[_ Old Earth _] Question for All Atheists.

[turnorburn]

Why would an atheist "accept" any god on their deathbed? If they did, they obviously weren't an atheist.

This deathbed conversion idea really amuses me. According to most Christians, you can sin all your life and really live it up, and then when you're just about to die, you can wash all those sins away and get your ticket to heaven.

It's not really fair on those people who lived a good Christian life for their entire adulthood.

What's not fair, do you mean somebody arrives at the job site just as the day's work is getting over, hires on for the same wages when the others had worked the entire day to get paid and this guy works one hour and gets the same pay, makes sense to me and in Matthew 20:1 For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.
2 And when he had agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard.
3 And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace,
4 And said unto them; Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give you. And they went their way.
5 Again he went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did likewise.
6 And about the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing idle, and saith unto them, Why stand ye here all the day idle?
7 They say unto him, Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the vineyard; and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive.
8 So when even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first.
9 And when they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny.
10 But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny.
11 And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,
12 Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
13 But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny?
14 Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.
15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?
16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.

You can't argue against the word of God for if you do you'll go nowhere in life.

Thanks,
turnorburn

 

[Orion]

What does "...for many be called, but few chosen. " have to do with the story? Who, in the story, was called to work the field, yet didn't work?

Also, it would seem that the "death bed conversion" person worked NO amount of time. Yet, If this parable is the case, the person who works for 50 years in the ministry, saving thousands of people during that time, they will receive nothing more than the reprobate who squanders his life, kills many people, rapes women, is a drunkard, womanizer, and mocks Christianity and God, . . . . yet has a sincere death bed conversion, saving not one soul, . . . . . that person will receive the same reward as the 50 year veteran. And that newly saved person will get their reward before the 50 year veteran.

I'm still amazed that a blind faith in the unproveable is seen as righteous. :-?

 

[turnorburn]

That's why its called faith.

 

[Free]

Atheism is simply the lack of belief/faith in a god/s.

No, that is agnosticism, or at least that ought to be the logical conclusion of those who simply lack belief in a god. Atheism is precisely that, "not god", and as a belief really is untenable.

The religious person requires faith since they are making the claim that there is 100% probability that god exists, and further that god is also their god. Neither of these claims have evidence to support them so they require faith.

I find it hypocritical that "atheists" and agnostics use this argument regarding faith in one breath and then in another say that "Science gathers together evidence and then draws a conclusion based on the evidence". Why can't the religious person also gather together evidence for God's existence and then draw a conclusion?

This is what you stated in another thread: "ID is not science. Science gathers together evidence and then draws a conclusion based on the evidence. ID has a conclusion right from square one and it frantically goes about searching for evidence to support this conclusion."

I will argue that this is precisely what atheists do, except they do not look for evidence, they dismiss it a priori, which is hardly scientific.

 

[Deep Thought]

Atheism is simply the lack of belief/faith in a god/s.

No, that is agnosticism, or at least that ought to be the logical conclusion of those who simply lack belief in a god. Atheism is precisely that, "not god", and as a belief really is untenable.

Agnosticism is someone who sits on the fence and thinks that there may be a God or not.

Atheism is a belief in exactly the same way that being bald is a hairstyle.

The religious person requires faith since they are making the claim that there is 100% probability that god exists, and further that god is also their god. Neither of these claims have evidence to support them so they require faith.

I find it hypocritical that "atheists" and agnostics use this argument regarding faith in one breath and then in another say that "Science gathers together evidence and then draws a conclusion based on the evidence". Why can't the religious person also gather together evidence for God's existence and then draw a conclusion?

The simple answer is there is *no* evidence for God/s existence.

 

[Guest]

The religious person requires faith since they are making the claim that there is 100% probability that god exists, and further that god is also their god. Neither of these claims have evidence to support them so they require faith.

I find it hypocritical that "atheists" and agnostics use this argument regarding faith in one breath and then in another say that "Science gathers together evidence and then draws a conclusion based on the evidence". Why can't the religious person also gather together evidence for God's existence and then draw a conclusion?

This is what you stated in another thread: "ID is not science. Science gathers together evidence and then draws a conclusion based on the evidence. ID has a conclusion right from square one and it frantically goes about searching for evidence to support this conclusion."

