Is there such a thing as an atheist?

[mustaphadrink]

I struggle with this because it seems we are losing in the arena of ideas because some of us are afraid to speak up. Also, I see Christians who may not have the intellectual ability to defend their faith being run over by atheistic bullies. A little pushback is good IMO because it doesn't afford them the ability to rely on bullying tactics.

You are so right. I worked out a long time ago, especially with homosexuals that they have discovered the pen is mightier than the sword so they have set themselves on course to wage a verbal war with anyone who disagrees with them. They have taken normal, ordinary words and twisted the truth as to what they mean to advance their war on law abiding citizens.

The first and biggest lie was to call themselves gay. A two year study of 200 hundred homosexuals in NY found that the overwhelming evidence was that they were not gay. They were some of the most miserable people on earth.

Now you are bigoted and intolerant if you believe what the bible says about homosexuality and for years now they have said they are born homosexual and although I have asked hundreds of homosexuals to provided evidence for this claim, not one has been able to.

Usually when anyone tries to silence christians they have to revert to lies to build a case because the truth cannot be used against them. But that should not surprise us as they invented lies to have Jesus crucified.

 

[Sirk]

You are so right. I worked out a long time ago, especially with homosexuals that they have discovered the pen is mightier than the sword so they have set themselves on course to wage a verbal war with anyone who disagrees with them. They have taken normal, ordinary words and twisted the truth as to what they mean to advance their war on law abiding citizens.

The first and biggest lie was to call themselves gay. A two year study of 200 hundred homosexuals in NY found that the overwhelming evidence was that they were not gay. They were some of the most miserable people on earth.

Now you are bigoted and intolerant if you believe what the bible says about homosexuality and for years now they have said they are born homosexual and although I have asked hundreds of homosexuals to provided evidence for this claim, not one has been able to.

Usually when anyone tries to silence christians they have to revert to lies to build a case because the truth cannot be used against them. But that should not surprise us as they invented lies to have Jesus crucified.

I believe the current term for their bullying is hipster thuggery.

 

[nl]

According to Christian belief Jesus was God. He didn't have to prove himself to himself. I don't see how this applies to my situation.

Wait a minute, it just occurred to me. Satan presumably knew Jesus was God, right? Why would he offer the world to God?

Then the devil, taking Him up on a high mountain, showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. 6 And the devil said to Him, “All this authority I will give You, and their glory; for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. 7 Therefore, if You will worship before me, all will be Yours (Luke 4:5-7).

You see, I think the author of the Gospel of Luke does not see Jesus as God. The son of God, yes, but not God. Why else would he have the devil tempt Jesus by offering him the kingdoms of all the world? This only makes sense if the author does not think Jesus is God.

The kingdoms of this world are separate from the Kingdom of God. We are still praying "Thy Kingdom come" for the kingdom of God to arrive fully.

Adam and Eve failed to believe God's Word but believed the serpent instead. God had given dominion to Adam. Adam and Eve followed the serpent. The kingdoms of this world became the kingdoms of the serpent.

Handel's Messiah and the Hallelujah chorus sing of a time yet to be fulfilled when the kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ. When this happens, He shall reign for ever and ever. Hallelujah.

 

[mustaphadrink]

God calls people to humility and repentance. God wants people to seek His glory and not their own. "If anyone wants to boast, let him boast in the Lord." God has conditions but He has also made wonderful promises.

Thankyou nl. I have found that to be my experience too. I realised after a period of bible study that most of what God offers is conditional and if we don't fulfil those conditions we are out in the cold as in Repent and be baptised for the forgiveness of sins so......no repentance and baptism, no forgiveness of sins. Then there is "believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved." No belief no salvation.

Where the atheists go wrong is that they want to wave the magic wand and conjure God out of nowhere to do their bidding. I guess that is what happens when satan has blinded your eyes as he has with them. Because satan has done this, the only emotion atheists have is pride and as we know pride always goes before a fall so in effect they are their own worst enemy.

 

[Timeline]

Yes, thank you for having some humility about our understanding. I was reading about a dual nature in Jesus, I was hesitant at first because of some connection to gnosticism, but I'm intrigued by the imagery of both the lamb and the lion. If someone could expand on this I'd be interested.

I am not sure what you are specifically talking about. I know that Jesus is called the lamb. And I find it interesting that both Jesus and Satan are referred to as Lions. But I guess this makes sense. Satan goes around looking for someone to devour. But Jesus is no weakling either.

I also find it interesting that everyone always connects David and Jesus, and they are right to do so. But, people rarely connect Jesus to Solomon. But it was Solomon who built the temple. Not only that, but Solomon married thousands of women, which I believe may have joined many nations to Israel. The church is the bride of Jesus Christ - Which joins people of all nations. I think sometimes that there may be more or just as much between Jesus and Solomon as there is Jesus and David. Just a thought (although not really on your topic; I apologize, it's just the way my mind works).

