Atheistic Lives

[redeemed098]

Psalm 31:14 But I trust in you, O LORD; I say, "You are my God."

Do you know the truth ? He loves you !!

Secondeve does the truth scare you ? How long can you avoid it ? Do you truly want to know the truth eve ?

I finished reading a really good fantasy book yesterday, Forest Mage by Robin Hobb. Right near the end, there was an exchange between two of the characters about why two different cultures were finding each other's desires mutually incompatable. A line that struck me (paraphrased from memory) went something like this:

'It's as if we think that, given the chance, everybody would think like we do. But they won't, because we've never tried to understand them in the first place, and so we just assume that their refusal to become like us is due to superstition or stubbornness.'

Thomas, do you think that, given the chance, I would think like you do? Even if I ever converted, I'd be my own person. Stating what seems obvious to you but which clearly isn't to me won't help either of us. Until you understand where I'm coming from - or at least try to - you're always going to be talking past me. You talk about your truth - the Bible - as though everyone else only has to turn their heads just so in order to realise what's there; but it isn't like that. It isn't self-apparent; it isn't obvious, even to athiests who've studied the Bible. For as long as you dismiss my beliefs without comprehending them, you have no right to tell me what is or is not obvious in my life.

I see the devil has gone and hidden himself again...Showed a bit too much of himself, and now has to try and win favour again.

Secondeve, your whole issue stems from your failure to acknowledge a Spirit Realm. Dont worry, you are not alone.

Niccodemus one of Israels great teachers of the Law didnt understand either. He asked our Lord, "But how can a man be born again. He cannot crawl back into his mothers womb, so how is this possible...?" Jesus was quick to point out that if Niccodemus as Israels teacher didnt understand even the physical things, what hope did he have of understanding the things of the Spirit. The good news though secondeve, if you follow what happens to Niccodemus in the gospels you will find that he becomes a believer.

"And Niccodemus who was one of them......"

Being a believer is not beyond you secondeve....Contrary to what you might think. Most of us here on the forum never thought we would believe either, yet something clearly changed all that.

Its also important to understand secondeve that Jesus never taught the gentiles. He came to his own. The house of Israel. Jesus never spoke to atheists secondeve. He spoke to Israel. Gods people. The ministry of proclaiming the gospel of Jesus to the gentiles or greeks was appointed to Paul.

That is why the gentiles HATE Paul. Paul DID speak to atheists and worshippers of other gods and goddesses. Jesus didnt teach on homosexuality or any of those issues simply because he was speaking to a people who ALREADY KNEW the LAWS of God.

Paul however had the massive task in the leading of Gods Holy Spirit to allow the Laws of God to pierce a mans soul and bring conviction of sin. Though he didnt want to weigh men down with too heavy a burden, he simply pointed out that all men who lived by the Laws of God and didnt acknowledge or give thanks to God, were people who by their own actions demonstrated they were simply "A Law Unto Themselves."

People find the teachings of Jesus more pallatable than the teachings of Paul simply because Jesus was NOT, I repeat NOT speaking to those who did NOT believe.

Why do you think God made himself so REAL to Saul through the Road to Damascus experience....?

"To whom much is revealed..Much is expected." Sauls proclamation of the gospel to the gentiles would eventually cost him his life through persecution, through beatings and stonings and floggings. Please Listen to what Ananias says to the lord when he instructs him through a vision to go to Saul.

"Lord, Ananias answered, I have heard many reports about this man and all the harm he has done to your saints in Jerusalem. And he has come here with authority from the Chief Priests to arrest all who call on your name."

But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go ! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel. I will show him how much he MUST SUFFER FOR MY NAME."

Such a great witness to the gospel was Saul also called Paul because of his complete turn around from Persecutor to PersecutED. The life of a man dramatically changed forever by the grace of God. A man not afraid to speak the truth in Love because he knew that even though offense was felt by many due to his teaching, this eventually led them to Godly repentance and salvation.

Paul himself said to the people of the church of Corinth (2nd Letter to the Corinthians), " Even if I caused you sorrow by my first letter (1 Corinthians ), I do not regret it. I see that my letter HURT you, but only for a little while. Yet now I am happy, NOT because you were made sorry, but because your sorrow led you to repentance. For you became sorrowful as God INTENDED and so were not harmed in any way by us. Godly sorrow brings repentance that LEADS to SALVATION, and leaves no regret, but WORLDLY SORROW LEADS TO DEATH."

Being sorry outside of Godly repentance means absolutely NOTHING toward eternity. What you NEED is GODLY SORROW. Sorrow for sin, remorse for sin, desire to repent and receive forgiveness and GET RIGHT with GOD....!! While there is still time.

Regards,

Ben.

