seebs

Probably not.

seebs

I would have to speculate that it wouldn't; if Christian theology is true, an entire class of beings (demons) believe in God, but are hardly free of sin.

Wishing to *follow* God, on the other hand, may help. Curiously, there's substantial reason to believe that the important part is the desire to be righteous, and the willingness to remain open to learning that you aren't there yet. IMHO, without those two, you're screwed no matter what positions you assert.

seebs

If this didn't contain an obviously false statement about atheists, I'd probably be reasonably close to agreeing with it.

If you replace "God" with "righteousness", and insert a #1.5 "Love of others for self's sake", you can do okay.

However, then it's quite clear that atheists, Muslims, Buddhists, and anyone else can potentially make it all the way to #4.

Buffman

seebs

(Ooooops! Missed this post. Sorry!)

No, frankly, I'm not seeing the hypocrisy. I'm trying to discover truth.

What do you believe are your qualifications to determine what is or is not truth? What standards/methodology do you employ in this search? (Did you read my post of the Robert Heinlein criteria for determining the best available answers to the unknown?)

I recognize that I do not have it, and may come to believe something, and later realize it's false - but I have to *try*, because the results are important.

Why are the results so important to you? If they are that important, why not get the verifiable "facts" first? Truth is conformity to fact, isn't it?

Hmm. It was not my intent to dodge the questions, but some questions are unanswerable.

Is that your opinion about those specific questions or "your" statement of fact about them? What is so terrible about admitting that you are currently unable to answer them? Isn't that a fair and honest answer all by itself?

I mean, what if I say "since atheists reject any concept of morality, why don't you just randomly kill people?". That question cannot be answered in a way that I can't spin as "dodging".

I am not sure what this has to do with my questions other than divert attention from them. However, you begin "your" question with a faulty premise. What verifiable evidence do you offer to validate the contention that "atheists reject any concept of morality?" So that question can be easily answered, can't it. No dodging involved! What are the verifiable facts?

Well, as a starter, just because it is always a delight to meet a new person, and why should He be any different?

Oh my!---- I have asked others and will ask you. Do you think that your supernatural "HE" has a belly button. (Why do you suppose that your God is male? Couldn't your supernatural God take whatever form it wished? Is it limited in some manner? Boy did your statement open a can of worms.)

Beyond that... Because, if He's out there, that's an interesting truth to know, and I *like* to know true things.

So do most humans seek to differentiate between what is real and what is not. It is called "curiosity." But again, it has little to do with truth. It has to do with verifiable facts...first. Just some general, rhetorical, questions for you to consider.

1. Why do you believe that there is only "one" God out there.
2. Where, exactly, is "out there?"
3. Why do you call your God "He" and use an upper case "H?"
4. If you determined that your "He God" was actually "out there," how would that change the way you live your life as a mortal "here?"
5. Other than religious "faith" beliefs, how do you determine what is accurate(fact) and what is not(fiction)?
6. Why do you believe the words written in one ancient book and not in others?

Probably a bit of both. It seems to me that several core components of Christian doctrine, such as the idea of a "personal relationship with God", are diametrically opposed to any central authority, and indeed, undermine such authority constantly.

The "bit of both" answer is certainly fair. The "personal relationship with God" part assumes something not in evidence. The latter part of your response would appear to totally ignore the 1st through 4th Commandments. (If your make-believe God isn't a central authority, what the hell is?)

Fair enough. But I doubt we'll get anywhere; you haven't offered me any convincing (or even new) arguments for thinking these things are errors, and I haven't offered you any convincing (or even knew) arguments for thinking they aren't.

Hmmmm? Let me try this again. I am not attempting to offer you anything old or new to convince you of anything. I am merely asking you to present me with some verifiable evidence to support the beliefs you have been posting. You are quite correct when you state that you have been unable to do that beyond admitting that you don't accept everything in the Christian bible as valid. That is when I asked you for the methodology you use to determine what is or is not valid. You dodged that question also.

Indeed, a horrible thing - and one which, you will note, has since been rejected by most Christians. (Of course, the ones who still like the idea are very *loud*.)

Hear! Hear! However, why aren't we hearing from "most Christians" in this country about the dangers to the expressions of individual conscience by this current administrations drive for even greater religion and government collusion. Why did they choose to elect more religious right politicians during the mid-terms...even in your state?

