The Anti-Christian conspiracy

So, I have one problem with the simple description that if you believe that or not is the thing. First of all, I don't feel that I have to believe that verse. But maybe I do anyway. But, here is the reason I keep getting told I will go to hell. I don't bellieve it the same way. I believe, but my view isn't acceptable. I believe in him. Good enough? Not what I hear. I keep being told that I have to bellieve that the crucifixion happened so he can take my sins. His blood will wash them away or something. I don't want him to take my sins, and unless I change my mind, Jesus could ask me in person for them, and I would very humbly, respectfully, politely, and reverentialy decline the offer. I'll see what I can do. He is at the bottom of the list of who I would dump my sins on. It is likely just my 'I can do it myself.' attitude. It will be harder, but I'll learn something. Not good enough apparently. Gotta give him my sins or no pearly gates for me. I kind of hope I can fing a way that I could ethically comply. Don't see one yet though. The buck stops here. A man has to shoot his own dog.

re; dna, shaunybaby, didn't know what they meant/what they were...same.

[edit on 03 22 2005 by BlackGuardXIII]

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
If he started rattling off genetic code, chromosomes and dna, they may not have known what it meant.

i think it's more likely that they didn't know what genetic codes, chromosomes or dna even were.

Originally posted by saint4God
rather, encourage you to get yours.

encourage me to get proof of what? sure you may have your personal beliefs that you took from the bible that you say 'proves' heaven to you, but my belief is that it can be neither proven nor disproven. so you don't need to encourage me to get anything.

The Bible, contrary to misconception, does not lay out a timeline. I've read the argument that is does and it's far from convincing.

are you saying there is no such thing as a bible literalist? i didn't ask if you found the arguement 'for' bible literalists 'convincing'.

We are Borg, we share a brain and you will be assimilated.

woah, so you actually have a sense of humour.

Hehe, and they call me a literalist...

what living thing therefore doesn't have a lifeline?

Pre-1910 theory. Plenty of books if you're interested or available on the web. Antiquated theories along with Panspermia, Phlogiston, and the like.

that's a little better. but i've already sorted this 'science being wrong, and then correcting itself'. it's like with pre-evolution theory, scientists believed in god, howeve now they don't, hence first they got it wrong, and now they're right. i'm using your philosophys on being wrong and then getting it right.

You're assuming that this is the only book (philosophy or otherwise) that I've read. This would also be untrue.

i didnt assume you've only read one book. but your main life philosophy is based on the bible, you're christian afterall. you believe jesus died for your sins, you believe he's the son of god, you believe you're going to heaven...all because it's written in a book...gee yeah, loving your 'three-dimensional thinking' there saintforgod.

LCKob:

One more thing to add a moderating mechanism to prevent or minimize existing "emotional potential".

... and yes, this applies to you as well saint4god

It would be prudent to qualify absolutist statements under contention

... for example ...

Yes the Theory of Evolution is valid as per x evidence ....

Yes there is a God as per ...

Yes, there is a Heaven and Hell? as per ...

So it comes down the the train of logic ... if someone absolutely claims "X" ... then it stands to reason that they can readily prove such a claim as in the definition provided by the Merriam Webster Online Dictionary:


www.m-w.com...


Main Entry: proof

Pronunciation: 'prüf

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, alteration of preove, from Old French preuve, from Late Latin proba, from Latin probare to prove -- more at PROVE

... a : the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact b : the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning

... : something that induces certainty or establishes validity

... : evidence operating to determine the finding or judgment of a tribunal

... : a test applied to articles or substances to determine whether they are of standard or satisfactory quality


[edit on 20-1-2006 by LCKob]

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
I know that verse, that's John 3:16

A+ . Although it is the most popular verse, it's not the only one that says it in the gospels and epistles. It's repeated many times in many different ways. I found the book of John had the most emotional appeal. I like Matthew better overall because of it's logical approach and instruction for those who already believe.

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
So, I have one problem with the simple description that if you believe that or not is the thing. First of all, I don't feel that I have to believe that verse.

Certainly the choice to believe has been left to us.

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
But maybe I do anyway. But, here is the reason I keep getting told I will go to hell. I don't bellieve it the same way. I believe, but my view isn't acceptable. I believe in him. Good enough? Not what I hear. I keep being told that I have to bellieve that the crucifixion happened so he can take my sins. His blood will wash them away or something. I don't want him to take my sins, and unless I change my mind, Jesus could ask me in person for them, and I would very humbly, respectfully, politely, and reverentialy decline the offer. I'll see what I can do. He is at the bottom of the list of who I would dump my sins on. It is likely just my 'I can do it myself.' attitude. It will be harder, but I'll learn something. Not good enough apparently. Gotta give him my sins or no pearly gates for me. I kind of hope I can fing a way that I could ethically comply. Don't see one yet though. The buck stops here. A man has to shoot his own dog.

