Your atheism ends at time of death. No atheeists in hell

Whatsisface

Well-known member
Unchecked Copy Box
Rom 1:18 - For the wrath of God is revealed from heavenagainst all ungodliness andunrighteousness of men, who hold the truth inunrighteousness;

Unchecked Copy Box
Rom 1:19 - Because that which may be known of Godis manifest in them; for Godhath shewed it unto them.

Unchecked Copy Box
Rom 1:20 - For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternalpower and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Unchecked Copy Box
Rom 1:21 - Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God,neither were thankful; butbecame vain in theirimaginations, and their foolishheart was darkened.

Unchecked Copy Box
Rom 1:22 - Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Do you honestly think that quoting bible verses will cut any ice with an atheist? Really? Particularly when you haven't said how you know the Bible to be the word of God. Don't you think that's rather foolish of you?

For example,
Unchecked Copy Box
Rom 1:22 - Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

I don't profess to be particularly wise. However, how do you know these are the words of God? These words could very easily have been written by a man with an agenda to propagate the faith.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Is this it?
Yep. That's it.

Yep. Really!

This is Incredibly naïve thinking on your part.
Nope. It's based entirely on 45+ years of experience and learning.
You are effectively saying, In order to know that God exists, you must first love God.
Nope.
I'm not effectively saying anything.

Jesus said it.
And I don't see where it was effectively.
It looks quite matter-of-factly.
Immediately following this statement, he said

Joh 14:24 WEB He who doesn’t love me doesn’t keep my words. The word which you hear isn’t mine, but the Father’s who sent me.


So, looks matter-of-fact to me.


If I have to point out the problems with this to you, then you have no idea about how to know something is true or not.
If you actually think that the problems matter you're having with it matter, you're barking up the wrong tree.
You either do it or you don't.

Don't gripe with me about it.
Take it up with Jesus.
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
Do you honestly think that quoting bible verses will cut any ice with an atheist? Really? Particularly when you haven't said how you know the Bible to be the word of God. Don't you think that's rather foolish of you?

For example,
Unchecked Copy Box
Rom 1:22 - Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

I don't profess to be particularly wise. However, how do you know these are the words of God? These words could very easily have been written by a man with an agenda to propagate the faith.
I would tell you but you don’t really want to know. Have a good one.
 

Whatsisface

Well-known member
I would tell you but you don’t really want to know. Have a good one.
If accepting what you have to say depends on my wanting to know it, then I would have given up critical unbiased thinking.

I am open to evidence that can be confirmed. That you aren't falling over yourself to present what you know and how you know it to be true only makes me think you don't know.
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
If accepting what you have to say depends on my wanting to know it, then I would have given up critical unbiased thinking.

I am open to evidence that can be confirmed. That you aren't falling over yourself to present what you know and how you know it to be true only makes me think you don't know.
No one goes to Jesus unless the Father draws them so either you were drawn and ignored or talked yourself out of the call. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make the horse drink. Keep telling yourself you have the right answer but when you step into eternity you will forever regret stepping into eternity without Jesus.
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
And I provide you with the references to check out what I say for yourself.
But those references are all from the Bible. As usual, you assume the Bible is true, and use that assumption to "prove" the Bible is true.

That works fine for you - you were conditioned as a kid to blindly believe it is true. I was not.

I provide a lot of specifics.
You just dismiss them, because you don't actually want to know the truth.
That's the most obvious part of your posts.
You provide plenty of specific quotes from the Bible. But when I ask why you think the Bible is true, other than assuming it is true, you are anything but specific. Here is what you said:

"Experience, and human history.
45+ years of experience and having studied history in high school, college and on my own."

You cannot not get much less specific than that!

Yep.
Millions to one, against surviving, or recovering.
WiF presented an article several years ago about the oddity of spontaneous remission. They had absolutely no idea what happened or why. It just happened.
And had I only had a couple occurrences/recurrences, I'd say that his point carried weight, worth considering.
But weighing against that is all the people who did not get this miraculous recovery.

The problem you're having is that God says he will give life to those who believe him.
It's written in Proverbs,

The spirit of a man will sustain him in his illnesses. But a wounded spirit who can bear?
See there you going being specific, but assuming the Bible is true.

Why should I believe the Bible is true? Why do YOU believe the Bible is true? Can you answer that without assuming it is true? No.

I earlier said:
What history? What have you studied that convinced you the empty tomb actually happened, for example? Can you tell me? Of course not! This is just how you rationalise your blind faith. You were told to believe, and so you do. And now you need to rationalise that blind faith, so we get this.
Really?
So, you never actually studied the history of the past several thousand years of humanity?
Wow!
I had no idea that Britain had reverted to the dark ages.
Where are you getting this nonsense from Steve?

How are you concluding I "never actually studied the history of the past several thousand years of humanity" from my asking you to support the historicity of the empty tomb?

I earlier said:
What history? What have you studied that convinced you the empty tomb actually happened, for example? Can you tell me? Of course not! This is just how you rationalise your blind faith. You were told to believe, and so you do. And now you need to rationalise that blind faith, so we get this.
European history. From about 400 to 1950.
Wow, so you evidence for an event that supposedly happened in ca. AD 30 in Jerusalem is the history of Europe from over three centuries later, and over 700 miles away!

