Poll: Do you believe in atheism?
No
Yes
Not sure (agnostic)
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 7 Votes - 1.57 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-08-2014, 09:06 AM
RE: Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
(16-08-2014 01:27 AM)hbl Wrote:  It's getting more and more difficult to actually find something to respond to as these atheists are degrading further and further into mindless gibberish.

Sounds like you are critiquing yourself. Since you have never bothered to address the plethora of evidence that counters your delusion, I think it is evident that 1) you are unable to actually provide an intellectual posit for your belief system, 2) Your fear and inner doubt is so evident I don't know whether to backhand you with facts, reason and logic, or offer you a security blanket and a few anti-depressants, 3) your infantile and closed-mindedness as you strive to articulate yourself between all of the YES JESUS, and THE BIBLE SAYS IT SO IT MUST BE SO all caps rage posts do little to prove your perspective.

How about you seek to learn about your own religion, you are proving to be a poor student who refuses to acknowledge the facts, heck, you even refuse to acknowledge Xtian Doctrine of which all 35,000+ versions of Xtianity are based.

How about you go study some more, learn to enter intellectual conversations and discourse without screaming like a 12 yo girl who just got her first period, and come back when you are ready to sit at the grown up table and talk about theology. Until then, off to the kiddy table you go where you can rant, and cry, and stomp your feet while arguing who is better spongebob or bugsbunny.



[Image: 2qw0v11.jpg]

[Image: 2dj775u.jpg]

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
16-08-2014, 11:04 AM
RE: Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
(15-08-2014 09:25 PM)hbl Wrote:  
(15-08-2014 09:21 PM)Anjele Wrote:  not eternal separation from a fictional character.

Jesus has more sources for Him within 150 years of His death than any ten figures from antiquity combined. So if you deny His existence, you would have to deny the existence of Julius Caesar, Tiberius, Plato, Aristotle, etc. But there are no historians that would consider you to be sane.

The difference between Jesus and the others you mentioned, Julius Ceasar, Tiberius, Plato and Aristotle, is that they didn't claim to walk on water or be the son of god so it's not too important even if they didn't exist. If a person claims to be the son of god you'd better have some damn good first hand evidence to back it up with.... which you don't have. You just have claims written in a book by non-eyewitness accounts and refuse to study anything outside of what you've been indoctrinated into.

Here is the definition of the word "Claim" from the Oxford dictionary.

1) state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes dancefortwo's post
16-08-2014, 11:52 AM
RE: Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
(16-08-2014 11:04 AM)dancefortwo Wrote:  The difference between Jesus and the others you mentioned, Julius Ceasar, Tiberius, Plato and Aristotle, is that they didn't claim to walk on water or be the son of god so it's not too important even if they didn't exist. If a person claims to be the son of god you'd better have some damn good first hand evidence to back it up with.... which you don't have. You just have claims written in a book by non-eyewitness accounts and refuse to study anything outside of what you've been indoctrinated into.

Studying other words by other individuals outside the Bible doesn't change what we know from the Bible.

The problem with your approach is most historians believe these other individuals existed such as Aristotle and Plato and that they were important, and the sources for Jesus are even more plentiful than that which is an even higher standard of evidence.

The Bible is composed of 27 books written by 8 individuals: Matthew, Luke, Mark, John, Paul, Peter, James and Jude. These were the people in the know. The writers of the books identify themselves as the authors as well as eyewitnesses of Jesus resurrected. So you can see God holds to the highest standard of evidence in these 27 books.

You might to consider asking yourself what you would think would be better evidence? I can't think of better evidence than the evidence we have of their experiences of 40 authors over 1500 years in 66 books - the complete word of God.

The burden remains on you to show 'with some evidence' someone else wrote these books other than the people who knew Jesus personally, were eyewitnesses or were very close to the eyewitnesses.