[secondeve]

Eve, Is Christianity a religion in your view ? Just curious...

Yes, but I tend to put religion and mythology in the same basket. All that seems to separate the two is time. The concepts never change; just how many people have faith.

Yes and no.

I know I asked for your opinion, but what you expressed doesn't touch where exactly I'm coming from.

Let me try this way.

Have you seen the movie Contact? The whole time Ellie, the scientist, puts forward her scientific mind and sells herself on her science, all the while relating the world and the universe to science and "the language of science."

Yet when she traveled through the universe, she was so awestruck and mesmorized she exclaimed, "They shouldn't have sent a scientist, they should have sent a poet!"

That's what I'm looking for it this answer.

Through the eyes of a poet, not a scientist (not saying you have to write a poem, but in terms of finding answers and expressing meanings the way a poet would) -

Why are people so drawn to evil?

(For example, Why do we prefer heros with "dark" edges rather than 'Mr. Goody-two-shoes"? )

I want you to speak to my heart, not my mind - why are we so appealed to peoples' bad sides?

Ah, ok, sorry for the mix-up

We prefer dark characters because they're enigmatic - the idea of 'cool.' What's important about these characters isn't their crimes - it's their struggle. Nobody wants to be a murderer, but once in a while, the wall at the back of the brain comes down - when we're angry, or tired, or sad, or helpless - and we wish that we could, just this once, break the rules and have everyone else understand why, and eschew the punnishment. Generally, though, we don't. We rebuild the wall - but we've all had those moments: when your boss yells at you for something you didn't do, when someone is particularly cruel and you know just the way you'd like to get back at them, when you wish you could say exactly what you were thinking but knew you couldn't. Those are the border moments - and dark characters walk them. Dark characters do let the wall down - but they stop short of being villains, because they recognise what they've done and feel remorse. Always, they battle to keep the beast at bay - perhaps they lose more often than not, but the very fact that they try is what redeems them to us. We see in them the person we want to be at those moments of stress, and are drawn to the idea of doing just as we wish, exacting justice as we think it should be exacted. But we know, too, that if we knowingly let down that wall - if it was a thing we could choose - then we would be villains, plain and simple. Dark characters let down the wall, not willingly, but because either circumstances or their own natures don't give them any other choice. They repent later, and have to fight to be human, but they still do the deed. And while, logically, we know we don't want to be that person, sometimes we think that we do, and that if we were, the thought process of should/shouldn't wouldn't be the same as it is now.

We don't like Mr Goody Two-Shoes because he's boring. He's us without the excitement. He's what we'd be if we dotted each i and crossed each t, cheerfully and without a single thought of doing otherwise. Mr Goody Two-Shoes would never get riotously drunk and end up with an amusing story about roadworks, several policemen, a party whistle and waking up with a traffic cone. Mr Goody-Two-Shoes is a static character: he never makes mistakes, and so he has nothing to learn from. He's flat, one-dimensional, and unrealistic, whereas dark characters, though rare, do exist. Why read the story if everything is the same at the end as at the beginning, with no change or disruption in the middle? Why even bother?

I think the best example of perfect = boring can be found in books for very small children. Even then, something has to go wrong, or there's no point. Dick and Jane have to momentarily lose Spot the Dog before finding him again on the next page. Baby Jessica falls over and has to cry. It is possible to find perfect books for small children, but usually these are instructional rather than narrative, and will not be nearly as popular.

The fact of the matter is, we can't deal with perfection. We can't deal with Always Good. We like dark characters, because they let us pretend we're a bit naughtier and wilder than we are, without going to the trouble of actually being wild or naughty. But incessantly good characters? No story worth reading - and what was there couldn't be real.

Better?

Edited September 1, 2006 by secondeve

[nebula]

Yes, better.

Now, if I may stratch your mind some more?

If we like our characters a bit "dark", why do we demand perfection out of them? We want our "heros" to be model citizens, don't we?

Also, would you consider Mother Theresa to be boring?

[redeemed098]

[Matthitjah]

Grace to you,

secondeve,

I wasn't making an argument for the popularity of Christianity.

What I was stating is that Christians have in most cases studied the other Religions and found them to be false.

It was and is obviously ypur presumption that we are simply born Christians and are following mindlessly our parents choice.

When that fact is blatently false even in my own experienec. Upon clsoe scrutiny, practice, and the examination of my Families Religious choice. I found it to be woefully inadequate to the claims of Jesus Christ. The Religion I was brought up in calls itself Christian. So myparents choice for me or even my Nations states most popular Religion had no bearing on the weight of the evidence when it was examined.

You artfully dodge the crutch of my question.