As the book goes on to define what "believing in him" means, it is that he was crucified and rose from the dead to pay the penalty for our sins and purchase a place in heaven for us. In other places, it clarifies by saying to trust in him and what he did on the cross to save us, instead of trusting in ourselves and our good works. "For it is by grace you have been saved, by faith. And this not from ourselves, it is a gift of God, not by works so that no man may boast." The devil and demons believe Christ existed, but they're not going to be in heaven. "You believe that God is one? Good! Even the demons believe that - and shutter." Hope this helps.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
encourage me to get proof of what?

God.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
sure you may have your personal beliefs that you took from the bible

I did not take my personal beliefs from the Bible. My personal beliefs were disproven by God. Shortly after, He'd directed me to the Bible. I'm sure there are those who have a different approach, but this is how it happened for me.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
that you say 'proves' heaven to you, but my belief is that it can be neither proven nor disproven.

Correct, as I said, I'm not here to prove my experiences to anyone.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
so you don't need to encourage me to get anything.

Ups to you. Just here to offer.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
are you saying there is no such thing as a bible literalist?

Nope.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
i didn't ask if you found the arguement 'for' bible literalists 'convincing'.

The people who have come up with a timeline aren't being literal. They're being creative, or deductive, but certainly not literal.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
woah, so you actually have a sense of humour.

Glad to be appreciated

Originally posted by shaunybaby
what living thing therefore doesn't have a lifeline?

God. Even more interesting is Christ, who was alive since the beginning, born, died, resurrected and is still alive. That'd be some fascinating science to try to figure out. Instead of taking a look at it, people get overwhelmed, throw their hands in the air and say, "That's absurd!". No, it's not absurd, it's unexplained, there is a difference.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
that's a little better. but i've already sorted this 'science being wrong, and then correcting itself'. it's like with pre-evolution theory, scientists believed in god, howeve now they don't,

I have no idea where you get this misconception that pre-Darwin scientists believed in God and post-Darwin, they do not. I'd recommend taking the microscope on the history books instead of pop-media.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
hence first they got it wrong, and now they're right. i'm using your philosophys on being wrong and then getting it right.

I don't care if evolution is right or wrong, it really has no bearing on this issue. From the years of study at the University, my conclussion is that it's lacking testable, quantitative and reproducible support, not that it's right or wrong. Some Christians agree, some disagree, but neither stance is pro or con-Biblical.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
i didnt assume you've only read one book. but your main life philosophy is based on the bible, you're christian afterall.

Yep, follow ya so far.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
you believe jesus died for your sins, you believe he's the son of god, you believe you're going to heaven...all because it's written in a book...gee yeah, loving your 'three-dimensional thinking' there saintforgod.

Again, I didn't read a book and believed. What I came to know to be true matches the Book. See a difference?

Originally posted by LCKob
... and yes, this applies to you as well saint4god

Yeah, I was an antagonist because of an emotional claim being presented as "fact" and have apologized to the mod and person I questioned. Advisory received and understood, time to moving on.

Originally posted by LCKob
So it comes down the the train of logic ... if someone absolutely claims "X" ... then it stands to reason that they can readily prove such a claim as in the definition provided by the Merriam Webster Online Dictionary:

I'm a fan of m-w too , if we can stick to these definitions, I think it'll keep clarity to the discussion. Hopefully you've seen that I've used the word correctly?

Originally posted by saint4God
Again, I didn't read a book and believed. What I came to know to be true matches the Book. See a difference?

you and i are not so different, even though you may think we are, we're not. I'm an atheist, you're a christian. you dismiss all other gods except your one monotheistic deity, i just go 'one' god further.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
you and i are not so different, even though you may think we are, we're not. I'm an atheist, you're a christian. you dismiss all other gods except your one monotheistic deity, i just go 'one' god further.

Why?

I'm not asking you to recount the various reasons you've presented here or even to post a response. I would prefer you didn't. I want you to try to look past the smoke, mirrors and walls we all erect in our minds and ask yourself exactly why you dismaiss God. What is the reason at the heart of that dismissal?

Originally posted by junglejake
Why?