I will argue that this is precisely what atheists do, except they do not look for evidence, they dismiss it a priori, which is hardly scientific.

You are welcome to draw a conclusion once you have evidence, but herein lies the problem. Religion and spirituality regards concepts above and beyond what can be physically measured and described. Whilst you can say "This car can go at 100mph" and then get out your stopwatch and prove it, if you say "When you die <event> happens", there is no way to prove it. God is undefinable, (in fact, at one period in history the Jewish god, and by extension, the Christian God was known by the name of YHWH for the expressed purpose that it was unpronouncable).

The only evidence a person can assemble for the existence of a God is to take something that cannot be otherwise be explained and say that it must therefore indicate a divine presence. However, this is circumstantial. For years, one of the most powerful arguments pro-God, was the humble rainbow. How do all the colours always know to line up in the same order, and to form such a perfect semi-circle? Science now has an objective and experiment based answer that can be repeated in the lab, or even in the home. Perhaps science one day will unravel the last mystery of the universe. Then again it may not and one day perhaps man will be forced to admit there are secrets that he cannot know. Until that day it will always take some measure of faith to state as fact what cannot be known.

To apply this to the Atheism vs. Religion topic, did you read my entire post? I'm fairly certain that I mention that the strong Atheists who reject God entirely are guilty of no less. To claim that there is no God at all, without having any piece of objective evidence to support their claim can only be taken as blind faith.
I've had a bit of an argument over what exactly constitutes an Atheist, some claim that anyone who does not subscribe to any form of religion (What I would consider agnostic) is also a form of Atheism. Personally, although I fall into this boat, I would not like to be called an Atheist simply because it lashes me to the strong Atheist end of the spectrum which I see as no more than another religion.

 

[proponent]

Lets say that you had an incurable illness and you were on your death bed, you had 10mins to live, Would you accept Jesus just in case, or would you remain against him till your final breath?


This is not a debate, just a simple question, Please answer it in complete honesty.

John M.- bottom line is that these atheists are not kind to their fellow atheist caught in that terminal death bed scenario just as they are unkind to Christians on this board.

If you want an honest answer you have to "wait for the event" and meet them during that point in their life.

You ask in too hypothetical a context.

but there are places you can go to find atheists in just such a condition - as we all know. And there ARE people whose "job it is" to meet them there -- as we all know. Why not ask them?

As for that last line of yours "in all honesty"??? These ARE atheists you are talking to -- remember?

Bob

[
Surely you aren't implying that atheists are incapable of telling the truth.

Actually I am letting this thread speak for itself on that point -- and recommending that John go to a more direct source less prone to story telling.

Bob

So correct me if I misunderstand, but you believe that all atheists are lying when they say they don't believe in God and that when we die all people reveal that they are truly god-fearing men who have simply been trying to decieve others in the name of the devil or something>?

 

[Snidey]

Bob's right. I actually am fully aware that Jesus is Lord, and have chosen to subject myself to eternal torture mostly to irritate believers.

 

[proponent]

Bob's right. I actually am fully aware that Jesus is Lord, and have chosen to subject myself to eternal torture mostly to irritate believers.

I admit it, me too. I'm in cahoots with satan to trick you guys

 

[Barbarian]

There may be some logic to all of this silliness.

In Christianity, there is a doctrine known as "invincible ignorance." It holds that if someone is for any reason truly unable to believe and accept God, then (because God is just) that person is not necessarily subject to damnation; he will be judged according to his works.

I imagine some people, resentful of God's generosity and mercy, would like to believe that atheists really do believe, so that they might be damned to hell thereby.

 

[Snidey]

There may be some logic to all of this silliness.

In Christianity, there is a doctrine known as "invincible ignorance." It holds that if someone is for any reason truly unable to believe and accept God, then (because God is just) that person is not necessarily subject to damnation; he will be judged according to his works.

I imagine some people, resentful of God's generosity and mercy, would like to believe that atheists really do believe, so that they might be damned to hell thereby.

I would guess that the vast, vast majority of atheists are atheists because they truly don't believe in a god. Who would ever rebel when the consequences are so severe?

 

[turnorburn]

Try this, Jesus is speaking here from Matthew 19:29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.
"30 But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first." :

You see, we don't think the way he thinks, so we have to get that flesh in line with the spirit,
and the only way it will ever make sense is by having a personal relationship with Christ.

