Anti-Semitism In France!

[Alexandra 55]

I started this thread asking your moderator, who labled herself as a "token athiest" why she considered herself an athiest and how she arrived at her conviction that there is no God. It was an honest question coming out of a title she gave to herself. I understand that there are many on this board who consider themselves as athiests. Does anyone care to tackle this question. No one has addressed it seriously since this thread started!!

I'll bite, though I'm not the moderator in question. I came to the conclusion that there is no deity after much study. As a rule I make decisions after reasoning them through, and I found it utterly impossible to reason my way to a heartfelt belief in a deity. Evidently it's very possible to talk oneself into it, if the need is there, but the simple fact is that not everyone feels a need. Lack of belief is not an absence in my life, so there's no need to seek. What prompted me to study in the first place was a fascination with messianic cults and the realization that the history of religion provided a great window into all the humanities.

What all my study has shown me is that humans are easily persuaded, like to have authority figures, and find deep comfort in ritual and the belief in an afterlife. That's pretty much it. The fact that belief systems over time and geography have so much in common with one another doesn't point me to conclude that any of them are actually true, just that humans share these characteristics and seek explanations for the inexplicable.

[Ron Cusano 0]

I dodn't know what that means, but I will assume it is not a bad thing!! :-)

Alors,vous savoir pourquoi.....

[Ron Cusano 0]

Alexandra,

Thanks for a serious post! You said you camt to the conclusion as much study. I am curious as to what exactly you studied.

You said that what led to your studies was "fascination with messianic cults", so I assume that it was not from a prospective of determining weather there is indeed a diety. Am I correct in this assumption?

One of the many things that led me to faith was messianiac prophecy, and the mathamatical odds accociated with the fulfillment of these peophecies.

For instance, It was prophesied in Psalms 22 how the Messiah would be put to death. This prophecy was written many hundreds of years before crucificition was every heard of. The odds of this occuring are off the chart.

It was prophesied that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. The matamatical odds that Jesus would both be crucified and have been born in Bethlehem not increases many times over.

Let's add another prophecy, say that He would have to be of the Davidic bloodline. This again increases the odds many more times.

When you consider all the prophecy fulfilled by Jesus, the staggering odds are a number we can't even conceive of. Into the realm of certainly.

Have you considered these things?

[Ron Cusano 0]

Laurend,

I respectfully disagree! There is overwhelming evidence both historically and through first hand personal accounts. So much so that no serious historian has come to the conclusion that Jesus did not exist. The fact taht you or I have not personally seen him is not evidence that he did not exist.

I never saw Abraham Lincoln, but I have no doubt he existed. Using your understanding, we would have to say that NO ONE in the Bible or any other historic writings can be proven to have existed because we can't see them now, and we have to rely on historical evidence to prove them. I am not looking to continue the backbiting, but can't you see the flaw in that argument. It makes no common sense.

[Alexandra 55]

You said that what led to your studies was "fascination with messianic cults", so I assume that it was not from a prospective of determining weather there is indeed a diety. Am I correct in this assumption?

Yes. In high school I learned about various behaviors motivated by religion--snake handling, peyote-induced hallucinations, Holy Communion, bar mitzvah--and was moved to explore the whole area of religious traditions more broadly in college.

One of the many things that led me to faith was messianiac prophecy, and the mathamatical odds accociated with the fulfillment of these peophecies.

For instance, It was prophesied in Psalms 22 how the Messiah would be put to death. This prophecy was written many hundreds of years before crucificition was every heard of. The odds of this occuring are off the chart.

It was prophesied that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. The matamatical odds that Jesus would both be crucified and have been born in Bethlehem not increases many times over.

Let's add another prophecy, say that He would have to be of the Davidic bloodline. This again increases the odds many more times.

When you consider all the prophecy fulfilled by Jesus, the staggering odds are a number we can't even conceive of. Into the realm of certainly.

Have you considered these things?