I would love to know what your "Cold-Case" detective would have to say about that. Imagine a detective trying to solve a murder by looking at evidence from so very far away. I wonder... do you ever think before you post?

Oh, well then. You obviously know everything about everything, so you apparently be d-man, and all knowledge, glory and wisdom dwells with you.
I do not need to know everything to be able to spot BS.

You clearly have no way to substantiate the empty tomb, and so have to pretend that events from hundreds of miles away and centuries later somehow, magically makes it true.

Must be painful to live with such arrogance and ignorance simultaneously.
You tell me, Steve. You are the one who thinks European history proves the empty tomb.

There are dozens of books available for you to read.
Are you telling me that you have never actually read them?
As I recall you saying that you have read the books by J. Warner Wallace and despised them.
There's Mike Licona, Gary Habermas, Craig Lane, Lee Strobel, and several other people who are highly educated and experienced in their respective careers and fields of expertise, who eloquently developed excellent arguments supporting, and corroborating the resurrection of Jesus and the veracity of the bible narrative.
The issue is whether you blindly believe what you are told to believe, or whether you can think for yourself.

Are you able to put their arguments into your own words? I guess not.
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
Why don't you just go out and buy the books which have already been written on the topic?
And you can find the list of books by doing a Google search for
"The case for Jesus resurrection"
I get 13,500,000 hits back.
Looks like the first one is Gary Habermas' book,
The Case for the resurrection of Jesus, from 2004.
There's a link at the top of the Amazon page to a new book by Gary,
Risen Indeed: A historical investigation into the resurrection of Jesus.
It was released last November.

Since you are highly educated, I'm thinking that you likely make more than enough money to afford to buy all those books, and then you can prepare a counter argument to silence all those people who just aren't as smart as you are.
As it happens I have investigated Habermas' claims in his 2004 book - his so-called "Minimal Facts" theory. The idea is that there are certain claims about the Easter story that pretty much all scholars agree on, and he claims that Christianity can be proved from them.

When we get to the empty tomb, his supposed "fact" is not as clearcut as we might like, and he is obliged to admit only about 75% of scholars agree:

This is a fact that is not supported by the overwhelming majority of New Testament scholars as the other four facts are, however it is still considered to be historically reliable by 75% of New Testament scholars (Habermas and Licona 2004, 70). While this is not an overwhelming percentage, it is still a rather high percentage. There are good reasons for why three out of four scholars advocate for this fact. The evidence for why the tomb was empty on the third day is certainly compelling enough to still be considered a fact for this minimal facts argument.

Even more damaging, he admits elsewhere that those 75% of scholars who accept the empty tomb are the Christian scholars, and non-Christian scholars reject it.

A second research area concerns those scholars who address the subject of the empty tomb. It has been said that the majority of contemporary researchers accepts the historicity of this event.[39] But is there any way to be more specific? From the study mentioned above, I have compiled 23 arguments for the empty tomb and 14 considerations against it, as cited by recent critical scholars. Generally, the listings are what might be expected, dividing along theological “party lines.” To be sure, such a large number of arguments, both pro and con, includes very specific differentiation, including some overlap.

So it looks like those scholars who believe the empty tomb is fact do so for religious reasons. And that is the supporting foundation of Habermas' argument. Christian scholars believe the empty tomb is factual, and so Habermas concludes the resurrection happened. It is all based on the faith of those Christian scholars. Blind faith? We do not know, but seems likely to me.

As usual, the apologetics is all smoke-and-mirrors. It looks good at first glance, but when you look at the details, it all falls apart.

Have you read the book, Steve? What did you think? Did you just blindly believe what he said?
 

Whatsisface

Well-known member
No one goes to Jesus unless the Father draws them so either you were drawn and ignored or talked yourself out of the call. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make the horse drink. Keep telling yourself you have the right answer but when you step into eternity you will forever regret stepping into eternity without Jesus.
This is a tacit admission that there is no confirming evidence for Christianity and that I have to be drawn by the father. He would know exactly what would draw me, but so far hasn't done it.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Ok. Explain what it is.
You're the one who keeps accusing me of not knowing what it is, so it's on you to explain it

Congratulations!

You finally have your soapbox. Not that you haven't had it all along. Rather, you're just too cowardly to take advantage of your thoughts, and this forum.

So, go for it!
 

Whatsisface

Well-known member
You're the one who keeps accusing me of not knowing what it is, so it's on you to explain it

Congratulations!

You finally have your soapbox. Not that you haven't had it all along. Rather, you're just too cowardly to take advantage of your thoughts, and this forum.

So, go for it!
Lol. You don't know.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
But those references are all from the Bible. As usual, you assume the Bible is true, and use that assumption to "prove" the Bible is true.
Nope.
You need it to not be true.
I've spent the past 45+ years learning that it's true, through acting on what Jesus said, and verified its veracity.
I'm simply explaining to you that's what you need to do in order to know that it's true, for yourself.
Or is that your problem.... You DON'T actually WANT to know that it's true, and speaks truth to all who will believe him, giving them life in exchange for their death?
You don't want peace with God, and you don't want to become his adopted child, you don't want to enjoy eternal life?