Not "for". "From" something generally called damnation; "by" God.

Thank you. Now, why do you believe in "damnation?" If there were no Holy Bible would you believe in damnation? If your supernatural God inspired others to write sacred books stating that there was no such thing as damnation from a God of Love, would you believe those writings and worship them as divinely inspired or would you ask for some verifiable proofs(evidence) of their authenticity?

Why do I believe in this? Because I know that, when I cut myself off from my friends, I feel horrible in ways which very nicely match up with Biblical doctrine about "hell". It seems to me that it is fairly plausible that this could be an outcome of rejecting God, and as such, I would rather avoid it.

When "you" cut yourself off from your "so-called" friends? What are you really attempting to say here? That you have no friends that aren't of your particular faith beliefs? I am afraid that I once again find your premise, and all thoughts stemming from it, fraught with social shallowness and superficial insights. Exactly what do you mean by "cut yourself off?" If you make the decision to do that, why would it make you feel horrible and like you were in hell? (Please describe "your" vision of hell.) Is being a member of a group more important than being honest and true with yourself? Which do you think is more honorable and a higher standard of integrity? To have the support of your friends so you won't feel horrible and be in your self-styled hell, or to be honest with yourself and them? --- Haven't you just provided yourself with some tangential evidence that there is no supernatural God? (Haven't you ever moved from one locale, where you knew everyone, to a place where you knew no one? Did you make new friends? Did that get you out of the hell of having cut yourself off from the old ones? If so, then your hell is certainly not someplace where you are damned forever, now is it? So does your supernatural God play these kinds of games?

I don't see it as a problem. You say "not enough evidence". I say "enough for me". No problem. You search for truth your way, I'll search for it mine.

That's why there are currently over 4,200 religious groups searching for the truth when they should be searching for the verifiable facts that can lead them to the most accurate reality of this current time and place. That's why I asked you for how you seek your truth. Apparently you are not seeking the most accurate one available because you have been conditioned to believe that you have already found it. Effectively, you stopped seriously seeking the truth long ago and simply do not recognize that "fact." You are content to believe as you do. There is nothing wrong with that...unless you wish to find the most accurate knowledge available to you...which is what you claimed you sought. (i.e.:No, frankly, I'm not seeing the hypocrisy. I'm trying to discover truth. I recognize that I do not have it, and may come to believe something, and later realize it's false - but I have to *try*, because the results are important.)

Jack the Bodiless

Therefore I, an atheist for thirty years since losing my faith at the age of ten, am still a Christian?

This is a usage of "Christian" that I have never encountered before. If you can redefine words at whim, don't blame others for not understanding you.

Radorth, you are a hippopotamus. I hereby define a hippopotamus as "one who follows the Nicene Creed". If you're thinking of citing examples of hippos who don't follow the Nicene Creed, I need merely point out that bipedal hippos such as yourself are a subset of all hippopotami, just as you have declared non-followers of Christ to be a subset of "Christians".
There are many examples of "true" Christians who are no longer Christians. For instance: atheistic ex-ministers.

Radorth

More mind reading- in this case assuming I am playing "victim." There are many other options, but your cynicism is the problem which prevents any useful communication here.

You inserting the word "all" into your bogus paraphrases. That is a misquote and a lie born of your own bias.

Rad

Radorth

Seebs, you have a good point, although I don't consider many Muslims great lovers of mankind. I seriously doubt you will ever hear anyone but a mature Christian talking about the intrinsic worth of each person, and saying we are all "valuable and precious specks of dust." You have to know God and the Bible very well, I think, to believe that in your heart.

Rad

Radorth

LOL!!! That's the whole problem with the logic used by atheists on this and the other thread. You arbitrarily define an ex-minister as a true Christian!

My my. Thanks for the help.

You have lost the argument all by yourself, but let the personal attacks and mind reading begin anew.

Oh wait. They already have, as I predicted.

Rad

Radorth

You mean like folks over on the philosophy thread who have decided there is nothing there? Or those who have decided "Live for yourself first."

Heh. Thanks. I prefer the reality of speaking in tongues, miracles and what Jesus called "rivers of living water" which I have experienced as well. God offers a "reality" far more real than anything here. This world is a fake, a house of cards, and a fool's paradise. You can learn that just reading the philosophy forum.

Rad

Radorth

Heh. Well said.

Rad