Which is this. Christianity is based upon the claims of the Bible that Jesus Christ is God. That He came down from heaven and took on the form of a man. He was born of a virgin in the flesh as predicted. Both fully God and fully man. He lived a sin Free life and preached repentance for the forgiveness of sins. He healed many people all the while claiming that He was the Only beggoten Son of God. Even more that He was God Himself in come in the flesh. That the Kingdom of heaven was at hand and that all men should repent of their sins. That anyone who believed what He was saying believed God and that their sins would actually be forgiven. That they would then become born again dying to their sins and having new life in Christ from above by Faith. He even forgave men their sins. A power that all Religions state belongs only to God. He raised the dead and preformed many Miracles upon the Witness of many followers to include 12 chosen Disciples. Whom He chose and whom did not choose Him. Then He was tried and charged as guilty although the weight of the evidence bore that He was indeed not. He was crucified and died. Three days later in fulfillment of Scripture unique to the Jewish Faith. He rose again. Appearing again to many witnesses. He ascended into heaven with the mandate that the Good news of His Gospel be Preached first in Judea and then unto all the world. When at such time He would indeed return again for those whom had believed. Ushering in the Kingdom of heaven on earth.

It boils down to this. Either this man upon the weight of the evidence is who He said He is. Or He is a lunatic on par with History's greats. A masterful con artist and an even more deadly cult leader to far surpass History's worst.

There is no two ways about it. It's one or the other.

He claimed to be the only way to heaven. Not your good works, not your morality, not a sysytem of actions one can take to enter based upon his own merit.

Just His Sacrifice and Faith in what He said about Himself. Brings you into relationship with Him and gives one access to heaven. Period.

This is our Faith as Christians. Despite all the other triviality you may here. The core of this premise is that man has a sinful nature that has to be dealt with. It seperates him from God. Jesus Christ claimed to be that solution. He sought no fame, money, or fortune.

To assume that Christians simply have not examined the evidence or have made the choice lightly is just that, an assumption on your part.

I'm not assuming anything.

I'm asking.

Do you believe based upon an examination of the evidence what Jesus Christ had to say about Himself?

Quite simply the Religion of my parents had no bearing on the Truth. It came down to my own personal decision and whether or not I believed.

Peace,

Dave

[nebula]

Mr goody two shoes as you like to call him

I was the one who used the term. I first heard it on Happy Days being applied to Richie in a mocking way.

[secondeve]

Yes, better.

Now, if I may stratch your mind some more?

If we like our characters a bit "dark", why do we demand perfection out of them? We want our "heros" to be model citizens, don't we?

Also, would you consider Mother Theresa to be boring?

I'm not sure we do demand perfection of dark characters - we simply don't like the idea that they're willingly dark. We want them to have to fight for who they are the rest of the time. And I'm equally uncertain that we like our heroes to be model citizens. Yes, we put them on a pedestal, but we don't like them to sail through perfect events. Without adversity and darkness to the stories, how could there be heroes?

Put Mother Theresa in the above category. She is far from "boring," because when I talk about the good guy being boring, I'm also talking about setting, which perhaps I didn't make clear. We live adversity in our stories. A strong, righteous hero only works against a backdrop of terrible adversity, which Mother Theresa certainly had. If there had been no plight in India for her to combat, would she have been a hero? That's what I'm saying. We can have almost-perfect characters, or heroic ones, but we still need the dark element to make the story work.

I wasn't making an argument for the popularity of Christianity.

What I was stating is that Christians have in most cases studied the other Religions and found them to be false.

It was and is obviously ypur presumption that we are simply born Christians and are following mindlessly our parents choice.

Dave, I'm not making this assumption at all. I understand what you're saying - that Christians have researched other religions, and found them to be false. I know that most people here weren't just born into Christianity, although I certainly know a few people like that from school. I'm just trying to say that I think those other religions are false, too - but I think all religions are, so mentioning it doesn't make Christianity seem more appealing to me. Lots of other people from other religions presumably do the same, too.

Edited September 1, 2006 by secondeve

[redeemed098]

Eve, Is Christianity a religion in your view ? Just curious...

Yes, but I tend to put religion and mythology in the same basket. All that seems to separate the two is time. The concepts never change; just how many people have faith.

Yes and no.

I know I asked for your opinion, but what you expressed doesn't touch where exactly I'm coming from.

Let me try this way.

Have you seen the movie Contact? The whole time Ellie, the scientist, puts forward her scientific mind and sells herself on her science, all the while relating the world and the universe to science and "the language of science."

Yet when she traveled through the universe, she was so awestruck and mesmorized she exclaimed, "They shouldn't have sent a scientist, they should have sent a poet!"

That's what I'm looking for it this answer.

Through the eyes of a poet, not a scientist (not saying you have to write a poem, but in terms of finding answers and expressing meanings the way a poet would) -

Why are people so drawn to evil?