 

[mustaphadrink]

A little pushback is good IMO because it doesn't afford them the ability to rely on bullying tactics.

so true Sirk so true. They HATE anyone disagreeing with them. I thought I would have a bit of fun and signed on to the PINK website. That is a UK homosexual magazine. Over a period of a month I submitted posts that contained the truth, then I was banned because they could not handle the truth.

But..................not before I had been called 173 foul, abusive, putrid, offensive, rude, crude, blasphemous and pathetic names. Sometimes when I am accused of not being lovey dovey, I just point this experience out to them and encourage them to get their own house in order first.

 

[mustaphadrink]

I want to add to this that the beauty of following Jesus is that Christianity is historically and scientifically testable as well as all inclusive in that you it welcomes those who take a blind leap as well as those who require some intellectual basis for believing.

Yes as this comment from Wikipedia attests to...............

Many modern scholars consider the baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion to be two historically certain facts about him.[SUP][4][/SUP][SUP][6][/SUP] James Dunn states that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent" and "rank so high on the 'almost impossible to doubt or deny' scale of historical facts" that they are often the starting points for the study of the historical Jesus.[SUP][4][/SUP] Bart Ehrman states that the crucifixion of Jesus on the orders of Pontius Pilate is the most certain element about him.[SUP][7][/SUP] John Dominic Crossan states that the crucifixion of Jesus is as certain as any historical fact can be.[SUP][8][/SUP] Eddy and Boyd state that it is now "firmly established" that there is non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus.[SUP][9]

[/SUP]
Craig Blomberg states that most scholars in the third quest for the historical Jesus consider the crucifixion indisputable.[SUP][5][/SUP] But, while scholars agree on the historicity of the crucifixion, they differ on the reason and context for it, e.g., both E. P. Sanders and Paula Fredriksen support the historicity of the crucifixion, but contend that Jesus did not foretell his own crucifixion, and that his prediction of the crucifixion is a Christian story.[SUP][10][/SUP] Christopher M. Tuckett states that, although the exact reasons for the death of Jesus are hard to determine, one of the indisputable facts about him is that he was crucified.[SUP][11][/SUP] Geza Vermes also views the crucifixion as a historical event but provides his own explanation and background for it.[SUP][10]

[/SUP]
John P. Meier views the crucifixion of Jesus as historical fact and states that based on the criterion of embarrassment Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader.[SUP][12][/SUP] Meier states that a number of other criteria, e.g., the criterion of multiple attestation (i.e., confirmation by more than one source), the criterion of coherence (i.e., that it fits with other historical elements) and the criterion of rejection (i.e., that it is not disputed by ancient sources) help establish the crucifixion of Jesus as a historical event.[SUP][13]

[/SUP]
Although almost all ancient sources relating to crucifixion are literary, the 1968 archeological discovery just northeast of Jerusalem of the body of a crucified man dated to the 1st century provided good confirmatory evidence of the gospel accounts of crucifixion.[SUP][14][/SUP] The crucified man was identified as Yohan Ben Ha'galgol and probably died about 70 AD, around the time of the Jewish revolt against Rome. The analyses at the Hadassah Medical School estimated that he died in his late 20s. These studies also showed that the man had been crucified in a manner resembling the Gospel accounts. Another relevant archaeological find, which also dates to the 1st century AD, is an unidentified heel bone with a spike discovered in a Jerusalem gravesite, now held by the Israel Antiquities Authority and displayed in the Israel Museum.[SUP][15][/SUP][SUP][16]

I use this comment because it is not from the bible or a Christian source. [/SUP]

 

[deepthought]

More and more I am convinced that atheism is a religion and its God is Dawkins as they quote him so much and believe what he says. There's that word again...believe. It is going to take more than a few denials to convince me atheism is not a religion especially as in the last 12 months they have opened atheist churches in three nations. If it is not a religion, why do they need churches?

I must agree with you on the church thing. I have heard of these Atheist Churches or Humanist Churches being formed. I can understand people of common interest wanting somewhere to come together but I don't think church was the right choice of name. Forum may have been better. However, church means different things to different people. As a martial artist, I have heard fellows say the Dojo is their church. As a practitioner of the arts, I have heard people say the theatre is their church, and then in music, well.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCvVatG16NE

So it may be the name used in an alternative manner. But I assure you. Lack of belief is no more a religion than 'Not playing Tennis' is a recognised sport.

 

[mustaphadrink]

Atheist Church Split: Sunday Assembly And Godless Revival's 'Denominational Chasm'

Aha! An atheist church split and they haven't been going a year. So much for the atheists criticism for splits in non atheist churches.

 

[mustaphadrink]

So it may be the name used in an alternative manner. But I assure you. Lack of belief is no more a religion than 'Not playing Tennis' is a recognised sport.

Haven't you heard that EVERYONE believes in something even if it is fairies at the bottom of the garden. Cycel used to believe in ghosts. And then there is the saying if you believe in nothing you will believe anything and that just about sums up atheists.

The way some atheists go on and on and on and on and on about their "beliefs" it is fairly obvious to the casual listener that lack of belief is as religious as belief in God and I am backed up in this because some atheist organisation in the USA has applied for religious tax exemption.

If you are not a religion why are you applying for a religious tax exemption and why are you starting up an atheist church? In addition I read this week that an atheist organisation THAT HAS religious tax exemption is trying to stop some religious organisation from GETTING tax exemption.

No doubt the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing and it is obvious that one atheist does not speak for another.

 

[deepthought]

Haven't you heard that EVERYONE believes in something even if it is fairies at the bottom of the garden. Cycel used to believe in ghosts. And then there is the saying if you believe in nothing you will believe anything and that just about sums up atheists.

The way some atheists go on and on and on and on and on about their "beliefs" it is fairly obvious to the casual listener that lack of belief is as religious as belief in God and I am backed up in this because some atheist organisation in the USA has applied for religious tax exemption.

If you are not a religion why are you applying for a religious tax exemption and why are you starting up an atheist church? In addition I read this week that an atheist organisation THAT HAS religious tax exemption is trying to stop some religious organisation from GETTING tax exemption.

No doubt the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing and it is obvious that one atheist does not speak for another.

Becuase atheists are by their nature individuals, and what a group of like minded people across the other side of the planet do is no concern of mine. However, it does raise the question of why ANY religion should have any preferential tax status?

 

[mustaphadrink]

Once again, confrontational and aggressive.

did you read my post about homosexuals at PINK NEWS? if you didn't you should then you would learn what confrontational and aggressive is.

It is more because of people with similar attitudes to yourself that people turn away from the churches.

Actually the evidence is that churches that hold to the truth of scripture are growing and those who are not are shrinking.

From catholic dogma to the anti-Semitic musings of Martin Luther to the fact that you list renowned fascist and supporter of the British Nazi Party Enoch Powell as one of the people you listen to.

I lived in England whilst Enoch Powell was a member of parliament. The claim that Enoch was a renowned fascist was a lie perpetrated by the loony left to blacken his name.

We have looked at your religion and decided for whatever reason that it makes no sense to us.

And what religion is that pray tell me?

If we die and go to hell for eternity, our choice and consequence. But at the moment, eternity in hell would be preferable to eternity with a mass of fascists! That would be my personal hell.

Don't know as I have not encountered either. I have only read about the atheist fascists that were around in the time of Stalin, Mao Ze Dong etc.

 

[mustaphadrink]

Becuase atheists are by their nature individuals, and what a group of like minded people across the other side of the planet do is no concern of mine. However, it does raise the question of why ANY religion should have any preferential tax status?

Nice try but you are up the creek without a paddle. The fact is your mates are seeking religious tax exemption and are building churches so it does affect you and what you say and makes it difficult to deny that non religion is not a religion.

As far as your last point is concerned, atheists and homosexuals alike have been trying for years to stop tax exemption for churches and their charitable organisations because their ideology demands that.

They choose to ignore the fact that the services they provide are at a third of the cost the government could provide them for so they are saving the government a lot of money. The fact is the net cost to the government is zero. Only an idiot would turn down an offer like that.

I would like to suggest that instead of trying to queer everyone's pitch that the atheists muck in and start up some charitable foundations, get the tax exemption and save the government even more money.

Course it won't happen because the atheists dogma subscribes to the survival of the fittest so if someone falls by the wayside, too bad. They obviously were not one of the fittest.

 

[deepthought]

Don't know as I have not encountered either. I have only read about the atheist fascists that were around in the time of Stalin, Mao Ze Dong etc.

Did you see my post of a list of 10 Christians who had committed murder on american soil in the name of their beliefs?

I'm sorry I forgot that all dictators were atheists like Hitler, Mousellini, Castro....oh wait. As Communism is frequently linked with Atheistic Principals it's no surprise they were. Communism as a philosophy doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the existence or non-existence of god/gods.

In the western world I suspect that the linking of communism and atheism is one of indoctrination. "Godless commies" was such a common epithet that many people have a hard time NOT thinking about atheism when they think about communism. Many people forget that in the early history of communism it was a popular idea with many westerners, and the seizing on of the atheist aspect as proposed by Marx was a powerful way to make communism socially unacceptable in western countries.


As actually practiced it has had much in common with religion, specifically in that the communist states hold a dogmatic view of communism that precludes any other "higher power". However, there is nothing inherent in the general principles of communism that require or preclude a god belief. It is easy to imagine, for example, a religion based commune. It isn't too far of a stretch to make the case that Jesus Christ preached communism, e.g. giving away your wealth to the poor, etc. 'quoted from tj3f3rsn'


But what did they all have in common? They were all human. Maybe, just maybe, that is the problem!

 

[mustaphadrink]

I disagree. The Pharisees would have agreed with him on many points. It wasn't them who wanted him dead. That distinction belongs to the Sadducees, who ran the temple, and who were puppets of the Herodian dynasty and of the Romans. When Jesus carried out an attack on the temple it was the Sadducees who would have found him a real and immediate threat. One perhaps even requiring his execution. They had valid concerns, but I also understand Jesus’ motivation. It was a politically charged manoeuver and it cost Jesus his life. That’s my view.

I believe that Jesus was condemned by the Sanhedrin which is made up of both Pharisees and Sadducees.

 

[deepthought]

As I have stated before. On the Darwin Scale, I would place myself and all other defacto atheists I know between a 6 and a 7 but not the full 7 as my knowledge is not absolute. If I were to place those people and myself into a group it would be Humanist. As for humanism or atheism being darwinistic, that is nonsense born of ignorance.

Q. Do Humanists believe in "the survival of the fittest" as a code of conduct?


A. No. Very far from it. The phrase "survival of the fittest" is derived from the theory of evolution originally proposed by Charles Darwin. Humanists do believe that human beings, like every other living thing, evolved from simpler organisms; but the evolutionary process doesn't of itself provide an ethical standard. Humanists share with most of the religions of the world a belief in the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Notice that this rule doesn't have anything to do with the existence or non-existence of supernatural beings. (A more complete statement of Humanist morality can be found in the work of the philosopher Immanuel Kant; and a Humanist theory of the purpose of life can be found in Aristotle's book Nicomachean Ethics.)


Ironically, however, many 19th century conservatives thought they saw in the concept of the "survival of the fittest" lessons to be learned about how to frame American society, as well as a justification for the greed and misconduct of businessmen. (This was true most notably of Herbert Spencer and William Graham Sumner.)

Humanism FAQ

 

[mustaphadrink]

This "avatar" (e.g. account on CC) exhibits characteristic features or patterns that point to intelligence behind the avatar (despite its faulty assertions). It communicates, for example, and does so in a manner consistent of an individual personality yet with a complexity that transcends any known AI program or bot though not that of a human being.

I would argue that the avatar has not arisen nor proceeds strictly by random cause preceding effect but rather that the avatar was designed by an intelligent being within an environment (e.g. CC) that was also designed by one or more intelligent beings while admitting that actual identity of the intelligent designer of the Cycel avatar requires a more detailed causal analysis... lol.

Yes AgeofKnowledge I did lol.

 

[Jda016]

Course it won't happen because the atheists dogma subscribes to the survival of the fittest so if someone falls by the wayside, too bad. They obviously were not one of the fittest.

Your comment gave me a thought that I never really realized.

Evolution has no concept of mercy, compassion, or love. Survival of the fittest is the goal and only the strong survive. The world despises Hitler and Stalin and yet people like them most exemplify the true philosophical nature of evolution.

According to the philosopy that arises from evolution, Society is stronger if it does not have the burden or strain of the elderly, the handicapped, or the invalid. When Hitler murdered the handicapped, elderly, gays, and Jews, he truly believed he was doing Europe a favor. He believed he was making Germany stronger and he had Darwin and Nietzche's teachings to back him up.

I never, until this moment, truly realized how cruel, evil, and compassionless the philosophy of evolution truly is.

If we are honest, we will see that evolution's enemy is morality.

 

[mustaphadrink]

I am 100 percent sure there is no god.

I am 100% sure there is a God and I will produce as much evidence as you do to prove it.

 

[mustaphadrink]

Your comment gave me a thought that I never really realized.

Evolution has no concept of mercy, compassion, or love. Survival of the fittest is the goal and only the strong survive. The world despises Hitler and Stalin and yet people like them most exemplify the true philosophical nature of evolution.

According to the philosopy that arises from evolution, Society is stronger if it does not have the burden or strain of the elderly, the handicapped, or the invalid. When Hitler murdered the handicapped, elderly, gays, and Jews, he truly believed he was doing Europe a favor. He believed he was making Germany stronger and he had Darwin and Nietzche's teachings to back him up.

I never, until this moment, truly realized how cruel, evil, and compassionless the philosophy of evolution truly is.

If we are honest, we will see that evolution's enemy is morality.

That is so true and you can add to the list the millions of babies that are murdered in the womb each year. At our annual March for Life, we always get a handful of pro-death rent a mob trying to stop a lawfully constituted assembly and the right to march and freedom of speech.

If ever I was unsure that a person could be possessed by a demon, I am not on that day. Their faces are dripping with hate and venom and their language is putrid. No doubt they are not at all interested in morality.