I'm not asking you to recount the various reasons you've presented here or even to post a response. I would prefer you didn't. I want you to try to look past the smoke, mirrors and walls we all erect in our minds and ask yourself exactly why you dismaiss God. What is the reason at the heart of that dismissal?

saintforgod dismisses gods. i just dismiss one more god than him. i could ask the same question 'why do you dimiss all other gods, except for one?' saintforgod's smoke, mirrors and walls in his mind direct him to believe that the christian god is real, yet all others are not. my smoke, mirrors and walls in my mind, lead me to believe there are no gods. why dimiss them all apart from one, that makes less sense than dismissing them all.

well I see a lot of brainwashing by religion here.
some aren;t open to other option then what the
theory of god(s) brings to them.
if somebody is trying to get an other theory or view
on the theory of god(s)
they are being attack like the scientist in de middle ages /dark ages
when people were burnt alive for dismissing gods.

I am glad I am not going to church so I can't get brainwashed by religion
mankind is curious by nature I am human and I will not accept what a religion says.
I am not for the theory of god(s)religion would lead to my death and the fall of human civilisation on the long run. so I was christian educated I stopped being christian the first time I saw evidence and theories other then being forward by religion which made more sense then god(s) who kill and reign with fear and terror.

Originally posted by shaunybaby

Originally posted by junglejake
why dismaiss God. What is the reason at the heart of that dismissal?

saintforgod dismisses gods. i just dismiss one more god than him. i could ask the same question 'why do you dimiss all other gods, except for one?' saintforgod's smoke, mirrors and walls in his mind direct him to believe that the christian god is real, yet all others are not. my smoke, mirrors and walls in my mind, lead me to believe there are no gods. why dimiss them all apart from one, that makes less sense than dismissing them all.

True, it is more inclusively dismissive. Rather than telling all but one church population that they're missing the boat. it is much more fair to dismiss that one too. Then no one is supported, which is not great, but it is more fair. My personal belief is to dismiss none of your beliefs, atheism included. Not as lipservice to be all warm and fuzzy, but because that makes more sense to me. I have had different experiences to work from though. Had I led your lives, my bet is that I'd be of that view.

Originally posted by MarkLuitzen
well I see a lot of brainwashing by religion here.
if somebody is trying to get an other theory or view
on the theory of god(s)
they are being attack like the scientist in de middle ages /dark ages
when people were burnt alive for dismissing gods.

I am glad I am not going to church so I can't get brainwashed by religion

I have been to many different churches, I think I was about eleven years old the last time I considered that it was possible they could brainwash me. Since then, I have not thought about it. It is possible to go to lots of churches and not get brainwashed. And the burnings have pretty much stopped. I am a very active alternative theory spouter, and I occasionally get threatened with burning. like this, "You are going to hell, buddy", I have yet to be actually attacked and set on fire.
If you cannot go and listen to someone else tell you their views withouyt worrying that they are going to brainwash you, then I support your avoidance. It is not a concern of mine though, I'll go in any church, mosque, temple, synagogue, and let them take their best shot. No holding back, do your worst, no quarter. And I have not the slightest worry.
Even when they say I am wrong and I'll burn in hell for eternity. I hope they're wrong, and not worried about it at all.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
you and i are not so different, even though you may think we are,

I don't think we're that different. We're both skeptics with the "I wanna see it to believe it" mode of thinking.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
we're not. I'm an atheist, you're a christian. you dismiss all other gods except your one monotheistic deity, i just go 'one' god further.

I challenged the others too. Invited them to the party so to speak.

[edit on 20-1-2006 by saint4God]

Originally posted by shaunybaby
saintforgod's smoke, mirrors and walls in his mind direct him to believe that the christian god is real,

There are no smoke, mirrors or walls, rather a lack thereof. That's exactly what one must be willing to give up to believe.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
saintforgod dismisses gods. i just dismiss one more god than him. i could ask the same question 'why do you dismiss all other gods, except for one?' saintforgod's smoke, mirrors and walls in his mind direct him to believe that the Christian God is real, yet all others are not. my smoke, mirrors and walls in my mind, lead me to believe there are no gods. why dismiss them all apart from one, that makes less sense than dismissing them all.

Not necessarily. It could be that you've seen through the smoke and mirrors, and it could be that Saint has seen through the smoke and mirrors. Humans have this uncanny ability to create a reality based on what they want or fear to be true. Recognizing that it a means by which you can prevent it.

