Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

obplayer · 22-04-2015 08:26PM

hinault wrote: »

You refuse to accept Jesus Christ's testimony regarding the afterlife?

Clearly you do refuse to accept Jesus Christ's testimony as to the reality that is the afterlife.

The really annoying thing is that when they die these people won't even have the opportunity to realise they were wrong.:(

Safehands · 22-04-2015 08:31PM

hinault wrote: »

I think God can have it anyway He chooses. He's God!

So he can change the definition of the word infinite to mean what? "not very" may fit!

Michael OBrien · 22-04-2015 08:36PM

hinault wrote: »

You refuse to accept Jesus Christ's testimony regarding the afterlife?

Clearly you do refuse to accept Jesus Christ's testimony as to the reality that is the afterlife.

You miss my point, perhaps intentionally.
OF COURSE I reject jesus's alleged sayings now but the point was that jesus stated that people were not allowed to come back from the DEAD to give testimony to the living.
There are different types of jesus in the bible (depending on the writer), but that one parable is crystal clear. Believe the prophets or else.
Heck if you disagree with the parable, then explain why. Otherwise you are in theological conflict between believing the bible or believing random 'saints'.

hinault · 22-04-2015 08:40PM

Safehands wrote: »

So he can change the definition of the word infinite to mean what? "not very" may fit!

God is unchanging. God is transcendent. God is infinite.

God's mercy is infinite.
God's justice is infinite.

Safehands · 22-04-2015 08:43PM

hinault wrote: »

God is unchanging. God is transcendent. God is infinite.

God's mercy is infinite.
God's justice is infinite.

Obviously not. You can repeat that all you like. It means nothing, just rambling statements.

hinault · 22-04-2015 08:46PM

Michael OBrien wrote: »

You miss my point, perhaps intentionally.
OF COURSE I reject jesus's alleged sayings now but the point was that jesus stated that people were not allowed to come back from the DEAD to give testimony to the living.
There are different types of jesus in the bible (depending on the writer), but that one parable is crystal clear. Believe the prophets or else.
Heck if you disagree with the parable, then explain why. Otherwise you are in theological conflict between believing the bible or believing random 'saints'.

I believe in Jesus teaching about the afterlife.

In the gospels Jesus teaches that there is an afterlife and that every person will be judged in the afterlife.

Whether someone else claims to have died and have seen Heaven and come back to life has no bearing upon my faith in Jesus Christ and what He says about the afterlife.

hinault · 22-04-2015 08:48PM

Safehands wrote: »

Obviously not. You can repeat that all you like. It means nothing, just rambling statements.

Each of those statements are at the core to our human understanding of God.

Safehands · 22-04-2015 08:55PM

hinault wrote: »

Each of those statements are at the core to our human understanding of God.

No they are not.
Maybe to your understanding but as i have pointed out, you don't understand the word "infinite". Because of that those statements are meaningless.

Michael OBrien · 22-04-2015 09:00PM

hinault wrote: »

I believe in Jesus teaching about the afterlife.

In the gospels Jesus teaches that there is an afterlife and that every person will be judged in the afterlife.

Whether someone else claims to have died and have seen Heaven and come back to life has no bearing upon my faith in Jesus Christ and what He says about the afterlife.

No bearing? You stated that you were influenced by the tales by saints of the afterlife.
I never argued that the AFTERLIFE did not exist in the post. I made several points ABOUT it. (my personal lack of belief in an afterlife is irrelevant at this juncture).
1. That the bible refutes claims by anyone after jesus dying and coming back to give testimony (until judgement day anyway).
2. That the jews had a different view of the afterlife than modern christians do.
3. That jesus had a different view than most christians seem to believe now. The afterlife was supposed to occur in different stages. The soul rests until judgement day and then it is judged (hence named judgement day for the living AND the dead).

You seem to think that I dispute that jesus believed in an afterlife in the post. This completely misses the goal of my statement. You can safely ignore point 2 and 3 if you want, they are secondary and just a point of interest. Point 1 addressed the tales of saints about heaven and hell. That is the point I wish you to address.
Again its not that an afterlife could not exist or that jesus did not believe in it, it is about the TESTIMONY of saints that claim special knowledge of it.

hinault · 22-04-2015 09:08PM

Safehands wrote: »

No they are not.
Maybe to your understanding but as i have pointed out, you don't understand the word "infinite". Because of that those statements are meaningless.

My understanding is entirely correct.