(For example, Why do we prefer heros with "dark" edges rather than 'Mr. Goody-two-shoes"? )

I want you to speak to my heart, not my mind - why are we so appealed to peoples' bad sides?

Ah, ok, sorry for the mix-up

We prefer dark characters because they're enigmatic - the idea of 'cool.' What's important about these characters isn't their crimes - it's their struggle. Nobody wants to be a murderer, but once in a while, the wall at the back of the brain comes down - when we're angry, or tired, or sad, or helpless - and we wish that we could, just this once, break the rules and have everyone else understand why, and eschew the punnishment. Generally, though, we don't. We rebuild the wall - but we've all had those moments: when your boss yells at you for something you didn't do, when someone is particularly cruel and you know just the way you'd like to get back at them, when you wish you could say exactly what you were thinking but knew you couldn't. Those are the border moments - and dark characters walk them. Dark characters do let the wall down - but they stop short of being villains, because they recognise what they've done and feel remorse. Always, they battle to keep the beast at bay - perhaps they lose more often than not, but the very fact that they try is what redeems them to us. We see in them the person we want to be at those moments of stress, and are drawn to the idea of doing just as we wish, exacting justice as we think it should be exacted. But we know, too, that if we knowingly let down that wall - if it was a thing we could choose - then we would be villains, plain and simple. Dark characters let down the wall, not willingly, but because either circumstances or their own natures don't give them any other choice. They repent later, and have to fight to be human, but they still do the deed. And while, logically, we know we don't want to be that person, sometimes we think that we do, and that if we were, the thought process of should/shouldn't wouldn't be the same as it is now.

We don't like Mr Goody Two-Shoes because he's boring. He's us without the excitement. He's what we'd be if we dotted each i and crossed each t, cheerfully and without a single thought of doing otherwise. Mr Goody Two-Shoes would never get riotously drunk and end up with an amusing story about roadworks, several policemen, a party whistle and waking up with a traffic cone. Mr Goody-Two-Shoes is a static character: he never makes mistakes, and so he has nothing to learn from. He's flat, one-dimensional, and unrealistic, whereas dark characters, though rare, do exist. Why read the story if everything is the same at the end as at the beginning, with no change or disruption in the middle? Why even bother?

I think the best example of perfect = boring can be found in books for very small children. Even then, something has to go wrong, or there's no point. Dick and Jane have to momentarily lose Spot the Dog before finding him again on the next page. Baby Jessica falls over and has to cry. It is possible to find perfect books for small children, but usually these are instructional rather than narrative, and will not be nearly as popular.

The fact of the matter is, we can't deal with perfection. We can't deal with Always Good. We like dark characters, because they let us pretend we're a bit naughtier and wilder than we are, without going to the trouble of actually being wild or naughty. But incessantly good characters? No story worth reading - and what was there couldn't be real.

Better?

secondeve,

Mr goody two shoes as you like to call him is simply being legalistic in an attempt to earn favour and be seen as a 'good' person.

Id like to destroy your story with one simple fact......Purity in the sight of God is NOT, I repeat NOT the attempt to do what is right in the sight of men to be pleasing to men.

Purity is the failure to DEVIATE from the manufacturer or Creators INTENDED plan and purpose.

Eg. God is the creator of sex, but he also created the perfect playground FOR sex...Its called MARRIAGE>

Just as Jesus as the groom is faithful to HIS Bride the church, so a man must be faithful to HIS Bride or his WIFE.

Mr goody two shoes is a legalistic religious attempt to be seen as righteous.

The REAL man or woman of God finds their freedom in being able to confidently admit and face the truth that he is NOT righteous and that only God IS...

Mr goody two shoes simple gets relegated to the place he belongs. The religious scrap-heap.

Consider that myth destroyed.

Regards,

Ben.

[redeemed098]

Sorry about that...It appears that the same post loaded twice...I must have done something wrong..

Regards,

Ben.

[secondeve]

Secondeve, your whole issue stems from your failure to acknowledge a Spirit Realm.

Ben, I believe there are things that sometimes happen which neither man nor science can satisfactorily explain. I've had them happen to me. They could be coincidence, could not - the point being, they didn't feel like it. I don't, however, claim to know what caused them - it's my belief that the universe wasn't designed with our comprehension in mind. It seems logical for me to say that, yes, that happened, and no, I don't know why. But the limits of human knowledge don't prevent there from being a cause, even if there might or might not be an intended reason. Nonetheless, I do believe these things, as they are a part of the universe and of nature (if they exist) could not contradict other laws, like reversing death or ignoring gravity. So, yes to possible coincidence-type stuff, and no to necromancy and levitation (or, put another way, rising from the dead and walking on water).

Edited September 1, 2006 by secondeve