There are several ways to explain this. Any written work could easily have been modified AFTER the fact of whatever it was supposed to prophesy. Alternatively, people could have read the prophesies and altered their behavior to fit. The seed of an idea is planted in a work of fiction, and when the idea comes to fruition the author is lauded as a prophet. (Cloning springs to mind, and I'm sure others can thing of other examples?)

Giving weight to the idea that some event fulfilled a prophesy ignores the untold numbers of prophesies that go unfulfilled. If we predict many different future scenarios, it's not so shocking that some might actually come to pass. It's not surprising to me that the idea of a prophet, a "savior," an earthly preacher with a new and different message who will be martyred and his followers rewarded would have been set down as a prediction for people living difficult lives who needed something to believe in.

In retrospect, lots of amazing connections can be found between the written word and subsequent events, but none of it is compelling evidence that any of it is true. If the events were indeed foreshadowed in someone's lucky writings, that would certainly do much to explain why these writings survived and were built upon.

[Ron Cusano 0]

The problem with your supposition that Jesus could have read the prophecies and altered His actions to fulfill them, is that many of the fulfilled prophecies were not in his control! i.e. his bloodline, manner of death, the soldiers gambling for His garments, etc. He would have had to have some way to cause his parents to go into Egypt, and of course, John the Baptist would have had to be willing to have his head removed. The list goes on!

With regardto unfulfilled prophecy concerning the Messiah, a portion was meant to be fulfilled to provide His messianiac credentials, while another body of prophecy is to be forfilled at His second coming at the end of the age.

Consider what would have been involved for Jesus to stage his claim to messiahship! First, he would have to be insane to subject himself to the excruciating death that he suffered. The Roman officials would have been in on it. So would all of the Apostles and deciples. So would the Pharasees and Saducees. Even Jewish historians and some writers of Talmud would have had to be agreeable to it. So would the multitudes that witnessed his teaching and miracles. An if all of this were possible, what would the motive be?

There are other prophecies to consider as well, such at the one that foretold of the rebirth of Israel, which after 2000 years of not being a country possessing their God given land, we have seen fulfilled in our own geberation. Lucky writing?? I don't think so.

At some point, as the mountain of prophetic evidence builds and the "amazing connections" multiply we reach a point where we can say with certainty that it must be true.

With all due respect, the arguments that you offered are all based on "possibilities" and "what could have happened" and guesses for which there is no evidence!

Yes. In high school I learned about various behaviors motivated by religion--snake handling, peyote-induced hallucinations, Holy Communion, bar mitzvah--and was moved to explore the whole area of religious traditions more broadly in college.

There are several ways to explain this. Any written work could easily have been modified AFTER the fact of whatever it was supposed to prophesy. Alternatively, people could have fascination with messianic cultsThe seed of an idea is planted in a work of fiction, and when the idea comes to fruition the author is lauded as a prophet. (Cloning springs to mind, and I'm sure others can thing of other examples?)

Giving weight to the idea that some event fulfilled a prophesy ignores the untold numbers of prophesies that go unfulfilled. If we predict many different future scenarios, it's not so shocking that some might actually come to pass. It's not surprising to me that the idea of a prophet, a "savior," an earthly preacher with a new and different message who will be martyred and his followers rewarded would have been set down as a prediction for people living difficult lives who needed something to believe in.

In retrospect, lots of amazing connections can be found between the written word and subsequent events, but none of it is compelling evidence that any of it is true. If the events were indeed foreshadowed in someone's lucky writings, that would certainly do much to explain why these writings survived and were built upon.

[Alexandra 55]

I didn't mean Jesus would have altered his actions, but rather the people in the environment into which he was born. A society that believes a Messiah is on the way is always looking for someone to fill the bill. And people who are told they are special enough times can come to believe it. Self-fulfilling prophecies don't prove anything.

Clearly you are more well-versed than I in the particulars of these writings; I don't claim to be a scholar of the Bible. But I maintain it was mostly written after the fact and what you read as prophesy I see as embellished history. None of it points me, personally, to make any sort of leap to believing in a deity. Nor do I see any reason why it should, why my life would be improved in any way.