What's interesting is even if they didn't write these books, this information most certainly came from the eyewitnesses themselves because, for example, Polycarp said he was a student of John and Clement of Rome knew Peter personally.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 11:54 AM
RE: Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
(16-08-2014 11:52 AM)hbl Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 11:04 AM)dancefortwo Wrote:  The difference between Jesus and the others you mentioned, Julius Ceasar, Tiberius, Plato and Aristotle, is that they didn't claim to walk on water or be the son of god so it's not too important even if they didn't exist. If a person claims to be the son of god you'd better have some damn good first hand evidence to back it up with.... which you don't have. You just have claims written in a book by non-eyewitness accounts and refuse to study anything outside of what you've been indoctrinated into.

Studying other words by other individuals outside the Bible doesn't change what we know from the Bible.

The problem with your approach is most historians believe these other individuals existed such as Aristotle and Plato and that they were important, and the sources for Jesus are even more plentiful than that which is an even higher standard of evidence.

The Bible is composed of 27 books written by 8 individuals: Matthew, Luke, Mark, John, Paul, Peter, James and Jude. These were the people in the know. The writers of the books identify themselves as the authors as well as eyewitnesses of Jesus resurrected. So you can see God holds to the highest standard of evidence in these 27 books.

You might to consider asking yourself what you would think would be better evidence? I can't think of better evidence than the evidence we have of their experiences of 40 authors over 1500 years in 66 books - the complete word of God.

The burden remains on you to show 'with some evidence' someone else wrote these books other than the people who knew Jesus personally, were eyewitnesses or were very close to the eyewitnesses.

What's interesting is even if they didn't write these books, this information most certainly came from the eyewitnesses themselves because, for example, Polycarp said he was a student of John and Clement of Rome knew Peter personally.

[Image: 1e8466aff6bb64e2a4f22f8c90cf858f71d21647...99614b.jpg]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
16-08-2014, 11:55 AM
RE: Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
(16-08-2014 11:52 AM)hbl Wrote:  Studying other words by other individuals outside the Bible doesn't change what we know from the Bible.

The problem with your approach is most historians believe these other individuals existed such as Aristotle and Plato and that they were important, and the sources for Jesus are even more plentiful than that which is an even higher standard of evidence.

The Bible is composed of 27 books written by 8 individuals: Matthew, Luke, Mark, John, Paul, Peter, James and Jude. These were the people in the know. The writers of the books identify themselves as the authors as well as eyewitnesses of Jesus resurrected. So you can see God holds to the highest standard of evidence in these 27 books.

You might to consider asking yourself what you would think would be better evidence? I can't think of better evidence than the evidence we have of their experiences of 40 authors over 1500 years in 66 books - the complete word of God.

The burden remains on you to show 'with some evidence' someone else wrote these books other than the people who knew Jesus personally, were eyewitnesses or were very close to the eyewitnesses.

What's interesting is even if they didn't write these books, this information most certainly came from the eyewitnesses themselves because, for example, Polycarp said he was a student of John and Clement of Rome knew Peter personally.

I am going to have to amen myself on that one.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 11:57 AM
RE: Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
(16-08-2014 11:52 AM)hbl Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 11:04 AM)dancefortwo Wrote:  The difference between Jesus and the others you mentioned, Julius Ceasar, Tiberius, Plato and Aristotle, is that they didn't claim to walk on water or be the son of god so it's not too important even if they didn't exist. If a person claims to be the son of god you'd better have some damn good first hand evidence to back it up with.... which you don't have. You just have claims written in a book by non-eyewitness accounts and refuse to study anything outside of what you've been indoctrinated into.

Studying other words by other individuals outside the Bible doesn't change what we know from the Bible.

The problem with your approach is most historians believe these other individuals existed such as Aristotle and Plato and that they were important, and the sources for Jesus are even more plentiful than that which is an even higher standard of evidence.

The Bible is composed of 27 books written by 8 individuals: Matthew, Luke, Mark, John, Paul, Peter, James and Jude. These were the people in the know. The writers of the books identify themselves as the authors as well as eyewitnesses of Jesus resurrected. So you can see God holds to the highest standard of evidence in these 27 books.