You don't have to take my word that my understanding is entirely correct.

http://www.catholicbasictraining.com/apologetics/coursetexts/6e.htm

Delirium · 22-04-2015 09:32PM

Huntergonzo wrote: »

I think the belief in God is an irrational one, there's never been a scrap of evidence to support the existence of any God and there has been many Gods throughout human history...which in itself should raise alarm bells among believers. To be honest I don't have a big problem with people believing in a God, I don't see the need to myself but I don't see it as particularly harmful, however organised religion is very dangerous and has caused nothing but harm the world over.

In Ireland the big problem is of course that we still have religious indoctrination in our schools and a non secular constitution and inevitably of course that leads to specific religious dogma and discrimination permeating every facet of our society. I mean do people really believe all the nonsense of the old and new testaments and if so why do they ignore quite a lot of the evil references in the bible?

MOD NOTE

Please remember that this is the Christianity forum and in future refrain from referring to the bible in terms such as "all the nonsense of the old and new testament".

Please remember this in any future postings in the forum.

Thanks for your attention.

ABC101 · 22-04-2015 09:56PM

Michael OBrien wrote: »

Luke 16:19-31 disproves any saint claims of going to heaven/hell and returning. I was a catholic for about 25 years before becoming a nondenominational christian and then deist and then atheist.
The bible repeatedly rejects providing evidence or allowing the dead to rise to attest to an afterlife. Those saints are mistaken. The jews also did not believe in the kind of afterlife that later christians developed. Jesus did not believe in that kind of testimony either, hence the parable.
Modern christianity has widely different takes on heaven and hell, if such testimonies had any genuine merit, they would be adopted as church doctrine.
A modern example of a false claim was the boy from the recent story of going to heaven that was made into a christian film. He publically renounced the entire experience in his teens. Christians ignored his statement and still watch the film, despite it being a complete lie. People love the stories, more than scepticism. The sceptic is seldom loved as it spoils the illusion that inspires hope that death is not the end and loved ones will be reunited.
Now look back in church history and imagine how easy such tales would be accepted back then, where doubt was vilified and faith rewarded.

Your comment about Luke 16: 19-31 is gravely mistaken, factually incorrect and blatently wrong.

The parable of Lazarus deals with the worldwide gap between the rich and the inhumanly poor. There is a deadly law of money which makes the rich live seperately; housing, transportation, recreation, medical care.

The wall the rich man willingly built in this life becomes after his death an abyss which no one will be able to bridge. The one who accepts this separation will find himself on the other side forever.

Note that Jesus names the poor man, but does not name the rich man. This reverses the order which we would normally find in present day society, which treats the well to do as a person, but not the ordinary worker.

On dying Lazarus sees many friends, the angels, Abraham etc.

The rich man finds neither friends nor lawyers to revlieve his situation. Hell is isolation.

This Gospel parable shows that the rich man did not even see Lazarus lying at his door.

It is relevant today, as the 3rd and 4th worlds are at our door, in particular N.Africa and all that is going on in the Mediterranean sea.

The table has been taken over by the more advanced economies and the priviliged minorities who are adept at using the media.

This perversion of mind... is what takes a person like this to Hell.

This Gospel in it's desire to save the rich as well as the poor, asks us to work with a view to removing the abyss which separates the well off from the poor.

The time to break down this barrier is in this life.

What made you come up with the absurd idea that this parable is about God not inviting Saints to see the afterlife?

Huntergonzo · 22-04-2015 09:57PM

SW wrote: »

MOD NOTE

Please remember that this is the Christianity forum and in future refrain from referring to the bible in terms such as "all the nonsense of the old and new testament".

Please remember this in any future postings in the forum.

Thanks for your attention.

Ok but what are the rules of the website, I was under the impression that I was allowed to express an opinion, would I be allowed to use the word nonsense regarding the bible in another forum?

hinault · 22-04-2015 10:28PM

Michael OBrien wrote: »

No bearing? You stated that you were influenced by the tales by saints of the afterlife

Where did I state this?

I stated no such thing.

Michael OBrien wrote: »

I never argued that the AFTERLIFE did not exist in the post. The afterlife was supposed to occur in different stages. The soul rests until judgement day and then it is judged (hence named judgement day for the living AND the dead).

You seem to think that I dispute that jesus believed in an afterlife in the post. This completely misses the goal of my statement. You can safely ignore point 2 and 3 if you want, they are secondary and just a point of interest. Point 1 addressed the tales of saints about heaven and hell. That is the point I wish you to address.
Again its not that an afterlife could not exist or that jesus did not believe in it, it is about the TESTIMONY of saints that claim special knowledge of it.

Your post represents confusion.

The gospel records Jesus testimony about the reality of the afterlife.
I accept Jesus testimony.

