• Love God, and love one another!

    Share your heart for Christ and others in Godly Love

    https://christianforums.net/forums/god_love/

  • Wake up and smell the coffee!

    Join us for a little humor in Joy of the Lord

    https://christianforums.net/forums/humor_and_jokes/

  • Want to discuss private matters, or make a few friends?

    Ask for membership to the Men's or Lady's Locker Rooms

    For access, please contact a member of staff and they can add you in!

  • Need prayer and encouragement?

    Come share your heart's concerns in the Prayer Forum

    https://christianforums.net/forums/prayer/

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join Hidden in Him and For His Glory for discussions on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/become-a-vessel-of-honor-part-2.112306/

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • CFN has a new look and a new theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes coming in the future!

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

The Athiest Asks - v2 (idea by Rookie/Soldiers)

KV-44-v1

No Denomination - Just Christian
Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2024
Messages
1,839
Reaction score
283
God already "broke" (He doesnt follow it in the 1st place) Conservation. And besides, Who put that law there?
Again, how do you know other than a book? Were there measurements done? Repeated testing? Data analysis? Nope, you just ASSUME that there was a god that created the universe.

The point is, youre arbitrarily rejecting evidence.
The "evidence" is one. SINGULAR. BOOK. If I were to believe everything I read in a book, I'd believe in everything from the Buddha to Harry Potter.

Prdicting human behavior is a great backup for the existence of God. If God were All-knowing, we'd expect Him to be correct on it, always, consistently. Right?
Issue there is, you have to prove a god exists before you can prove he's all-knowing. Also, being correct about human behavior isn't being correct about everything. Now, if the Bible authors were correct about something that literally couldn't have been understood at the time, like predicting that the sun uses nuclear fusion for energy, THAT would at least be something. But humans existed back then, and the Bible authors could have easily pulled from their understanding of human behavior at the time.

Humans never have had and never will have the ability to search their hearts and timelessly be accurate on human behavior on their own. We need God to reveal it. Our own abilites can only take us so far.
This is what I dislike about Christianity, tbh. Screw the transphobia and homophobia, the worst part is that it completely breaks down any achievement anyone could ever have and makes it completely meaningless. An epiphany you had no part in has no meaning, overcoming a challenge has no meaning if you did it because someone else willed it, and love dictated by someone else is meaningless too. And then, as if to add insult to injury, it blames humans specifically for all the BAD things in the world. Like, come on man, consider having faith in YOURSELF for once. Maybe that's why people believe in religion; it's easier to tell others the things one desperately needs to tell oneself, so perhaps faith follows that trend too.

Projection. You fit everything into mere pattern recog. Tell me, how can pattern recog operate on something that isnt there? Hint: it cant.
It can't operate on something that's not there, but it can produce results that aren't there based on things that are there. That's literally what "projection" is; seeing factors that are there and imagining something that isn't there so hard you think it's true.

What actions have been taken that "dont fit", then??
That is, in fact, the problem. If your god is all-powerful and all-knowing and all-good, then literally any possible actions that occur could be chalked up to him. Compound onto that the fact that you also believe this all-good god can do evil in the service of good, and yeah, it's literally impossible for any action taken to NOT fit with the existence of your god, which makes the criterion meaningless because it can explain literally any data.

Either believe God's Omniscience or believe that He is fallible or hold. What alternative to the 3 do YOU propose?
Every other religion in existence that hasn't been actively disproven and features vague criterion for human behavior that can be interpreted to fit the moment?

-----

Oh yeah, and one other point I forgot to mention. How do you know that the motivations that you fit to the Bible, AREN'T just you seeing motivations that aren't there? How do you KNOW that a transgender person, or a homosexual person, or even and Atheist, is motivated by a desire to rebel against your god? Hell, in the last case, that's literally impossible because you can't want to rebel against something that doesn't exist.

And herein we find the TRUE root of all suffering and evil; people assume that the motivations of others are what they WANT to see, instead of trying to come in with an open mind and without assumptions. I'm not completely innocent of this; you already know that from a recent comments thread. However, you seem to be doing it a LOT. 99% of the time, hate and evil come from people saying the same thing in different ways.

As an example of this, a story I heard from a friend; A teacher once asked their philosophy class whether they believed in women's suffrage. All but one raised their hands. When the teacher asked the one individual who didn't raise their hand why they didn't believe in women's suffrage, they said "Because I don't want women to suffer". All the students were saying the same thing, just in a slightly different way, but if that student's intent were never revealed, it would have seemed he was advocating for taking away basic rights from women, rather than actually wanting women to NOT SUFFER, which would include maintaining their basic rights.


Again, it's all just people using different means and different words to do and say the same things, but they vilify each other because of those surface-level differences. I would encourage you to try to stop assuming things about others in your conversations with them, you will at least have better conversations, and you might just surprise yourself with what you realize you were missing and how much common ground you have with someone who's transgender or homosexual or Atheist.
 
All of the Athiest's text there is in RED.

Mine in White.
 
It would be interesting to know where this conversation came from.

As to how to talk to this person, either challenge them to provide a valid moral standard that is supported by their philosophy of life.
Or
Talk about Jesus, his life, crucifixion, burial and resurrection.
Ask him to provide the evidence for what ever views he/she has.
 