You asked why we are atheists. Speaking for myself, I can't see any reason NOT to be.

[Ron Cusano 0]

I see! Actually, the people in his enviroment did exactly the opposite, and let me explain why!

Yes the Jews at the time of Jesus were longing for and expecting a Messiah. The Tenach (Old Testament) gave two pictures of the Messiah to come. Messiah Ben David, the Kingly Messiah, and Messiah Ben Yoseph, the suffering Messiah. The Rabbi's of old seeing this dual role of Messiah actually speculated that perhaps there would be two Messiahs. The fact is the Jewish people were looking for the "Kingly" Messiah to save them from Roman bondage. The Messiah that came was the "suffering" Messiah, who came to become a final atonement for sin. When He returns at His second coming, He will come at the Kingly Messiah to establish His Messianic kingdom. In truth, the people in His enviroment went to great lengths to disprove His Messianic credentials.

You ask how you life would be improved. Good question and I believe you are sincere. As an intelligent person, I believe that you would want to know what the truth really is. If Jesus was who He claimed to be and did what He came to do, it has eternal implications for you and for me.

You are going to die someday, as am I and everyone else. If the Bible is true and Jesus was the Messiah, and if you reject His free gift of salvation, you will be eternally lost. I didn't use the "Hell" word, but that is what I am really saying.

That is after you are gone, but what about the brief time your are here. A life of faith is a life of home. As a child of God, you have fellowship with other Believers, and have a direct spiritual connection with the Father. The Bible teaches that you become indwelled with the Holy Spirit the moment that you believe, and your are changed forever. I can personally tell you that that is very true. Your priorities change. How you feel inside changes. Purity and truth have new meaning. The benefits and changes are legion.

Perhaps I do know scripture better than you, which means nothing, but the real difference is I KNOW Jesus and have a personal relationship with the saviour. That means everything. My prayer is that you could experience that too.

Being an athiest because you can't see a reason not to is not a real reason. If what I am telling you is true, that in itself is good reason not to be an athiest.

I didn't mean Jesus would have altered his actions, but rather the people in the environment into which he was born. A society that believes a Messiah is on the way is always looking for someone to fill the bill. And people who are told they are special enough times can come to believe it. Self-fulfilling prophecies don't prove anything.

Clearly you are more well-versed than I in the particulars of these writings; I don't claim to be a scholar of the Bible. But I maintain it was mostly written after the fact and what you read as prophesy I see as embellished history. None of it points me, personally, to make any sort of leap to believing in a deity. Nor do I see any reason why it should, why my life would be improved in any way.

You asked why we are atheists. Speaking for myself, I can't see any reason NOT to be.

[Alexandra 55]

You are going to die someday, as am I and everyone else. If the Bible is true and Jesus was the Messiah, and if you reject His free gift of salvation, you will be eternally lost. I didn't use the "Hell" word, but that is what I am really saying.

That is after you are gone, but what about the brief time your are here. A life of faith is a life of home. As a child of God, you have fellowship with other Believers, and have a direct spiritual connection with the Father. The Bible teaches that you become indwelled with the Holy Spirit the moment that you believe, and your are changed forever. I can personally tell you that that is very true. Your priorities change. How you feel inside changes. Purity and truth have new meaning. The benefits and changes are legion.

Perhaps I do know scripture better than you, which means nothing, but the real difference is I KNOW Jesus and have a personal relationship with the saviour. That means everything. My prayer is that you could experience that too.

Being an athiest because you can't see a reason not to is not a real reason. If what I am telling you is true, that in itself is good reason not to be an athiest.

See, I completely accept that what you say is felt to be the heartfelt truth for believers such as yourself. That's why I completely respect your feelings and right to embrace them. But it just is not convincing to me; I've never felt the stirrings of religious feeling inside me and have no fear of eternal suffering since I don't believe in an everlasting soul. I can't buy in to the idea of salvation since I don't believe in sin. I've thought about it, meditated on it, have experienced many life-changing events in my life in which other people might have found an impetus to a religious awakening. From time to time I've even wanted to belong, wanted to believe, wanted to be comforted by it. But in the end none of it rang true, spoke to me personally, or answered any unfilled need in my life. And thanks, but I think my priorities are in fine order as they are.

The benefits of belonging to a worship community can be real, sure, but they can be found in other sorts of communities as well (such as that of bandsters, mothers, friends, or whomever we find commonality with). And for every person who enjoys and is benefited by their association with a religion, I'd wager there is someone else who has had their life made smaller or in some other way damaged by their or their parents' or teachers' adherence to a strict belief system. (That's their current life here, on earth, the only one I believe exists.)

And when all is said and done, I believe more harm has been done in the name of religion than any other force in human history. A good reason to keep it at arms' length, IMO.

And it's spelled ATHEIST, btw.

[Ron Cusano 0]

There is one thing we agree on! More harm has been done in the name of religion unfortunately, but it has been done by people who did what they did in defference to the supposed spititual convictions. They didn't practice what the preached; an indication that perhaps they never believed at all.

I too was never inspired by a strong urge or feelings to embrace faith. I saw all the hyprocicy and phonyness and concluded that there could not be a God. I too thought that my life and priorities were just fine. At the time, I was self-employed and doing well, had a wife, children, owned my oen home, plenty of friends . . . what did I need with religion!

Someone challanged me about the Bible and I decided to investigate with an open mind, with the intent to prove this person to be wrong, and a fraud. What I found suprised me. In face it shocked me. Even thought i felt I did not want or need religion, if what I found was really true, then I had better accept it. To me, not accepting something that was true, was little more that denial. How could I not embrace something that could factually be proven true.

I hear everything you are saying because I have been there, and I respect your right to believe or not believe as you choose. I believe that true Christianity can be embraced intelligently rather that emotionally. I want to challange you too, to explore the biblical claims with an open mind, and I think you may come to the same intelligent conclusions that I have. I don't make any brownie points in heaven or with my church for spending my time doing this ot if you believe as I do. I do this and care because I know this to be true.

You say that you are not concerned about sin or an afterlife because you believe this is all there is. What if you are wrong, and you have to suffer eternally for a bad judgement. Isn't it worth the effort to explore it?

See, I completely accept that what you say is felt to be the heartfelt truth for believers such as yourself. That's why I completely respect your feelings and right to embrace them. But it just is not convincing to me; I've never felt the stirrings of religious feeling inside me and have no fear of eternal suffering since I don't believe in an everlasting soul. I can't buy in to the idea of salvation since I don't believe in sin. I've thought about it, meditated on it, have experienced many life-changing events in my life in which other people might have found an impetus to a religious awakening. From time to time I've even wanted to belong, wanted to believe, wanted to be comforted by it. But in the end none of it rang true, spoke to me personally, or answered any unfilled need in my life. And thanks, but I think my priorities are in fine order as they are.

The benefits of belonging to a worship community can be real, sure, but they can be found in other sorts of communities as well (such as that of bandsters, mothers, friends, or whomever we find commonality with). And for every person who enjoys and is benefited by their association with a religion, I'd wager there is someone else who has had their life made smaller or in some other way damaged by their or their parents' or teachers' adherence to a strict belief system. (That's their current life here, on earth, the only one I believe exists.)

And when all is said and done, I believe more harm has been done in the name of religion than any other force in human history. A good reason to keep it at arms' length, IMO.

And it's spelled ATHEIST, btw.

[Alexandra 55]

I too was never inspired by a strong urge or feelings to embrace faith. I saw all the hyprocicy and phonyness and concluded that there could not be a God. I too thought that my life and priorities were just fine. At the time, I was self-employed and doing well, had a wife, children, owned my oen home, plenty of friends . . . what did I need with religion!