Now your assessment is that these delusions cause saint to believe there is a God while these delusions cause you to believe there isn't. That's one way of explaining it away, but tell me this. When a drunk says they can quit any time, and his family says he has a problem, are they both delusional, or is it just the drunk?

Finally, did you take the time to really ask yourself why you don't believe there is a God? Seriously consider why it is you reject the belief in any God. Ask when you stopped believing in God, and what caused it. Then dig deeper. You can't dismiss God as impossibility through science; otherwise many of our greatest scientists wouldn't be religious. They would all be atheists. Why? Why can there be no God? Don't start with the Christian God, just ask why there can't be any God, and why you believe that.

Sorry if this is old news, our network kept going down while I was responding.

Originally posted by junglejake
Finally, did you take the time to really ask yourself why you don't believe there is a God? Seriously consider why it is you reject the belief in any God. Ask when you stopped believing in God, and what caused it. Then dig deeper. You can't dismiss God as impossibility through science; otherwise many of our greatest scientists wouldn't be religious. They would all be atheists. Why? Why can there be no God? Don't start with the Christian God, just ask why there can't be any God, and why you believe that.

gods like thor and ra, from ancient beliefs are taught as mere mythical historic gods. the same as the gods today may be taught in the future. there's no difference between the gods today and the ones that are now taught as mythical history. i'm not using any science to come to my conclusion. i don't need to. just rational thought alone will lead you to this very same conclusion. and if i did believe in a god, what one do you choose, and then what sect of that religion do you choose...it's a complete joke.

Originally posted by junglejake
Now your assessment is that these delusions cause saint to believe there is a God while these delusions cause you to believe there isn't. That's one way of explaining it away, but tell me this. When a drunk says they can quit any time, and his family says he has a problem, are they both delusional, or is it just the drunk?

Finally, did you take the time to really ask yourself why you don't believe there is a God? Seriously consider why it is you reject the belief in any God. Ask when you stopped believing in God, and what caused it. Then dig deeper. You can't dismiss God as impossibility through science; otherwise many of our greatest scientists wouldn't be religious. They would all be atheists. Why? Why can there be no God? Don't start with the Christian God, just ask why there can't be any God, and why you believe that.

well, my personal belief on god(s) is somewhat different than a nonreligious person, but most of the time a religion with a specific deity involved is a comfort mechanism developed to cope with the unexplainable and with hard times.

i think it isn't as hard to dismiss the existence of deities as you'd make it jj.

look at all the horrible diseases. what god would create EBOLA?
why would a divine being allow injustice to be done in their name?
why would there be so many different religious beliefs if there was a specific deity?

just try explaining why you believe there IS a god.

it would make things SOOO much easier.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
just try explaining why you believe there IS a god.

it would make things SOOO much easier.

Again, click the sig, then ask more specific questions on that thread. Every time, every time I discover I was wrong in an interpretation I had of the Bible, every time I discover I was incorrect in an assessment of God's character, every time one of my fellow members here at ATS nails me with something that makes me look back and discover just how wrong I was in my understanding, I reassess my faith. Every time I discover something I knew to be true turns out to be a corruption of my own ego influencing my faith, I reassess my faith. Every time I have had a conversation, been held accountable, heard a ministry, or stumble upon an unknown verse that shatters my perception of a facet of my faith, I have questioned.

Every time, I have come to know Christ better.

well, at least you aren't saying that you know absolutely everthing about jesus' character now.

good, you have at least some sort of rational thought process going on in your system of beliefs.

I think I've finally figured it out. Proselityzing is considered being "evangelical" but disagreeing is "hijacking". Got it.

I'd forgotten that there are special rules for believers that allows war and capital punishment but not abortion even to save a life, torture if it's against infidels, and any discussion of the hypocrisy of what passes for "Christianity" in much of the US today is a "conspiracy against Christians".

Does using the name of Christ to accrue power, wealth and political advantage count as taking the name of the Lord in vain? Or is that commandment just about saying "Goddamn"?

If there is a conspiracy against Christians, it is being perpetrated by those folks that sit in their megachurches counting money, telling their flock that if they vote Democrat they'll go to hell.

I'm so tired of the Christian Victim Syndrome that's being touted around here. I thought we were "more than conquerors". When you talk about a conspiracy against Christians let's be clear, if there's a battle being waged, it's with the phoney baloney holy men like Robertson and Dobson who have spit on the belief system of people who believe in what Jesus said. If there's hijacking going on, it's being done by these new-age slick Redstate Bible thumpers who believe they have some special corner on the faith market.