You claimed earlier to be an atheist. Therefore you reject the testimony of Jesus. You reject the existence of the afterlife also.

I made no reference at any point to saints and the afterlife.

The chapter you cited by Luke stands. The meaning that you derived from Luke is wholly inaccurate.

Luke is telling a parable. The parable that Luke is telling is about how the injustice left to lie in this world is dealt with in the afterlife.

It is a lesson of how God remedies the unjust treatment suffered in this life and how God punishes those who do nothing about this injustice and who are responsible for the continuance of that injustice.

The last few lines of the parable are important as well. In being held to account for his life, the rich man asks God to allow him the chance to tell his relatives in this life about the afterlife, so that they won't make the same mistakes as he (the rich man) made.
But God tells the man if humans choose to ignore what the prophets said about the afterlife, and when humans killed Jesus instead of accepting him, no amount of proof will move peoples hearts.

Michael OBrien · 22-04-2015 11:29PM

hinault wrote: »

Where did I state this?

I stated no such thing.

Sorry I mistook you for the ABC guy that I was responding to. Hence the quote. Since he and you post back and forth in the thread I forgot which one I was quoting. On double checking it was not you.
Again sorry for that, my point was aimed at him/her/trans/ whatever.

Michael OBrien · 22-04-2015 11:32PM

hinault wrote: »

The last few lines of the parable are important as well. In being held to account for his life, the rich man asks God to allow him the chance to tell his relatives in this life about the afterlife, so that they won't make the same mistakes as he (the rich man) made.
But God tells the man if humans choose to ignore what the prophets said about the afterlife, and when humans killed Jesus instead of accepting him, no amount of proof will move peoples hearts.

Thats the part I was addressing. I agree that the other part of the parable deals with social justice. I did not think anyone needed me to spell that out since I was referring constantly to allowing people back from the dead to testify to the living.

Michael OBrien · 22-04-2015 11:38PM

ABC101 wrote: »

What made you come up with the absurd idea that this parable is about God not inviting Saints to see the afterlife?

I see I need to clarify. I agree that the first part of the parable deals with social issues. I understand that, the idea of a reversal of fortune is laid on several inches thick.
I was referring to the last part, which deals with not allowing the rich man any chance to return to warn his relatives because the prophets words should have been enough.
A parable can have more than one meaning, so if you can forgive my lack of clarification, despite constantly referring to the last part (I mentioned the whole thing to give context and make it easier to remember), I am ONLY referring to the last part, about the reason why the rich man was refused a chance to personally rise from the dead to warn his relatives in any way.

hinault · 22-04-2015 11:54PM

Michael OBrien wrote: »

Sorry I mistook you for the ABC guy that I was responding to. Hence the quote. Since he and you post back and forth in the thread I forgot which one I was quoting. On double checking it was not you.
Again sorry for that, my point was aimed at him/her/trans/ whatever.

That's ok. Any of us can and do make mistakes.

hinault · 23-04-2015 12:03AM

Michael OBrien wrote: »

Thats the part I was addressing. I agree that the other part of the parable deals with social justice. I did not think anyone needed me to spell that out since I was referring constantly to allowing people back from the dead to testify to the living.

The part that you were addressing in that parable is clear though. The parable says that no matter what level of proof is provided, some people will never accept that proof regardless.

And by the way, God did allow someone to die and come back to life. Jesus.

Jesus said before he died that he would be killed but that he would return from the dead.
People refused to believe what he said.
Then when Jesus rose from the dead, people still refused to believe.
So no matter how much Jesus foretells and no matter that He fulfilled what He foretold, people refuse to believe.

But you say now that you don't believe in Jesus in any more.

looksee · 23-04-2015 08:17AM

http://www.ancient-origins.net/human-origins-folklore/origins-human-beings-according-ancient-sumerian-texts-0065

This is a page about the Sumarian writings relating to creation and the gods. It is based on old texts and even has some links to the Christian bible (Eden for example) How can the posters here be sure that they are believing in the right deity? These gods go back further than Abraham and the writings are just as convincing. Have you (believers) studied these texts and come to conclusions about why the Bible should supersede them? If not, what are you basing your belief on?

orubiru · 23-04-2015 08:22AM

hinault wrote: »

God is unchanging. God is transcendent. God is infinite.

God's mercy is infinite.
God's justice is infinite.

What I don't understand here is how you can claim to know, and understand, the nature of God?

If something is infinite then it is impossible to make predictions about that thing. If something is infinite then it is impossible to measure that thing.

So when you say that God is infinite you say that it's impossible to measure or predict God.

Yet, you then go on to claim that God not only understands concepts such as "mercy" and "justice" but apparently knows how to apply them correctly.

What I am feeling here is that "God is infinite" is more of a way to avoid answering questions. If I can claim that God is infinite then I can pretty much dismiss any and all arguments, questions, and criticisms.

If God is infinite then how can religious people claim to know anything at all about God? How can you make claims about an infinite being?

Delirium · 23-04-2015 08:24AM

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Ok but what are the rules of the website, I was under the impression that I was allowed to express an opinion, would I be allowed to use the word nonsense regarding the bible in another forum?

MOD NOTE

Anyone can post but they must keep within the site rules and well as the local forum charter.

As to other forums, you'd have to consult the appropriate charter.

Hope that helps.

orubiru · 23-04-2015 08:39AM

hinault wrote: »

Jesus said before he died that he would be killed but that he would return from the dead.
People refused to believe what he said.
Then when Jesus rose from the dead, people still refused to believe.
So no matter how much Jesus foretells and no matter that He fulfilled what He foretold, people refuse to believe.

To be fair to those people, they probably refused to believe he would return from the dead because something like that clearly contradicts nature.

I imagine that 2,000 years ago people saw quite a lot of death and the average adult would have seen plenty of people dying over the course of their life and would have never seen someone rising from the dead.

I would imagine that "this is some kind of trick" would be a pretty understandable reaction.

How many people actually saw Jesus rise from the dead? What was the worlds population at the time?

You expect a couple of hundred million people to believe a story that contradicts nature based on eyewitness reports? It's not likely.

It has nothing to do with peoples refusal to believe and everything to do with the inability of Jesus' followers to make a convincing case.

You want people to believe that some guy was dead for three days and then came back? Fine. Provide evidence.

There is also a problem that 2,000 years ago we did not have the medical knowledge we had now. I am sure that once in a while someone would get into an accident, be in a coma, and then wake up again. People could easily misunderstand that if they did not have a certain level of education.

The idea that Jesus was somehow dead for days and then came back from the dead is such a spectacular and unrealistic claim. It's perfectly understandable that people wouldn't believe it.

So why can't God just send another son to Earth? With our current technology and capacity for communication we would be able to measure and verify His miracles. That would be amazing.

Why doesn't God do that?

Huntergonzo · 23-04-2015 08:52AM

SW wrote: »

MOD NOTE

Anyone can post but they must keep within the site rules and well as the local forum charter.

As to other forums, you'd have to consult the appropriate charter.

Hope that helps.

Ok thank you for the feedback.

orubiru · 23-04-2015 09:17AM

ABC101 wrote: »

WRT to our good athiest who has died and is now standing before God getting judged, well I cannot say for certain what will happen to them. But I can logically say... that there is a increased risk of being denied entry into Heaven.

Could I ask you to put yourself in God's place, what would you say to the athiest? Now put yourself in the place of the athiest, what would they say to God? What would the conversation look like?

I would say that in this situation it would become clear that our Atheist does not understand the nature of God.

It would also become clear that God would not understand the nature of our Atheist.

Surely any decent human being would have so many questions upon confirmation of Gods existence? Why would God allow so much suffering to exist in the world? Death and disease and destruction. Injustice. Suffering.

Is it reasonable to expect God to explain this?

Would it be unreasonable to take God through the Old Testament as ask "what were you thinking here"?

Surely if God can judge Man then Man is also entitled to judge God?

Joshua 6:21, "They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys".

Numbers 31:17-18 "Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

These are Gods armies doing these things right? At least they have Gods backing?

So, yeah, I'd expect an explanation. I've done some questionable things in my life but nothing serious and certainly nothing on that kind of scale.

indioblack · 23-04-2015 10:10AM

ABC101 wrote: »

From the perspective of an athiest.... I could understand your comment.

Only God will know what will happen to those "Good athiest's" who have led good lives (as you call it) when they die.

However if it is true that there is a God, and that Jesus Christ is his Son, and that there are numerous rules / regulations i.e. 10 commandments etc

Then it would be the case that the good athiest who did not do anything wrong to his fellow human beings would be in a bit of an conundrum... as they did not do anything particularly right spiritually towards God.

Chrisitians are called upon to not only do good works to their fellow human beings, but they are also to attempt to incorporate God into their daily lives.

It is kind of surrendering your will.... to that of God's will.

WRT to our good athiest who has died and is now standing before God getting judged, well I cannot say for certain what will happen to them. But I can logically say... that there is a increased risk of being denied entry into Heaven.

Could I ask you to put yourself in God's place, what would you say to the athiest? Now put yourself in the place of the athiest, what would they say to God? What would the conversation look like?

What would god say to this atheist?
Let's assume this person lived a mostly good life. God would say, "You've done some bad things, but on the whole you've led a blameless life. Nevertheless, you have been unable to accept my existence, therefore you are denied entry into heaven.
To pursue this, to a believer presenting him/herself before god he might say, "You have done some bad things also, but, in the main you too have led a mostly blameless life. Additionally, you have accepted my existence - and on that basis you may enter heaven.
Or.... he might say, "If all the atheists were as well behaved as you the churches would become redundant!"
God is depicted as infinite in all respects. I wonder if an entity like that is so far above us that he might regard our notions of justice and morality as irrelevant.

hinault · 23-04-2015 11:47AM

orubiru wrote: »

What I don't understand here is how you can claim to know, and understand, the nature of God?

If something is infinite then it is impossible to make predictions about that thing. If something is infinite then it is impossible to measure that thing.

So when you say that God is infinite you say that it's impossible to measure or predict God.

Yet, you then go on to claim that God not only understands concepts such as "mercy" and "justice" but apparently knows how to apply them correctly.

What I am feeling here is that "God is infinite" is more of a way to avoid answering questions. If I can claim that God is infinite then I can pretty much dismiss any and all arguments, questions, and criticisms.

If God is infinite then how can religious people claim to know anything at all about God? How can you make claims about an infinite being?

God is infinite.

We don't have to understand something to know something.

Do you have to fully understand the physical laws of electro magnetism to know that an electric current can kill you?
When your child is trying to stick their finger in to an electrical socket do you need to explain to that the child how Faraday's Electro Magnetism theory in order to convey the effect of electricity and an electric shock?
Does your child need to fully comprehend the laws of electro magnetism in order to know that sticking their finger in the electrical socket could generate an electrical charge that could damage them?

No one of faith claims to understand infinity.

The prophets and Jesus Christ have all communicated to humanity the properties which God is. One property is that God is infinite.
We know that infinity has no beginning and no end.

Do we fully understand all of the properties that infinity possesses? Of course not.
Do we need to fully understand all of the properties that infinity possesses?

Many atheists will use the lack of understanding anything pertaining to the supernatural to try to justify their stance and they will also use the lack of understanding to try to denigrate those who do have faith.

You are entirely free to refute what has been communicated in the bible.
You are entirely free to reject that there has been communication.

For those who do believe no proof may be necessary.
For those who do not believe no amount of proof is sufficient.

Safehands · 23-04-2015 12:23PM

hinault wrote: »

God is infinite.

We don't have to understand something to know something.

If you are going to use the term "infinite" or "infinity" to describe something then you absolutely should know what you are saying.

If there are an infinite number of galaxies like ours then there would be an infinite number of forums called boards.ie, with an infinite no of posters called hinault. It is kind of mind-blowing as a concept.

If God's love, mercy or forgiveness was infinite, then no-one would go to hell because God would not let them go, no matter what they had done, because he would have infinite forgiveness and mercy.

So yes, you do need to understand what you are saying!

hinault · 23-04-2015 12:41PM

safehands wrote:

If you are going to use the term "infinite" or "infinity" to describe something then you absolutely should know what you are saying.

I understand the term infinity.

Just as you understand the term Electro Magnetism.

Safehands wrote: »

It is kind of mind-blowing as a concept.

Infinity is too vast to comprehend. It is suprarational in reality.

Safehands wrote: »

If God's love, mercy or forgiveness was infinite, then no-one would go to hell because God would not let them go, no matter what they had done, because he would have infinite forgiveness and mercy.

God is infinite.
God's mercy is infinite
God's justice is infinite.

I supplied a link in reply to you earlier to help you understand better what mercy means and what justice means.
The link explains in detail what I had told you earlier and what I have told you since.

Infinite forgiveness? Infinite forgiveness is granted only to those who invoke God's mercy. This has been explained to you by me and by the link.
Infinite justice is dispensed to those who do not seek God's mercy.

The concept of mercy and justice is not that difficult to grasp, whatever about the infinity concept.

From reading your posts it appears that you want God to tolerate sin.
A licence to sin, if you will.

I'll supply you with the link again and I will supply an additional link to explain Mercy and Justice.

http://www.catholicbasictraining.com/apologetics/coursetexts/6e.htm

http://catholicharboroffaithandmorals.com/Mercy%20and%20Justice.html

marienbad · 23-04-2015 12:48PM

hinault wrote: »

I understand the term infinity.

Just as you understand the term Electro Magnetism.

Infinity is too vast to comprehend. It is suprarational in reality.

Not often you see a poster contradict themselves in so short a space !

Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

Comments