Part 5 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

Depends on the atheist; but there are plenty of coping methods, some effective, some not.

Not really, as that really wouldn't indicate them being atheist.

Again, it depends on the atheist, but there are some who would when appropriate, some who would when it isn't appropriate, and some who wouldn't at all.

 

Though not an atheist, I want you to understand something about the question you ask here.
This is not evidence of a God, no matter how it is answered.
Your question is the evidence that man faced things that made him want a God. Whether one is there or not is a different issue, but despair makes one desperate for something to solve it. So desperate, in fact, that they are willing to believe some of the most preposterous things just to find comfort.
You believe this to be true, as well. You just think that it's OTHER people believing what is absurd. Different cultures have invented different ways to comfort themselves, and had you been born in India or Japan or Pakistan you would embrace beliefs that you find preposterous.
Being alone, in despair, confused, alienated are all reasons to desperately want a god. They are not evidence of one.

 

Quote Posted by crusader777:
my questions are probably not "conventional" enough... Only a Catholic would u/stand my Qs...

but one Q i have is this

Why is life as a Christian (Catholic Christian) SO SO hard????
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps you should consider being a Bible Christian instead of a Catholic. There are differences. Check out the link below
http://www.gotquestions.org/Catholic-Christian.html

 

Quote Posted by danielpalos:

Can we really confide in the moral sincerity of our friends on the right, if they are unwilling to recognize a need to not spare any Tax (rod) burden on the wealthiest (children) during alleged and in that alternative, real times of war?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How about the moral sincerity of our friends on the left? Is it moral to keep raising the taxes on the wealthiest, what would be their fair share? In my view, they are already paying a lot in their tax burden obligations as it is.

 

Quote Posted by AlphaOmega:

Factually and historically speaking more people have commited atrocities over religious reasons than non-religious.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is just your biased opinion which is not a fact. So why do you express your biased opinion and state it as a fact? You can't possibly know who committed more atrocities, all you can do is just have a biased opinion.

And it's obvious you being non-religious will make a biased statement. I'm a religious person but I'm not going to make a statement claiming non-religious people committed more atrocities because I honestly don't know but what I do know is that every single one of us regardless if religious/non-religious are all sinners...that's right we are all sinners!

 

If you think one of the lowest tax burdens on wealthy people in the history of our country is excessive, I guess you're right.
You can look it up.

 

Quote Posted by Giftedone:

Islam is so similar to Christianity.
----------------------------------------------
But believe me, they are not the same religion.

 

"As far as the exodus you insist that scholars are 100% dismissing"

THIS, is what I'm claiming you're lying about. I did NOT insist that nor did I say it at all.

I also did do anything like what you're asking me about in the bolded text here: "There you go again accusing me of lying, are you not trying to twist history by insisting the Bible has no relationship with history as far as in relation to the Jews and their history?"

Well, for one: "By the 1920s, the idea of an Israelite conquest of Canaan - the story of the book of Joshua - was not supported by the archaeological record." This stuff has been known for approximately 90 years and you're still trying to say that the Bible describes how Israel came into being correctly.

For two: "There is no evidence of a United Monarchy, no evidence of a capital in Jerusalem or of any coherent, unified political force that dominated western Palestine, let alone an empire of the size the legends describe. We do not have evidence for the existence of kings named Saul, David or Solomon; nor do we have evidence for any temple at Jerusalem in this early period. What we do know of Israel and Judah of the tenth century does not allow us to interpret this lack of evidence as a gap in our knowledge and information about the past, a result merely of the accidental nature of archeology. There is neither room nor context, no artifact or archive that points to such historical realities in Palestine's tenth century. One cannot speak historically of a state without a population. Nor can one speak of a capital without a town. Stories are not enough."

I don't know why you keep bringing up what scholars think if you don't believe them.

No. An argument from ignorance is a term used for a logical fallacy you are using.

 

soo I noticed this was ignored. Can you let me know if you are going to answer? If not just say so. Since some of you dont use the quote button I am not notified if when you answer so I have to go back and keep re-reading posts. The use of the forum reply with quote button would be beneficial. Thanks

 

Quote Posted by Woody:

Where in all the religious text of the Abrahamic religions does it say that this god only accepts one religion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well it's pretty clear when our Lord Savior Jesus Christ said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me." John 14:6 NLT

To come to the Father is to obtain His favor, to have access to His throne by prayer, and finally to enter His kingdom. No man can obtain any of these things except by the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. By coming by Him is meant coming in His name and depending on His merits. We are ignorant, and He alone can guide us. We are sinful, and it is only by His merits that we can be pardoned. We are blind, and He only can enlighten us. God has appointed Him as the Mediator, and has ordained that all blessings shall descend to this world through Him. Hence He has put the world under His control; has given the affairs of men into His hand, and has appointed Him to dispense whatever may be necessary for our peace, pardon, and salvation.