You might to consider asking yourself what you would think would be better evidence? I can't think of better evidence than the evidence we have of their experiences of 40 authors over 1500 years in 66 books - the complete word of God.

The burden remains on you to show 'with some evidence' someone else wrote these books other than the people who knew Jesus personally, were eyewitnesses or were very close to the eyewitnesses.

What's interesting is even if they didn't write these books, this information most certainly came from the eyewitnesses themselves because, for example, Polycarp said he was a student of John and Clement of Rome knew Peter personally.


There are no eyewitness accounts of Jesus. None. What you have is a dream world backed by believers who retold the story to make other people believe in the same dream story who later wrote a book about it.

Psssst.

God doesn't exist.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like dancefortwo's post
16-08-2014, 12:20 PM
RE: Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
(16-08-2014 11:57 AM)dancefortwo Wrote:  There are no eyewitness accounts of Jesus. None. What you have is a dream world backed by believers who retold the story to make other people believe in the same dream story who later wrote a book about it.

Your theory doesn't pan out because you can quote all the NT except for 11 verses from the early church fathers in the late 1st and 2nd centuries so the NT was written before then. And it wouldn't make much sense to place the writings after the Apostles were martyred around 65 AD so we have their eyewitness testimony recorded in the 27 books of the NT in complete agreement before 65 AD when they were alive. Their message never countered the NT record.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 12:24 PM
RE: Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
(16-08-2014 11:55 AM)hbl Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 11:52 AM)hbl Wrote:  Studying other words by other individuals outside the Bible doesn't change what we know from the Bible.

The problem with your approach is most historians believe these other individuals existed such as Aristotle and Plato and that they were important, and the sources for Jesus are even more plentiful than that which is an even higher standard of evidence.

The Bible is composed of 27 books written by 8 individuals: Matthew, Luke, Mark, John, Paul, Peter, James and Jude. These were the people in the know. The writers of the books identify themselves as the authors as well as eyewitnesses of Jesus resurrected. So you can see God holds to the highest standard of evidence in these 27 books.

You might to consider asking yourself what you would think would be better evidence? I can't think of better evidence than the evidence we have of their experiences of 40 authors over 1500 years in 66 books - the complete word of God.

The burden remains on you to show 'with some evidence' someone else wrote these books other than the people who knew Jesus personally, were eyewitnesses or were very close to the eyewitnesses.

What's interesting is even if they didn't write these books, this information most certainly came from the eyewitnesses themselves because, for example, Polycarp said he was a student of John and Clement of Rome knew Peter personally.

I am going to have to amen myself on that one.

[Image: 1370648931141.gif]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 12:27 PM
RE: Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
(16-08-2014 12:20 PM)hbl Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 11:57 AM)dancefortwo Wrote:  There are no eyewitness accounts of Jesus. None. What you have is a dream world backed by believers who retold the story to make other people believe in the same dream story who later wrote a book about it.

Your theory doesn't pan out because you can quote all the NT except for 11 verses from the early church fathers in the late 1st and 2nd centuries so the NT was written before then. And it wouldn't make much sense to place the writings after the Apostles were martyred around 65 AD so we have their eyewitness testimony recorded in the 27 books of the NT in complete agreement before 65 AD when they were alive. Their message never countered the NT record.

[Image: mlfw7946_large.jpg]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 12:27 PM
RE: Why I Don't Believe in Atheism
(16-08-2014 12:20 PM)hbl Wrote:  Your theory doesn't pan out because you can quote all the NT except for 11 verses from the early church fathers in the late 1st and 2nd centuries so the NT was written before then. And it wouldn't make much sense to place the writings after the Apostles were martyred around 65 AD so we have their eyewitness testimony recorded in the 27 books of the NT in complete agreement before 65 AD when they were alive. Their message never countered the NT record.

Awesome. I love it!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: