Zent sun!!

Not funny. That's.. not funny. No way, in alleged hell or on earth, is that funny.

Don't be trifflen me Bee-o-tch, funny is as funny does, and I does funny!

Sorry, I digress. You're from Florida, dude.

The FAr East SiDE!

And yeah we Americans are typically of more than one nationality.

white is not an nationality. german speaking white people. french speaking white people, english speaking white people, with the only real difference is how you spell your words and how you eat your beef pork and poultry. a proper cultural change will Literally be offensive to the point of fighting to someone. but I digress.

How about you confront the actual point they were making, which is that you want anyone willing to aCtually know what you TRuly believe, to come to you with their tail between their legs and their hands up looking to you like you have the answers they surely do not!

Your partially right. Humility is a HUGE part of all of this. but not to me. As I am nothing and I am no body in this process. You don't have to show me crap. However you need to be on your face before God.

Otherwise you "don't waste your time" on us, do you?

67 pages that's ten comments per page times 67... Seems to me the subject matter of a thread like that dedicated to silence or elimination of a member is NOT because I wasn't spending time here. It was all about silencing me without having to contend with the content of my message. Not just one person but it seemed all but maybe one or two people wanted me gone.. So forgive me if I ping a range to target sonar ping to see if you are still with me or if you bailed. because the next step is going to be even deeper and more anti-'self' than what we had done before.

The sad fact is, that Without humbling those around you with utter nonsense--preying upon their hopes that you actually know what you're talking about.., you cant seem to communicate effectively. Which is a problem. Maybe you should mull that one over as you fall asleep tonight, chief.

Here's something to think about... IF the thing of God made sense to you. could you not then find them on your own? wouldn't you have stumbled across them at some point?

So then if one says He has found God, would you expect to find him where you spent so much time already looking? would you be able to comperhend "his ways when they are you your ways?"

Then why oh why would you assume everything I have to say will make sense straight out of the gate?

So then why not ask a question?

oh, that's right pride.. You don't want to loose your pride while shopping for a god.

But again what if humility is the key? what if you go about looking for God in the place where you keep your pride? and that puts you back to where you are now? Then the conclusion would be Drich's God is no different than anyother one.

-OR what if I make Humility a sticking point, and once I see a little bit of it I tell you do not direct that at me point it here to God, and then your world changes. was that me? or you finally doing what you have always been instructed to do?

May I cut in?
1. What makes you the standard of love and justice? Matter of fact what seperates your love  and justice/What makes your version of love and justice "MORE RIGHT" than the love and justice found in sherria law concerning women? That 'love and justice' is your core righteousness. but again what makes your version of righteousness more righteous that an isis member practicing his version of sherria law? In both cases you only have yourselves or your peer groups to support what you think is right.

Now what if to God bothing of you and your ISIS friend's idea of righteousness is an abomination to everything Holy? What makes God's version of righteousness a standard and your version just another version of self righteousness?

2. Youre missing an element. God is all powerful, therefore whatever He says is Just is Just. Even if the unjust would disagree. Despite what some of your peers would say. All of man's history have always shown that might make right. God is the mightiest, so he is indeed the rightiest!
2b :Bwahahahaha: the bible is consistant through out concerning Hell. In the OT it is described as death, and in the new it is simply describes as the second death, where God sends the condemned to die, "fear not the one who can hurt the body bt the one who can destroy the soul in Hell..
What was added in the NT was HOW the soul is destroyed.. HOW the soul dies.. No matter how it dies the soul is still sheol..

I love it when you guys try to trivialize hell by using the bible to try and build a case. either you are trying to 'win souls' or yur still steeped in religion. That means if I can show you that you are wrong using the bible, you'll be wondering about this before you doze off!

So despite what your quoted guys thinks... the only thing that truly changed between the OT and NT decription of Hell was in the NT Jesus describes How the soul in destroyed in sheol.

1. There you go, laughing overtly at someone truly willing to voice their concerns with the biblically provided definitions of certain premises.

There I go seeking some humility. let's go back to what I said about different cultures (not just different language speaking white people) but truly different cultures are offensive to the point of someone getting hurt.

Let's say the OP Value system is that as western america. (Basically take middle of the road values and assign it to the op.) Now take the Values bound to sharia law, and compare them. Compare what 'rights say homosexuals have in both instances or what rights women have.

Now put those cultures back in their places, and take the op and her values to an ISIS held state, and have her demand her "rights as a western." what value, what power or authority does she have to demand his western rights in a ISIS state? None. Now think of it the other way. what if an male isis fighter was placed here and demanded the right to stone gay people or to circumcise his daughter? what right or authority does he have to demand such things?

As I said truly different cultures can be offensive to another even to the point of death.

Yet the OP assumes God would be like Her.. Never mind the fact that 'we' are not even like each other. Then the OP judges the nature of God based on again this trivial culture.

The Op clearly does not understand the basics of what even God is. but judges Him because He is not like her.

How much pride can a heart hold to judge what you do not even know? and just assume your way of life is the only and right way of life?

Here's the thing.. we already know our way of life outside out little western world is hated and frowned upon greatly. meaning if we ventured outside of this world hell fire and brimstone would be brought down on any american by an ISIS fighter or even North Korean.

So my question is, what if our middle of the road idea of right and wrong are an abomination (HATED) by God like they are hated by a large portion of the world (for different reasons obvi, but hated just the same?)

Hmmm. if there were only a way to know for sure.

There is and that is through the bible. and yes our "morality" is garbage to God.

So the question should be why are my values different and who is right?

Like justice. And she has a very valid point, which you choose to turn around and throw into her face a bunch of superiority complex bullshit shrouded in non sequiturs about how SHE is mistaken in expecting the Biblical creator of all things including the bible, to actually fucking communicate effectively with his creation about his will and expectations. The ISIS bull crap has nothing to do with the things she takes issue with, so why bring it up??? 

Love and justice are trivial and fleeting emotions. or should I say elements of love are fleeting and justice is a trivial word.

Use to be Justice was meant as fair impartial adjudication before the law. BLM or modern justice is "burn they shit down." F the police and law. So then how can anyone make a serious point concerning an emotion that exists as a vapor of steam here one moment and gone the next? and a word that now means pay me for killing my ________.

So I took her love and justice and compared them to her value system, a value system founded in western thought and principles. then compared them to middle eastern principles, showing that even among man there is sharp division between right and wrong.

Then I ask and answer the question. Who's right is right and who's wrng is always wrong? The answer will always be the mightest among us right is right and wrong is always wrong.

That's what God is. The mightiest. The beginning, and end to all things.

2.Might make right in man world so that equates to.. god being the mightiest rightiest? Either you're talking down to her, or you're legitimately being lazy. If you don't have anything of content to say, maybe shut up for onciest.
And in case you missed it, she asked you a question. How do you legitimize a being who says they are just, even though their professed actions tell a different story?

Perspective. For the Just God will appear as Just. For the unjust God will be a tyrrant.

For that matter how do you even begin to believe someone you cannot heAR smell or touch, exists in the first place?

You or rather i can't.. But I don't have that problem do I? I heard Jesus say :Away from me you wick man I never knew you" Not something you ever want to hear but I heard that. I touched one of his angels as I shook his hand when I gave Him some money (and if I remember correctly he poked me in the chest a few times as well) and I get direction from God daily.

You'd be far more reasonable to believe the homeless guy with a sign who says he's god who lives at the trainstation, is just and righteous when he says it, because at least youcan confirm that he exists in the first place.

And if the Holy Spirit came and super charged your own life, gave you insite and wisdom? That would be what? a tumor that could be found? But here again what if everything you were supernaturally told was true or you could bank on it as the truth... Would for you that be a legit God experience?

2b. I'm.. not getting into this time sink again. I will pull up an old threwd for u maybe though with my proofs for why youre wrong. Again. 
I will say however "just because you say it's so does not mean it is so, so if you're going to get in a debate about this issue-back it up with some evidence and quit being lazy.

Lastly, hell or the concept of it, is a very serious part of why you are despised. I despise you. You take pleasure in the belief that the vast majority of humans won't be as smart as you, or as good as you, and will end up in a fiery pit of forever torment.

You misjudge me. I simply will not allow people the comfort of a "everybody is basically good and Hell is only for the crazt be hitlers." I have no issue with saying most everyone will know what Hell is like. Why? because if it bothers you enough maybe you get off your ass and do something about it while you can. In this life for the unsaved Hell needs to be a worm that just gnaws at your insides never truly allowing you a moment's peace. Because it is way way worse once you are there.

YOU can trivialize hell all you want, but we've all read Revelations, Drich. I'll get that thread to you that I made for Catfish when he was around, re: my actual references for why hell should be taken at face value from the bible as eternal and as described.

It is described as an eternal place and the bible says very directly that Satan will burn there forever, but it also says many many time even Jesus said many many times the unforgiven will die there, or be consumed "eaten" by the fire. that was my experience.

 If it makes you feel better to know your mom or dad or uncle or kids won't go to an actual eternal fiery hell--then all that means is youve negotiated your conscience with the bible so you don't have to feel like a monster for advocating the fantasy of such evidently evil bullshit about your fellow man, in the first place.

I'm confused.. Thisis what I think about Hell:

https://atheistforums.org/thread-15622.html

[Angrboda]

[Amarok]

It is a tale told by an idiot  full of sound and fury Signifying nothing

[vorlon13]

Man, if I was a believer before this thread, I wouldn't be now.

Sheesh !!!!