Well, ok. If that's what you want...
Not really sure why you'd want to perish, and suffer the shame and everlasting contempt. Especially when everything Jesus has to give us leads to a quality of life that exceeds everything we could possibly fathom.

That works fine for you - you were conditioned as a kid to blindly believe it is true. I was not.
Well, that's obviously not true.
Your childhood beliefs, imposed on you since childhood are clearly forcing you to not actually think clearly.
I left the church I grew up in 50 years ago.
So, what's your excuse?

You provide plenty of specific quotes from the Bible. But when I ask why you think the Bible is true, other than assuming it is true, you are anything but specific. Here is what you said:

"Experience, and human history.
45+ years of experience and having studied history in high school, college and on my own."

You cannot not get much less specific than that!
What part of experience and having studied human history in high school and college is vague?
Didn't you go to high school and college?
Or perhaps the problem here isn't that you did or did not attend both.
It's that you were told what to think, but never taught HOW to think, and why.

In my high school and college, and perhaps it's just a western United states thing...... we were taught how to think.

Well. That reminds me of Orson Welles book 1984.
Pity you grew up in Britain.

But weighing against that is all the people who did not get this miraculous recovery.
So, their lack of experience is somehow definitive proof that mine is invalid?
Wow.
That takes a special kind of ignorance to believe that.
This ongoing routine of yours to dismiss anything that doesn't fit your biases and preconceptions is indeed impressive.
Your dedication to it is even more so.

See there you going being specific, but assuming the Bible is true.
I've already spent 45+ years of my life learning to know that it's true.
You're being given the invitation to learn for yourself.
If you're too frightened to learn, then I can only say that you have more to be afraid of by dismissing YHVH than you do by engaging Jesus.


Why should I believe the Bible is true?
Because it is true.
Why do YOU believe the Bible is true?
Because I've been learning for the past 45 years that it's true.
By action, by learning, by historical study, and by actually visiting the land of Israel.

Can you answer that without assuming it is true? No.
There it is.
That assuming that under no circumstances whatsoever is it possible to find out the bible is true apart from assumptions.

For someone who is desperate to make everyone who comes to Jesus wrong, you sure assume a lot!
You're like the king of assuming.
Where are you getting this nonsense from Steve?
Experience.

How are you concluding I "never actually studied the history of the past several thousand years of humanity" from my asking you to support the historicity of the empty tomb?
Because it's contained within the annals of history.
So, if you've never seen it, then you obviously never studied history.
Oh, wait. I just remembered...
You actually are afraid of learning.
You've repeatedly stated that there are certain authors that you absolutely refuse to learn from.
Sorry. I'd forgotten about that.


Wow, so you evidence for an event that supposedly happened in ca. AD 30 in Jerusalem is the history of Europe from over three centuries later, and over 700 miles away!
You don't actually understand the nature of the idea of throwing a rock in a pond?
Do yourself a favor and go find a pond, during a calm time, and throw a pebble into the pond, and then consider how far out the ripples travel.
It's the same with the human experience.
The ripple of the resurrection made it all the way to China too. As it did India, Africa, Europe, Britain, .....

I would love to know what your "Cold-Case" detective would have to say about that. Imagine a detective trying to solve a murder by looking at evidence from so very far away. I wonder... do you ever think before you post?
Why don't you read and find out for yourself?
Or, as you've stated before--- are you too afraid to learn from people who don't fit your biases?


I do not need to know everything to be able to spot BS.
:ROFLMAO:

Well, considering you're full of it, that's no surprise.... When it's filling you to your mind, it's all your eyes can see.

You clearly have no way to substantiate the empty tomb, and so have to pretend that events from hundreds of miles away and centuries later somehow, magically makes it true.
Sounds like a personal bias that justifies your ignorance. Well, your dedication to your ignorance is indeed impressive.
I guarantee it won't fly come judgment day. That great big--- oh sh9t, that passes between your lips on that day won't help.
You tell me, Steve. You are the one who thinks European history proves the empty tomb.
As does Chinese, African, Indian, etc.... history.

The thing you don't seem to comprehend is that the nature of the resurrection is pretty overwhelming. People who were witnesses went to their deaths, refusing to recant, when recanting would have been all that would've been needed to spare their lives.
The entirety of human history was impacted by this lone guy who was killed on a roman cross, and then 3 days later, raised again.
As such, I'm thinking that you're having to work really hard to silence it. The irony is--- you're not the first, nor will you be the last. And all who were serious about seeking to silence it, and did the research to achieve that silence wound up being convinced he actually did rise, and became followers of Jesus.

Those who just didn't want anything to do with it ignored, dismissed, and blew it off. It was them who died utterly ignominious deaths, filled with misery.

As you've repeatedly been invited to do your own investigation, and have refused, I'm thinking you're of the latter bunch, and lack the courage to actually learn the truth.


The issue is whether you blindly believe what you are told to believe, or whether you can think for yourself.
Something that you should find out by reading and doing what Jesus said.
I'll be praying for you.
 
Top