What does "...for many be called, but few chosen. " have to do with the story? Who, in the story, was called to work the field, yet didn't work?

Also, it would seem that the "death bed conversion" person worked NO amount of time. Yet, If this parable is the case, the person who works for 50 years in the ministry, saving thousands of people during that time, they will receive nothing more than the reprobate who squanders his life, kills many people, rapes women, is a drunkard, womanizer, and mocks Christianity and God, . . . . yet has a sincere death bed conversion, saving not one soul, . . . . . that person will receive the same reward as the 50 year veteran. And that newly saved person will get their reward before the 50 year veteran.

I'm still amazed that a blind faith in the unproveable is seen as righteous. :-?

 

[freeway]

Bob's right. I actually am fully aware that Jesus is Lord, and have chosen to subject myself to eternal torture mostly to irritate believers.

I admit it, me too. I'm in cahoots with satan to trick you guys

you say this as a joke.. but in truth, but best trick satan ever pulled off was to make people think he doesn't exist... someday we'll all know, won't we.... 8-)

 

[jmm9683]

Bob's right. I actually am fully aware that Jesus is Lord, and have chosen to subject myself to eternal torture mostly to irritate believers.

I admit it, me too. I'm in cahoots with satan to trick you guys

you say this as a joke.. but in truth, but best trick satan ever pulled off was to make people think he doesn't exist... someday we'll all know, won't we.... 8-)

Teh debbil iz comin 4 U proponent.

 

[Snidey]

Bob's right. I actually am fully aware that Jesus is Lord, and have chosen to subject myself to eternal torture mostly to irritate believers.

I admit it, me too. I'm in cahoots with satan to trick you guys

you say this as a joke.. but in truth, but best trick satan ever pulled off was to make people think he doesn't exist... someday we'll all know, won't we.... 8-)

A. That is from The Usual Suspects
B. You missed my point entirely
C. No

 

[freeway]

and the one liner kid strike again...

yes its true.. satan is very clever he has you fooled, or do you know for a fact the he does not exist, if you do, know this for a fact.. why not share it with us Christians because we must have miss took Jesus when he spoke about satan... 8-)

 

[Snidey]

I don't know the reality of the existence of Satan for a fact, just as you don't, nor did I claim to. I do know that I sincerely do not believe in the existence of such a being, which is the question at hand.

 

[jmm9683]

and the one liner kid strike again...

yes its true.. satan is very clever he has you fooled, or do you know for a fact the he does not exist, if you do, know this for a fact.. why not share it with us Christians because we must have miss took Jesus when he spoke about satan... 8-)

You can't prove a negative. Prove to me that unicorns don't exist.

You haven't showed any evidence of teh debbil. Burden of proof is on you.

 

[freeway]

I don't know the reality of the existence of Satan for a fact, just as you don't, nor did I claim to. I do know that I sincerely do not believe in the existence of such a being, which is the question at hand.

the remarks where not actually directed at you.. but since you answered, yes I can not grab hold of satan and drag him into the room and sit him in a chair.. but if I believe the bible which I do, then he is as real as this computer I'm typing on.. for one to say they don't believe in something does not make it so... I don't believe there's gold on the moon but can not prove it so by that, it does not make it so.. and to be a true atheist that does not believe in some kind of intelligent invisible being well I have never meant one yet... and I've meant a bunch.. not all, but a lot... 8-)

 

[jmm9683]

I don't know the reality of the existence of Satan for a fact, just as you don't, nor did I claim to. I do know that I sincerely do not believe in the existence of such a being, which is the question at hand.

the remarks where not actually directed at you.. but since you answered, yes I can not grab hold of satan and drag him into the room and sit him in a chair.. but if I believe the bible which I do, then he is as real as this computer I'm typing on.. for one to say they don't believe in something does not make it so... I don't believe there's gold on the moon but can not prove it so by that, it does not make it so.. and to be a true atheist that does not believe in some kind of intelligent invisible being well I have never meant one yet... and I've meant a bunch.. not all, but a lot... 8-)

What are you babbling on about? All I got was "I can't prove there is such a thing as Satan." Thanks, that's all I wanted to know.