So basically all this means is that God is only accepting the Christian religion through Jesus Christ. One has to accept Jesus Christ as their Lord Savior in order to be saved.

 

God is eternal, He has no beginning or end. He is everlasting. He did not come into existence because He was always in existence. He is the uncaused that caused everything else to come into existence.

Scripture tells us, "All honor and glory to God forever and ever! He is the eternal King, the unseen one who never dies; He alone is God. Amen." 1 Timothy 1:17 NLT

Lastly you're getting way ahead of yourself with this Higgs Boson. They are in very early stages of experimenting. There is so much data that still need to be scrutinized. And no we can't create something out of nothing, and no we will never be gods but will always be creative mortal human beings. For there is only one God, the Creator of the Universe and everything that exists.

 

Quote Posted by Woody:

Muslims only considered him a prophet not a saviour of mankind. Christianity is the only one that applies the term saviour to him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes I am aware of that and I'm also aware that the founder of the Islamic religion has his bones lying dormant in the ground somewhere in the Middle East, while the founder of Christianity lives on and will return oneday to reign over this entire world to fix all the mess we sinful humans have created.

 

So does this mean, that atheist in their own way do or does believe in a spiritual being? It may not be the Christian God, or natural spirit, but something that is unseen something that can provide them with comfort when in time of loneliness, despair or depress? Or do they just turn to medication?

 

Then why does he need men to worship him and give him glory?
And why does he cast them in hell for being what he made them, imperfect?

 

The question will be, what makes man believe in such a spiritual being does not have to be the Christian God that can provide them comfort especially in time of trouble or despair? The two criminals that were crucified together with Jesus they were unbelievers in the end they too started to believe in something, something that they can find some comfort in their time of helplessness and dying time.

 

Why did God take away Pharaoh's free will and hardened his heart? Simply to prove he is is a great God. Certainly a Great God wouldn't need to do stuff like that.

Why did God murder all those children, first borns, just to prove a he's a powerful God? When all he had to do was not harden Pharaoh's heart and allowed him to set them all free via his own free will if he would chose to do so. This is not a good God who goes around murdering innocent children just to prove his own superiority.

 

IMO, you are confuse and in denial of your own link about the history of Israel and Jews.

 

Great.
What is the point?
Does their comfort provide some kind of proof of a god?

 

The Pharaoh's heart was already harden that is why the Hebrews were slaves under the Pharaoh for thousand of years. God wanted to show the Pharaoh that God is more powerful no matter how hard the Pharaoh's heart is. The death of those first born falls on the hands of the Pharaoh not God. Pharaoh dare to challenge God and he lost.

 

The point is atheist does believe in some kind of a god in their own way. And maybe they are so against Christian is because we refuse to worship their god or gods?

 

The bible clearly states that Moses told Pharaoh, let my people go. But God hardened his heart. Thus Pharaoh's heart was not already hardened, God hardened it.

 

What does this have to do with my post?

 

Quote Posted by Giftedone:

James 2 (supposedly written by James the Brother of Jesus and leader of the Jerusalem Church) is entirely devoted to dealing with what he considered to be false doctrine (the doctrine promoted by Paul) among some groups of Christians at the time.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no book of James 2 in the bible. But there is the book of James. The book of James contains many short, proverbial sayings and resembles the teachings of Jesus. James addressed several matteres in which Christian behavior should reflect Christian faith. He discussed pride, discrimination, greed, lust, hypocrisy, worldliness, and slander. No where in his book did he discuss false doctrine being promoted by the Apostle Paul or anyone else for that matter. Why do you say things that are false?

 

Slyhunter is right. Scripture is not grey on this point. God hardens Pharaoh's heart more that ten time in the tale of Moses. It isn't pretty, but it's crystal clear.

 

1) The material Universe was created fron the pre-existing Energy which transmuted into matter and the space/time to hold it accoRding to God's Natural Law, E = mC^2.

2) Energy

3) The Higgs particle is matter that was created at the moment of the Big Bang from that same pre-existing Energy.
Higgs create a Field that is similar to the Starch one uses to thicken up a broth of Elementary Particles which become weighty masses.
"We" don't do anything in that realm but observe it.