And friend, if you're debating with people who go that long on about such a silly issue as the nature of mankind somehow being a proof that there is no God... read the first chapter of the book of Romans to them.
As an example of this, a story I heard from a friend; A teacher once asked their philosophy class whether they believed in women's suffrage. All but one raised their hands. When the teacher asked the one individual who didn't raise their hand why they didn't believe in women's suffrage, they said "Because I don't want women to suffer". All the students were saying the same thing, just in a slightly different way, but if that student's intent were never revealed, it would have seemed he was advocating for taking away basic rights from women, rather than actually wanting women to NOT SUFFER, which would include maintaining their basic rights.
Really? This is something that an atheist said to you? That some idiot in some philosophy class thought that 'suffrage' was about 'suffering'. And they said that was their proof that God did not exist.
 
Issue there is, you have to prove a god exists before you can prove he's all-knowing.
Actually he is right, but you have to demand that in turn h3e shows how your scientific evidence is not valid.

Please read the sight at this link:-
Issue there is, you have to prove a god exists before you can prove he's all-knowing.
the point is You can believe anything you want. As long as what you believe is consistent with the evidence.
 
Satan and his horde are hiding behind human education. They plague our education system to get humans brainwashed. All histories are from books, as that's the only way historical events and figures are conveyed among humans from generation to generation. The methodology of conveying history also shares a common factor, which is the need of canonization. Chinese thus has canonical history and non-canonical history, while the Jews have canonical books and non-canonical books. Another shared characteristic is that the canon needs to be guarded by an authority without which there won't be the continuity of a canon. It's the job of the consecutive Chinese governments (as an entity or authority) who are responisble for defining and guarding such an canon (well it's made of books, and sometime a sole book in terms of a certain history). To the Jews the equivalent is their consecutive governments or religious authorities without which a canon won't stand. These characteristics reflect the capability (or the lack thereof) of humans in terms of conveying a historical truth. So if you don't believe in books, you have no history! Period!

Just as Jesus said, humans don't actually know what they are doing. Evidence is a false reality forged by Satan and his angels for humans to fall for. In reality, you have zero evidence on nothing! Humans don't actually rely on evidence to get to a truth, they rely heavily one human testimonies in a form to get any piece of truth or fact, including scientific facts. Scientific are in fact a form of human testimonies from scientists. 99.99% humans don't actually have any evidence on any claimed scientific facts! They don't need evidence either. Period!

Humans (relative to the much more intelligent angelic beings) are easy to fool.

2 Corinthians 4:4
In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
 
Last edited:
Humans (relative to the much more intelligent angelic beings) are easy to fool.
Ok, say someone acuses YOU of being fooled. So will you defend your stance or should we believe that you yourself was fooled?
 
Again, how do you know other than a book? Were there measurements done? Repeated testing? Data analysis? Nope, you just ASSUME that there was a god that created the universe.

Both the failed (self-refuting) notion of scientism and profound ignorance concerning Christian apologetics are evident here. Christian theism does not rest solely upon the claims of the Bible. And the core claim of scientism can't be proved by science.

Issue there is, you have to prove a god exists before you can prove he's all-knowing. Also, being correct about human behavior isn't being correct about everything. Now, if the Bible authors were correct about something that literally couldn't have been understood at the time, like predicting that the sun uses nuclear fusion for energy, THAT would at least be something. But humans existed back then, and the Bible authors could have easily pulled from their understanding of human behavior at the time.

You need to be careful of the Strawman argument, which the fellow uses above, of red-herrings and of his unilaterally establishing on what basis a thing is legitimate evidence/argument, or not. There are objective, unchanging and authoritative rules of logic, reason and evidence to which you both ought to adhere and so long as you operate according to them, you are under no obligation to satisfy the unique evidentiary/philosophic demands of any individual person. "I am not convinced" is not the standard for whether or not your arguments and evidence succeed, though athiests often smuggle this in as the standard.

This is what I dislike about Christianity, tbh. Screw the transphobia and homophobia, the worst part is that it completely breaks down any achievement anyone could ever have and makes it completely meaningless.

This is a huge contortion of the facts concerning Christianity - a popular atheist Strawman, actually, that ignores how many prominent scientists (Boyle, Mendel, Pascal, Newton, Curie, Faraday, etc.) have been theists and how many of them cite their faith as a prime motivator of their scientific labors.

An epiphany you had no part in has no meaning, overcoming a challenge has no meaning if you did it because someone else willed it, and love dictated by someone else is meaningless too.

Says who? Mere assertion is not an argument. Can you think of an exception to this assertion? I can. Many.

And then, as if to add insult to injury, it blames humans specifically for all the BAD things in the world. Like, come on man, consider having faith in YOURSELF for once.

There is a big non sequitur, here. Can you see it? Does it follow logically, reasonably, that assigning blame for evil in the world to human beings means you can't have any faith in yourself?

That is, in fact, the problem. If your god is all-powerful and all-knowing and all-good, then literally any possible actions that occur could be chalked up to him.

False. This is a very clumsy attempt at using the Problem of Evil to confound your Christian worldview. Does the wood carver who makes a knife to carve wood deserve blame when his knife is stolen and used to kill someone? Of course not.

Compound onto that the fact that you also believe this all-good god can do evil in the service of good,

Where is this person deriving their standard of "good" and "evil"? I bet he's stealing it from Christianity, though he doesn't realize it. Concerning morality, there is only personal preference, on atheism, not objective moral right and wrong.

Anyway, the person you're talking with has had little exposure, I suspect, to philosophy, or to the actual, robust evidence for the Christian faith that there is. Really, he sounds like he's just parroting atheist propaganda. It might do him more good to challenge him on the level of first principles, logic and reason. Until he gets these things squared away in his thinking, he won't be able to avoid the very poor thinking he's demonstrated in your OP.
 
Back
Top