Someone challanged me about the Bible and I decided to investigate with an open mind, with the intent to prove this person to be wrong, and a fraud. What I found suprised me. In face it shocked me. Even thought i felt I did not want or need religion, if what I found was really true, then I had better accept it. To me, not accepting something that was true, was little more that denial. How could I not embrace something that could factually be proven true.

I hear everything you are saying because I have been there, and I respect your right to believe or not believe as you choose. I believe that true Christianity can be embraced intelligently rather that emotionally. I want to challange you too, to explore the biblical claims with an open mind, and I think you may come to the same intelligent conclusions that I have. I don't make any brownie points in heaven or with my church for spending my time doing this ot if you believe as I do. I do this and care because I know this to be true.

You say that you are not concerned about sin or an afterlife because you believe this is all there is. What if you are wrong, and you have to suffer eternally for a bad judgement. Isn't it worth the effort to explore it?

There are lots of things that may or may not be true that I can't spend my entire life investigating. There are only so many hours in a day, after all, and my days are pretty busy. My priority is the here and now, not the hereafter. Your sense that eternal life is in the balance is what motivates YOU, it doesn't motivate me. And "factually proven true" seems to be in the eye of the beholder--clearly we all have different standards of proof. I go with what the scientific community holds to be provable, explicable, grounded in the scientific method.

Recorded history is notoriously subjective--being written by the winners and all. All of it (before modern recording methods were invented) is inflected with huge amounts of personal and cultural bias, almost to the point of being fiction. Useful, enlightening, fascinating, indeed, but not something to use as a roadmap for my life. We should learn from our history, think critically about it, not live our lives as though we're still in it. The existence of a popular and influential teacher 2000 years ago speaks not at all to my life in the 21st century.

It seems to me that going into Bible study with an intent to prove or disprove is a pretty all-encompassing endeavor. And it can only ever be done to the seeker's satisfaction; any arguments based on such study will prove persuasive only to those who are seeking as well. I did my investigating early in life, and reached my conclusion based on information, time, experience, and personal instinct.

I'd like nothing more than for everyone to be able to say the same.

[BJean 16]

Alexandra: I love your outlook. Very refreshing on so many levels.

Arguing with someone who is so scared of going to hell that it dominates their thinking and reasoning is a big waste of time. (They must have done a whole lot of sinning for the issue to be so important.)

Arguing with someone who thinks that because they have embraced certain passages of the Bible, and they no longer question the validity of divine intervention being the source of the writings in the Bible and because they say that they embrace all that they think that Jesus stands for and that Jesus died for their sins, and that since they have been "born again" and have a close personal relationship with God and have their pass into heaven, they seem to believe that any and everything they say and do is right. (Or at least forgiven, which may be an important distinction.)

Any of the those same people who fear "eternal damnation in hell" and who believe that the "second coming" is drawing near are like chicken Little. We should get out of their way so they can run around the yard flapping and squawking to their little heart's content.

Afterall, what's wrong with people being good for goodness' sake?

I am much more impressed with the state of your heart than of some Christian's I've encountered.

[lisah25 3]

Be assailed by athiests in mass sure felt like what I described! Using the term "crawling out of the woodwork is just that, a term; an expression which is commonly used

Words mean things. We chose to type what we do because, I hope at least, it best fits what we mean.

You made personal beliefs the issue, people responded. Not all who responded were athiests.

[lisah25 3]

BJean,

I have no illusions that everyone will agree with my charactization here. It is what it is and you can either accept it or take it personally. "Crawling Out Of The Woodwork" is a commonly used expression, and you know it.

And? No, really. So it's a common expression, so what? Does that change it's meaning?

Yeah, some of the terminology I used was a bit extream, however many of the things that have beed said here, in accusation and attack against me, have been absurd and beyond reason, hense the "wacko and nut job" verbage. It is interesting that one seems to take issue with all that I have be called and the verbal barbs thrown in my directions. Yeah, there is a double standard in play here, but I don't believe it's on my part.

I believe that I alone am responsible for my behavior. That what other people do doesn't justify anything I might choose to do.

[Alexandra 55]

Thank you, BJean! :wave: